EVE Search - Naglfar, Captial Projectile Turrets and Citadel Torpedos

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Naglfar, Captial Projectile Turrets and Citadel Torpedos

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:00:00 - [1] It is clear that the Naglfar is not up to scratch with the other dreadnoughts. Many of you have been rightfully vocal on the issue and we have been looking into the issue with a view to a more balanced role and performance for each of the dreadnoughts. Most of you are acutely aware that the dreadnought's primary role is besieging starbases with a secondary role being fighting other capital ships to which they perform to a varying degree dependant on each scenario on who is being hotdropped and at what range for example. What we hope to achieve here is a focused fix to the biggest specific issues with dreads in an upcoming patch with an acknowledgement that there are deeper issues and problems which we need to address in the long term in future releases which require more indepth changes. So, what are we looking at changing with the Naglfar? * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. * Increasing the citadel launcher rate of fire bonus to 7.5% per level. * Increasing the base CPU to 770 (+70) * Decreasing the base powergrid to 560,000 (-65,000) And what about capital projectile turrets? The Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I will have some changes to base it of the 1400mm artillery: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) Citadel Torpedoes We are looking at an increase to missile velocity and a proportional decrease to flight time. * Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 1,250 m/s (from 750) * Citadel Torpedo flight time decreased to 54 secs (from 90) Summary At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome!

Nitch Bigga	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:02:00 - [2] First... and WOOT
ian666 Minmatar Lamb Federation Navy C0VEN	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:03:00 - [3] Edited by: ian666 on 29/04/2009 18:04:55 what about slot layout and citadel torpedo explosion velocity
Liang Nuren No Salvation PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:03:00 - [4] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 29/04/2009 18:04:39 Holy crap! <3 Chronitis... it's been so long. /sobs, runs into Chronitis' arms for some lovin -Liang Ed: Now that I finished reading it... that looks really sexy. Are you also planning on increasing the Phoenix' torp bonus? -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Khanak Hryad Amarr Radioactive Battle Bunnies The Council.	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:08:00 - [5] wow /* This be a sig */ Free bottle of rum to the first 3 who mod this sig!
Chris Sandstorm Minmatar	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:10:00 - [6] Most welcome changes. However i think a mid/low slot layout change should also be in order.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:11:00 - [7] Edited by: Seishi Maru on 29/04/2009 18:13:43 Fast to the pocket calculator mobile to calculate the DPS!!! BTW seems this changes were calcualted specifically so naglfar CANNOT anymore fit 2 capital reps and arties... don 't know if this is bad.. but.. why?
MicroWarpdrive II Disorder. Shock Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:16:00 - [8] I have no complaints. This looks like an awesome buff.
Nova Satar Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:22:00 - [9] better late than never :P Next stop... NIDHOGGUR CENTRAL! WOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOO pulls train chain-horn thing
BobbaPhett Gallente Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:24:00 - [10] It's vertical, what more does it need Please resize your sig to a maximum of 400 x 120 and a file size no greater than 24000 bytes - Mitnal

MicroWarpdrive II Disorder. Shock Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:25:00 - [11] Originally by: Nova Satar better late than never :P Next stop... NIDHOGGUR CENTRAL! WOOOOO WOOOOOOOOOOO pulls train chain-horn thing Nova, they already fixed it duh.... THEY MADE IT ARMOR TANK
Odhinn Vinlandii Viper Squad Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:28:00 - [12] Originally by: CCP Chronotis What we hope to achieve here is a focused fix to the biggest specific issues with dreads in an upcoming patch with an acknowledgement that there are deeper issues and problems which we need to address in the long term in future releases which require more indepth changes. This is what is called 'painted rust' or 'gun decking' .. a quick half ass solution to a problem while you lie to yourself that you will fix the problem properly later. My advice to you, do it right the first time. The biggest problem to the nag is that it takes way too much SP to fly it since the Nag is split tanking and split weapons. Also, to keep it inline with Minmatar speed. How about halving the siege cycle and increasing the agility? Thanks for bringing the capital projectiles in line tho!
Jelmer Minmatar The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:29:00 - [13] As one of those vertically inclined pilots - well, yes, the Nag is in need of some... loving. Yes, it is great to be vertical - but having to train two weapon systems, incl. ofc. supportive skills, to capital level is a pain for most. Sure, I don't care, I did it - but others will come after me. You do not see a caldari dread with both missile and hybrid... So, my suggestion would be - remove the missile slots and make this ship pure projectile. Thank you. *** A noob a day takes the boredom away ***
Tyler Balls Deep Inc.	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:31:00 - [14] /me looks at watch. Oh look how late you are.
Sanika DeCroix	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:32:00 - [15] just nerf all the other dreads so they suck just as bad. That's what ccp usually does :)
Midjutetur Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:34:00 - [16] Originally by: Jelmer So, my suggestion would be - remove the missile slots and make this ship pure projectile. Thank you. PLEASE
Imhothar Xarodit Minmatar Wolverine Solutions Dead Mans Hand	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:38:00 - [17] Edited by: Imhothar Xarodit on 29/04/2009 18:39:07 It's a start but won't solve the problem of the huge additional time sink it takes a Minmatar pilot to use the ship in combat. Make it projectile only. Make it three turrets and add a third turret slot to the ship model. I'm sure that is no problem for the great artists you have. It is the only dread with a spilt weapon system, making it a punishment to train for any Minmatar pilot. It would require some real benefit compared to the other dreads considering the additional training time involved.
Yoh Sha Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:40:00 - [18] This is a total crap until there be 3d turret slot on this dread. Nobody needs torpedoes, they are stupidly useless.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:44:00 - [19] Edited by: isdisco3 on 29/04/2009 18:45:51 schwing. thanks, this looks fantastic. would it be asking too much for an increase in torp explosion velocity, thereby helping one of the major problems with the phoenix and helping the nag at the same time?
Lumy Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:44:00 - [20] Originally by: CCP Chronotis * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. Feedback is most welcome! Do you realize that this actually means less DPS increase from ship bonus? 1/0.625 = 1.6x DPS 11.5 = 1.5x DPS Joomla! in EVE - IGB compatible CMS.*

Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:46:00 - [21] I fly a moros, but jeez, can't you guys give naglfars ATLEAST a third turret slot? 4 would be just perfect. I know you guys wanted to give a wide variety of options for the cap pilots out there and didnt want everything to look the same (like 3 races all having 4 turret slots). Prolly wanted to introduce naglfar as a hybrid of turrets and missiles... or smtn... But this is just wrong. Give 3-4 turret hardpoints, or leave missile hardpoints ALONG with turrets hardpoints Bottom line is that this ship really needs more turret hardpoints. - BH
Gespenst Jager Pumpkin Scissors Bright Side of Death	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:46:00 - [22] Quote: Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 1,250 m/s (from 750) At least 2,000 m/s and bonus to exposion velocity - and maybe they will start work against capital ships. If you just boost velocity, it remain anti-POS weapon. And give more low slots to Naglfar, minmatar is enemy of caldari and they must not suffer from caldari "shieldtankinpvp" curse. Or make imp set for passive-shield tank.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:48:00 - [23] Ok by my initial calculations the naglfar will change almost nothing. The projectiles damage increase will be 16% the change on bonus type will be -11%. So at end a 5% damage increase on projectiles? Ok the citatels get more damage. But that perpetrate the issue with SPLIT WEAPONS DO NOT ESCALATE WELL ON GANK MODE! It is better than the old one. But an all projectiles one (simply 2 turrets with 7.5% rof and 7.5% damage .. tempest style bonus) would be more welcome .
Tarminic Aliastra	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:51:00 - [24] You guys know that adding a third turret would require the entire model to be remade right? Don't count on anything getting done if your solution hinges on that. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:52:00 - [25] Originally by: Lumy Originally by: CCP Chronotis * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. Feedback is most welcome! Do you realize that this actually means less DPS increase from ship bonus? 1/0.625 = 1.6x DPS 1*1.5 = 1.5x DPS Yes, consider all four weapons together. Overall, it should be a large increase to volley damage and a smaller overall increase to DPS which is the flavour we went with in the first pass. It is very much open to further feedback though as it is understandable that many would prefer higher DPS over volley damage.

Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:55:00 - [26] Originally by: Tarminic You guys know that adding a third turret would require the entire model to be remade right? Don't count on anything getting done if your solution hinges on that. wat? - BH
Slave 2739FKZ	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:56:00 - [27] What about citadel torpedoes and the problem of explosion velocity, and somewhat stupid range (I'm looking at you, Phoenix) under some circunstances? If you could split torpedoes in two classes: shor-range hight damage, long-range low damage; at least they could compete someway with moro-n-s and revelations or take part of same fleets without problems. And for the explosion velocity (specially on siege), give a bonus to both ships please! Don't ignore this issue and fix it all at the same time.
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:59:00 - [28] Edited by: Ecky X on 29/04/2009 19:02:36 I have a problem with your suggested changes. You are actually decreasing its DPS with a 10% damage bonus over a 7.5% ROF bonus, not taking clip sizes into account. Taking bonuses into account, artillery will do 8.75% more dps, closer to 10% with reloads taken into account. I don't think the cost of EMP XL is the main problem with the Naglmao, give it some punch! Citadel torpedos already do more DPS than XL Artillery, and you're swinging the bonuses even more in favor of them. What we will end up with is a dreadnaught that fits 2 torp launchers, a siege mod, and 2 capital remote reps in the highs. (exaggeration but I'm trying to push a point) The changes to damage multiplier and ROF equate to a 16% increase in DPS, roughly, but you are taking away 7% of its artillery DPS by changing the bonuses (not taking reloads into account). 2 steps forward, 1 step back? Better than nothing I guess. Currently, the Nag is about 225 cpu short of fitting a proper shield tank, with damage mods in the lows. 70 additional CPU is not nearly enough. With the proposed changes, the Naglmao is far more dependent on its bonuses than the other dreads. It edges out the Moros (not counting drones) only with dread V, but with dread 4 it still does less with its 5 highslots than the Moros does with 4, never mind the Revelation, while having less tank, less cap stability, and still being unable to fit its mods without one or more co-processors AND faction mods. Giving it an additional slot to fit another cap recharger or damage mod in ADDITION to the proposed changes AND a cpu increase would still leave it subpar to the other dreads, though not laughably so. Just my 2 cents.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:00:00 - [29] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Lumy Originally by: CCP Chronotis * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. Feedback is most welcome! Do you realize that this actually means less DPS increase from ship bonus? 1/0.625 = 1.6x DPS 1*1.5 = 1.5x DPS Yes, consider all four weapons together. Overall, it should be a large increase to volley damage and a smaller overall increase to DPS which is the flavour we went with in the first pass. It is very much open to further feedback though as it is understandable that many would prefer higher DPS over volley damage. Sincirely.. how volley damage can be relevant against a capital ship after the 400% HP increase back in revelations? Not to talk anythign even about POSs.... IF dreads coudl track a bit better to hit non MWD/ABing Bss then this woudl be usefull.. but as anti pos and ati capital ship is a minor thing.
Jalif Black Sinisters	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:00:00 - [30] Edited by: Jalif on 29/04/2009 19:01:26 Why not just a Nagflar with guns? I really do not feel training the missiles too. Give it a 100% bonus to the guns like the nightmare/maurauders and further no damage bonus since it will have the effectiveness of 4 turrents already. Atleast something along that line. + what the guy said above.

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:03:00 - [31] Originally by: Tarminic You guys know that adding a third turret would require the entire model to be remade right? Don't count on anything getting done if your solution hinges on that. You can simply remove the citatels and make 2 large projectile bonuses. A 5% damage and a 7.5% rof combined on 2 projectiles only... would result in slightly higher damage than a revelation at level 5 and same dpos at level 4.
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:05:00 - [32] A base CPU increase to 770 will still fall short of what's needed to fit a shield tank without a co-pro. A named t1 shield tank (with COSMOS gyros) needs 997 CPU, with the new base CPU you'll only have 962. A t2 shield tank with 3 t2 weapon mods needs 1042 CPU. It's a step up from having to fit a faction Co-pro, but it still seems a bit silly if versatility is what you're going for. I'm not too optimistic about the meager bonus changes, but I guess I'll give it a shot when the changes reach SiSi. Overall I was hoping for one of two things to happen. Either making shield tanking viable without having to waste a low slot on a co-pro or changing the split weapon situation so that a damage mod is actually worth taking a hit to your armor tank. Maybe I'm expecting too much?
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:05:00 - [33] This is good stuff except the bonuses: Originally by: CCP Chronotis * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. * Increasing the citadel launcher rate of fire bonus to 7.5% per level. How about just going for the classic double bonused projectiles and no torp bonuses, like this: 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire 5% bonus to Capital Projectile damage This'd leave it with a bit less base dps than the proposed changes (I think) but would scew it much more towards projectile dps (about 2 to 1), making it more viable to fit damage mods and somewhat satisfy people who dislike the citadel torps and having to pimp two weapon classes of skills. I fly Revelations now so I'll declare no personal interest in these changes but I did spend several years flying Nags and it was a huge shock when I found out my torps had more dps than the arties (assuming full damage). The proposed changes will make that even more so. The split weapon system is fair enough but I really feel the torps should be secondary to the projectiles. It's a Minmatar ship after all. _
Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:12:00 - [34] Originally by: CCP Chronotis It is clear that the Naglfar is not up to scratch with the other dreadnoughts. Many of you have been rightfully vocal on the issue and we have been looking into the issue with a view to a more balanced role and performance for each of the dreadnoughts. Most of you are acutely aware that the dreadnought's primary role is besieging starbases with a secondary role being fighting other capital ships to which they perform to a varying degree dependant on each scenario on who is being hotdropped and at what range for example. What we hope to achieve here is a focused fix to the biggest specific issues with dreads in an upcoming patch with an acknowledgement that there are deeper issues and problems which we need to address in the long term in future releases which require more indepth changes. So, what are we looking at changing with the Naglfar? * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. * Increasing the citadel launcher rate of fire bonus to 7.5% per level. * Increasing the base CPU to 770 (+70) * Decreasing the base powergrid to 560,000 (-65,000) And what about capital projectile turrets? The Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I will have some changes to base it of the 1400mm artillery: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) Citadel Torpedoes We are looking at an increase to missile velocity and a proportional decrease to flight time. * Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 1,250 m/s (from 750) * Citadel Torpedo flight time decreased to 54 secs (from 90) Summary At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome! Its like you didn't read anything anyone said and dont even **ing understand what the issue is ing hell get a **ing real dev here.
Tarminic Aliastra	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:14:00 - [35] I don't think that going for an increased alpha strike will help very much, though it does have a good coolness factor. But to achieve that effect, you should apply that effective 50% increase in artillery alpha strike to the guns themselves and handle the Naglfar separately. After all, how much does alpha strike matter in a POS-busting operation or capital hotdrop? Generally speaking, it doesn't. I haven't flown the ship myself, but what everyone has been saying about it: 1. Too SP-Intensive - Split weapons mean that this dread takes a lot of SP to get the best performance 1. DPS/Tank Ratio - The slot layout and bonuses of the Naglfar means that it has the most DPS and simultaneously the worst tank of all the dreadnaughts. That makes this ship instant-primary in almost any engagement. What would I advise? The Naglfar needs a competitive tank at the expense of some of it's DPS. Personally, considering how SP-intense the ship is I think it's DPS would be fine if you removed the missile launcher bonus and replaced it with a tanking bonus. - 10% Shield HP or 7.5% to Shield Booster amount comes to mind. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)
MicroWarpdrive II Disorder. Shock Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:15:00 - [36] I like the idea of the current changes, but please give it phoon slots...I'd love you forever. Phoon slots (on a naglmao) 5 highs 4 meds 7 lows
Zamolxiss Amarr ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:17:00 - [37] Interesting move Chronotis.. but you keep ignoring one strange tradeoff that the Naglfar does and shouldn't.. that would be the low/med slot it trades for a high slot in comparison to other dreads, and yeah, it shouldn't.. alot of minmatar ships have more high slots than theyr Amarr/Caldari/Gallente counterparts without haveing less mids+lows.. Cyclone, Sleipnir, Huginn etc are all good examples.. You should seriously concider giving the Nag another mid slot, keeps it inline with the whole Minnie design philosophy, without giving it an unneeded and unwanted lolboost..
Areo Hotah Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:17:00 - [38] A step in the right direction, but still not enough. The Nag has the weakest tank of all ships, and takes the most amount of training (dual capital weapons and dual tank, but most don't shield tank it anyhow). To compensate for this, the Nag should be the absolute king of DPS (and be called even more primary :S), or get a better tank. The Rev has high DPS, can fit a very nice tank with the 8 low-slots, but pays for it with cap problems. The Moros has lower DPS potential than the Rev, but gains a mid slot, and has the awesome (excessive?) drone bonus. The Phoenix has the biggest burst tank, and can fit 2 or 3 dmg mods without any problem, however the usual problems with missiles. Btw, since "sniper-dreads" are not that uncommon, leave the flight time of the citadel torps where they are. It is unfair if the Phoenix and half of the Nag are completely incapable to hit anything at 200km. Coming back to the Nag, it has the lowest amount of DPS, least amount of slots to fit a tank, and if it armor tanks, practically no room any more for damage mods. Your suggestion for the Quad 3500mm is DPS x 1.1637 (+16%). As mentioned above, changing the bonus from RoF to +dmg (assuming Minmatar Dread lvl 4), is actually a decrease of about 2% more. If you think this marginal increase in DPS (about half the effect of 1 damage mod!!) is enough to compensate for the weak tank, you are wrong. Also, nobody cares at all about high alpha in capital fights. DPS and EHP are the only things that really matter. As mentioned so many times: the minmatar philosophy does not work at capital level ("versatility, speed, hit-and-run"). We just want a good tank, and good damage. The easiest solution is just to give it 3 turret hardpoints, 5 mids, 7 lows (identical to the Moros), and I don't think anybody will complain if you leave the DPS a tad lower than the Moros with rails + drones to compensate for the capless weapons, which means jumping out is faster, or less problems running the cap repper. Also the Minmatar armor resistance (+10% em) is the best. As you were able to give the Eagle a fifth turret, I assume it is no problem to modify the Naglfar as well. Adding an additional midslot would give the option of a shield tank, and loads of damage mods in the lows. I am a bit unsure if this would work.
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:19:00 - [39] Originally by: Tarminic What would I advise? The Naglfar needs a competitive tank at the expense of some of it's DPS. Personally, considering how SP-intense the ship is I think it's DPS would be fine if you removed the missile launcher bonus and replaced it with a tanking bonus. - 10% Shield HP or 7.5% to Shield Booster amount comes to mind. It already does the least DPS, realistic fit or not.
Stretchmeat Crotchquake GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:21:00 - [40] Edited by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake on 29/04/2009 19:22:14 Originally by: CCP Chronotis It is very much open to further feedback though as it is understandable that many would prefer higher DPS over volley damage. Even if you're trying to hypothetically alpha something down, the volley damage will be bad because half of its payload has a travel time attached. Sustained damage needs to be comparable or it will continue to be a terrible, substandard ship.

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:21:00 - [41] Originally by: Tarminic I don't think that going for an increased alpha strike will help very much, though it does have a good coolness factor. But to achieve that effect, you should apply that effective 50% increase in artillery alpha strike to the guns themselves and handle the Naglfar separately. After all, how much does alpha strike matter in a POS-busting operation or capital hotdrop? Generally speaking, it doesn't. I haven't flown the ship myself, but what everyone has been saying about it: 1. Too SP-Intensive - Split weapons mean that this dread takes a lot of SP to get the best performance 1. DPS/Tank Ratio - The slot layout and bonuses of the Naglfar means that it has the most DPS and simultaneously the worst tank of all the dreadnaughts. That makes this ship instant-primary in almost any engagement. What would I advise? The Naglfar needs a competitive tank at the expense of some of it's DPS. Personally, considering how SP-intense the ship is I think it's DPS would be fine if you removed the missile launcher bonus and replaced it with a tanking bonus. - 10% Shield HP or 7.5% to Shield Booster amount comes to mind. false.. naglfar has the LOWEST dps of all the dreads. Because all dreads on common combat situations use 2 sometimes 3 damage mods. Then compare how much the damage escalates on the naglfar agaisnt other dreads.
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:24:00 - [42] Originally by: Tarminic The slot layout and bonuses of the Naglfar means that it has the most DPS and simultaneously the worst tank of all the dreadnaughts. That makes this ship instant-primary in almost any engagement. That's just it, it doesn't have the most DPS once you factor in damage mods (and every dread fits at least 1 damage mod). Factor in a single damage mod and its DPS is on par with a Moros. Nevermind that the other dreads can fit 2 damage mods and still get the same level of tank as a Naglfar with no damage mods, at that point the DPS drops to below a Phoenix, and is just laughable compared to the Rev.
Kiev Duran Caldari Net 7 The Last Brigade	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:27:00 - [43] To me it seems there are two major problems with the larger missile types, missile velocity and explosion velocity. Missiles at range suffer from being useless against targets as the bigger and more powerful ones may not make it to the target before fire from the rest of the fleet pops it (it can, obviously, literally take just under a minute to reach the intended target after changes and can currently take up to a minute and a half). This effectively means that a pilot has just wasted money by shooting at the primary. Secondly, explosion velocity seems to be implemented in a strange way, and it is far too easy for ships of the same size class to mitigate damage by simply switching on an AB or MWD. This wouldn't be so much of a problem if it only worked when the target was close to the missile boat (thereby more closely resembling tracking) but it also works when the ship is moving with no transversal to the missile ship, making it so any guns he may have can still connect. The bigger the missile the more obvious these problems become. Third, explosion velocity. Lol? The missile explodes slower than it can fly, something's wrong there; if only the name assigned to the mechanic. Increasing the citadel torp velocity is a change in the right direction, but they (citadel torps) seem like they need to have their velocity either doubled or tripled, and all other long range missiles seem like they would need the 50% increase that is proposed to citadel torps. Additionally, citadel torps probably need their explosion velocity increased pretty heavily, unless they are only intended as anti-siege dread and anti-POS weapons. In which case the Phoenix deserves to have a second look too. On second thought, the Phoenix probably deserves that second look regardless of how citadels are designed to be used.
Tyby Viper Squad Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:27:00 - [44] why don't just remake him into a big freighter? Quote: It is clear that the Naglfar is not up to scratch with the other dreadnoughts. Many of you have been rightfully vocal on the issue and we have been looking into the issue with a view to a more balanced role and performance for each of the dreadnoughts. from where do you come up with the +70 CPU(lol) and the -60k powergrid? and at the same time increasing siege arty powergrid???! what is the concept of those modifications? at least there is somthing like that? what type of ship you think nag should be? a shield tanked one? an armor tanked one? a hull tanked one? a mining ship? trying again to do things half way, and do the rest "soon"....maibe i'm too dumb but i can't understand that concept; why not fix this ship right now?
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:30:00 - [45] you are an idiot, or at least ignorant on capital engagements. ok imagine you siege a pos with 100 naglfars. Shooting a pos is something every dread can do, sure the nag does it worse than any other, but in any case, it's not the problem with the current nag. now imagine someone dropping 20 revelations at 240km out, sniping fit and bubble your nags. the torps wont reach them and if you shield tank a nag, which it seems is what you want us to do, then you wont be able to get enough range out of it to hit to that range with any power, simply because you're wasting most of your lows on 2 kinds of damage mods. and if you do try to fully sniping fit your nags, ignoring the torps entirely, then you'll still be lucky to out-damage 2 apocs. ie. your 100 man nag fleet will probably die to 20 revelations for 0 kills. is that the balance you were aiming for? just keep it simple, remove the useless torp slots and make it a 3 gun dread, yeah it means you might have to do some actual work and change the model, but trying to polish a turd like you're suggesting is just a waste of time for everyone. hth!
Odhinn Vinlandii Viper Squad Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:30:00 - [46] Originally by: Tarminic What would I advise? The Naglfar needs a competitive tank at the expense of some of it's DPS. Nag is the worst dps, worst tank, and twice as much SP of any dread.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:31:00 - [47] Edited by: Seishi Maru on 29/04/2009 19:34:08 Edited by: Seishi Maru on 29/04/2009 19:31:17 Also CCP must put in mind that capital fights at long range make citatel torps useless. Taking one and half minute to reach your target is ludicrous. There is no logical reason why larger missiles must be slower than the smaller ones (for the ones that like RL comparisson an ICBM is about 12 times faster than a close range air to air missile). Make citatels go like 3 km/s base speed and we are a HUGE step onto makign citatels useful. BUT even so a 2 guns ONLY with double projectiles bonus is stil what SHOUDL be done and what every matar pilot wants.
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:32:00 - [48] Edited by: Beyond Horizon on 29/04/2009 19:35:45 [ Originally by: Tyby why not fix this ship right now? obviously you're not acquainted enough with the ways of CCP... Dear Mr Chronotis, Could you please adress the additional turret hardpoint issue, as it is the most bothering one amongst capsuleer pilots, as you can see from this thread. Thank you. - BH
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:37:00 - [49] by the way, to anyone reading this thread, ccp wont actually fix the nag for at least 12 months after trying every easy solution first, so just train into a revelation instead. or dual boxing apocs, they'll be more effective than a nag at least.
Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:41:00 - [50] Its a fact that the only way to brign naglfar up to moros and revelation standards is to forget about TORPS! Be it with 2 weapons and large bonuses or 3 weapons and normal bonuses ( 3 weapons with ROF bonus AND a falloff bonus would be fancy and border making XL AC usefull on hotdrops). Even so CCp shoudl enjoy this change to solve the phoenix problem related to the citatel torps. Citatel torps have near zero usefulness in long range combat. If the missiles take more than 25 secodns to reach their target they are useless!

Ragel Tropxe The Older Gamers Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:43:00 - [51] the changes as proposed would not address the major problem(s) with the ship. they are 1. Split weapon system = less real world dps as other can max out damage mods 2. Weak tank - rooted in the failed "versatility" idiom for Minmatar ships 3 not enough cpu to fit a capital shield tank - thereby creating yet another armour tanking dread (note Minmatar carrier armour tanks when its mothership shield tanks!!) solutions 1. remove a high point, add a midpoint 2. make it 2/2 layout if you cant do 3 turrets (max 3 weapons) and increase bonuses to compensate for lower dps 3. add cpu to make a shield tank viable without a co-pro seriously though guys, just changing the weapon dps without looking at the structural issues causing the problems (slot layout and fitting) will just make it worse. make it a Shield tanking dread.
Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:47:00 - [52] Originally by: Ragel Tropxe the changes as proposed would not address the major problem(s) with the ship. they are 1. Split weapon system = less real world dps as other can max out damage mods 2. Weak tank - rooted in the failed "versatility" idiom for Minmatar ships 3 not enough cpu to fit a capital shield tank - thereby creating yet another armour tanking dread (note Minmatar carrier armour tanks when its mothership shield tanks!!) solutions 1. remove a high point, add a midpoint 2. make it 2/2 layout if you cant do 3 turrets (max 3 weapons) and increase bonuses to compensate for lower dps 3. add cpu to make a shield tank viable without a co-pro seriously though guys, just changing the weapon dps without looking at the structural issues causing the problems (slot layout and fitting) will just make it worse. make it a Shield tanking dread. traditional tempest bonuses would be enough with this configuration.... would in fact make hard to choose between revelation and naglfar.
Great Artista Caldari Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:49:00 - [53] Okay, why is it set in stone that dreads NEED to have 3 guns? Let nag have 2 turrets, remove missiles, compensate with ridiculous damage bonus. Epic. _______ ◕◡◕
Zamolxiss Amarr ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:55:00 - [54] Stop bashing Chronotis ppl, this is not about him and the 'CCP way of doing things'.. the Nag is what it is.. a split weapon sistem dread, try tackling that and come with some input if you can, if not STFU.. The Dreads we have ingame atm will never be onpar with eachother.. missiles will never be onpar with turrets(best on pos sieges, lol in dread fights), and that's very little anyone can do about it.. Untill Tier2 Dreads are introduced, witch will be turret only(hopefully) you'll just have to deal with what you've got, so help up or GTFO of this thread!
Lumy Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:55:00 - [55] Imho idea 7.5% ROF and 5% DMG bonus to capital projectiles is good one. This will put Naglrofl to 4 effective turrets at level 5. Remove one high sloth with missile bay and move it low slot, or move it with another low to mid. Getting a) 4 highs (2 hardpoint + 1 bay), 5 mids, 7 lows b) 4 highs (2 hardpoint + 1 bay), 7 mids, 5 lows PS: what would Caldari pilots say about 4 highs (3 bays + 1 hardpoint), 8 mids, 4 lows configuration? Assuming b) would be put to life, Phoenix wouldn't have same distribution of mids/lows. Ok, no more theorycrafting from me since I don't actually fly a dread. Joomla! in EVE - IGB compatible CMS.
Charles Kuralt Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:56:00 - [56] Three words: Speed Tanking Titans. Please look at citadel expl velocity again. Citadel in siege = 3.25m/s = a 11.7 km/h "explosion"= I could speed tank at a brisk walk. An 84' Chevette would be completely immune to gargantuan space torpedoes. Excellent thread on the issue: Citadel Torps
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.04.29 19:59:00 - [57] Originally by: Lumy Imho idea 7.5% ROF and 5% DMG bonus to capital projectiles is good one. This will put Naglrofl to 4 effective turrets at level 5. Remove one high sloth with missile bay and move it low slot, or move it with another low to mid. Getting a) 4 highs (2 hardpoint + 1 bay), 5 mids, 7 lows b) 4 highs (2 hardpoint + 1 bay), 7 mids, 5 lows PS: what would Caldari pilots say about 4 highs (3 bays + 1 hardpoint), 8 mids, 4 lows configuration? Assuming b) would be put to life, Phoenix wouldn't have same distribution of mids/lows. Ok, no more theorycrafting from me since I don't actually fly a dread. Those bonuses ALOGNSIDE a citatel launcher would be overpowered. With those bonuses it shoudl have only 2 turrets.. nothing more.... ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Incantare	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:00:00 - [58] Edited by: Incantare on 29/04/2009 20:01:55 You're completly missing the single biggest issue with citadels. Explosion velocity. That said I'm glad the Nag is finally getting a boost even if it's not as significant as many were expecting.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:02:00 - [59] Originally by: Zamolxiss Stop bashing Chronotis ppl, this is not about him and the 'CCP way of doing things'.. the Nag is what it is.. a split weapon sistem dread, try tackling that and come with some input if you can, if not STFU.. The Dreads we have ingame atm will never be onpar with eachother.. missiles will never be onpar with turrets(best on pos sieges, lol in dread fights), and that's very little anyone can do about it.. Untill Tier2 Dreads are introduced, witch will be turret only(hopefully) you'll just have to deal with what you've got, so help up or GTFO of this thread! Its nto bashing, its simply the fact that we feel that CCP does not grasp the problem we see, like the same in the ECM drones thread. CCP started this askign for what balance issues we had in game. And they post asking feedback. What we are doign is exaclty what they asked, we hit HARD to be sure they grasp that they are NOT seeign the problems we are pointing. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
DigitalCommunist November Corporation	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:04:00 - [60] So basically a damage boost. How disappointing. This doesn't make the Naglfar any better than it makes the Phoenix better. Both are constricted by the speed of citadels and little else. Changes like this **** me off because they don't actually fix the problem, they just appease people who always have one thing on their mind: damage boost. Why don't you differentiate the capitals through capital stats? Jump range and fuel costs for instance, or ship bay and corporate hangars on the Carriers. Why is it that all of the races developed massive siege platforms with wildly different hull designs and the only differences are racial in nature? You could increase siege mode duration to 20 minutes but keep it at 10 for the Naglfar, while boosting jump range and cutting fuel consumption. To fix the missile flight time issue, you give all missiles a logarithmic speed curve where they start out slow and build up velocity to a max. Going the first 50km would take as long as going the next 100km. The same change to all missiles would make heavies and cruise viable at long range.

Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:08:00 - [61] Edited by: Blazde on 29/04/2009 20:10:38 Originally by: Blazde How about just going for the classic double bonused projectiles and no torp bonuses, like this: 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire 5% bonus to Capital Projectile damage After running the numbers in a bit more detail and considering lots of different fits I'll lay my chips on the line in answer to everyone arguing about tank & dps & is it enough. For the proposed new bonuses, or the ones I suggested (quoted above) I wouldn't switch back to the Naglfar from the Rev. For these I would, just: 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile damage The point blank dps would still be behind the Moros and Rev with comparable fits but it would get much more interesting at range which would also further offset the problems with torps, and it would allow a good range of fitting choices on the tank vs gank scale. The clincher for me is the undeniably awesome cargo hold that Nags have. I'm happy to put up with still slightly funky dps and hitpoints considering stuff like that, the falloff characteristics of arties, and choosing dmg types. But it needs to be slightly funky dps and hitpoints, not still **** poor dps and hitpoints. If I was training a char from scratch I'd still go for the Rev, but with everything already trained, that's what it would take to get me back in a Nag. _
Dray Caldari The Glenn Quagmire Finishing School for Young Ladies Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:12:00 - [62] Edited by: Dray on 29/04/2009 20:14:20 Still not good enough, versatility does not work at the capital level, it needs to have 3 turrets and ditch the citadel launchers slots and bonus. This of course will not happen as they'll have a lot of minmatar chars howling for there sp returned from citadel training and rightly so tbh, which is a shame as its the most obvious and elegant solution for my money. Also make it a shield tanker or an armour tanker, give it the slots and hp's to reflect the tank and enough cpu and grid to fit it, end of.
Polinus Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:12:00 - [63] Edited by: Polinus on 29/04/2009 20:13:08 Sorry but no. These bonuses woudl amke it FAR more damage dealign than a revelation. Effective 4.4 turrets against 3.75 of revelation... this answer to 2 posts above mine...
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:13:00 - [64] Edited by: Vlip on 29/04/2009 20:17:28 I'm thoroughly unimpressed. Alpha strike is largely useless on the Tempest now so let's not even start to fathom the possibility of it being useful when firing at capitals... Especially on a split weapon ship whose torps will take the better part of an hour to reach the target to deal the other half of that "alpha strike" What we need above all is the ability to fit a shield tank and allocate our lows for damage mods without running out of cpu, you know, like a phoenix... It doesn't have to have a stupid shield tank like the phoenix, I'm well used to flying ships with lesser tanks than other races, but give it something reasonable and high dps (ideally highest in dreads, make it worth something to train two weapon systems). Flying "fragile" ships is stupid if it does less dps than other dreads with better tanks. I still think the best solution to the naglfar is to leave it pretty much as is but give it more mid slots (2-3?) without taking away highs or lows and add way more CPU. That way you can make it an adequate shield tanker with top DPS (what it should be able to do) or make it have weak dps but give it a very good armor tank. It'll be a ***** to train, more expensive to fit, but it'll be truly versatile, which is what minmatar ships are all about.
Stretchmeat Crotchquake GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:13:00 - [65] Give it another low slot. Or two.
Sertan Deras Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:14:00 - [66] First, let me say that it's good you are looking at the Naglfar. Okay, that's the end of the nice part of my post. This is simply not what the Nag needs. It needs the following things: * A defined tanking layer. Is it a shield dread? Is it an armor dread? Is it both? Who knows. * No split weapons. This is especially true if you decide it's an armor tanker. The main advantages the other dreads have are a defined tanking layer, and the fact that they can min/max damage mods because they only need to choose one type. If it's a shield tanker, you need to put that PG back. If it's an armor tanker, you need to play with the slot layout and certainly take it down to a single weapon dread like the others. Every other dread has a legitimate choice between tank and gank, the poor Naglfar just ends up being a steaming pile of "it is a mystery" because of a combination of slot layout, undefined tanking layer and split weapons. The Naglfar's current situation is so bad, we've had serious discussions about fitting giga beam lasers on Naglfars because frankly it doesn't matter. The artillery bonuses are terrible, and you can't fit proper damage mods on a Naglfar and still armor tank it anyway. Oh, and it doesn't have the right slot layout to be shield tanked correctly (like say, the Phoenix). tl;dr: The Naglfar's problem is a serious case of multiple personality disorder. It can't figure out what it wants to be when it grows up. Quick fix: Change it to be a purely shield tanked dread (just to make things even, two shield tankers, two armor tankers), and take it to a four high slot, three turret layout and just let it use siege artillery.
Hlidskjalf Novus Aevum Transport and Industries Novus Aevum	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:16:00 - [67] Originally by: Charles Kuralt Please look at citadel expl velocity again. Citadel in siege = 3.25m/s = a 11.7 km/h "explosion"= I could speed tank at a brisk walk. An 84' Chevette would be completely immune to gargantuan space torpedoes. I even EFT'ed that to confirm it. :o When it's put like that, the scale of the problem becomes apparent. I'm now much more secure in the knowledge that should a Phoenix show up to destroy me, I'll simply catch the train safely away. :) In all seriousness though, I called the 10% damage bonus from the other thread, but why the continuation of the split weapon system and no extra slots to accomodate such a system? 7.5% is a nice bonus for the citadel torp, but you're essentially pegging the idea that the Naglfar should stack its lows with damage mods (to bring its damage into line with the others) and make do with a poor shield tank in the mids (5 mid slots). All gank, no tank. Indicative of the Minmatar way perhaps, but not terribly useful for the pricetag and training required to fly one of these beasts compared to the cost/skill training time/efficiency of the other Dreadnoughts. Especially when the enemy POS and capitals shoot you first. +10% Capital Projectile Turret damage per level +7.5% Capital Shield Booster amount per level + 1 Midslot - 1 Lowslot - - - - - - - - - What could possibly make me walk into your gate camp to get to low sec, unless my Retriever has a doomsday device on it...
Noodly Appendage	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:18:00 - [68] !!!!! An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. !!!!!
Sertan Deras Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:18:00 - [69] One thing to add: I think making a Dread versatile is dumb. Dreads aren't versatile, they are specialized tools. They have a very, very specific purpose. Aside from comedy uses, they do two things: Shoot capitals (and occasionally BS out of siege), shoot towers. That's it. Trying to layout a Dread to be flexible is just silly because it's entire purpose in existing is not flexible.
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:22:00 - [70] Originally by: Polinus Edited by: Polinus on 29/04/2009 20:13:08 Sorry but no. These bonuses woudl amke it FAR more damage dealign than a revelation. Effective 4.4 turrets against 3.75 of revelation... this answer to 2 posts above mine... Projectiles are 'made prenerfed' dps wise. Amarr ships typically use one bonus for cap usage, while Minmatar get an extra dps bonus. So it's useless to compare effective turret number. You have to calculate the actual dps. I've accounted for the +16% dps of fixing the Quad 3500, it's still way behind the Giga Beam dps by a ratio of 1 to 1.42 (yes really that much). _

Sertan Deras Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:22:00 - [71] Edited by: Sertan Deras on 29/04/2009 20:23:18 Originally by: Noodly Appendage !!!!! An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. !!!!! Yes, indeed, lets go back to the days when Phoenixes couldn't hurt a Carrier because the Carrier was mounting enough smartbombs to nullify it's torps. It's not like Phoenixes don't have enough disadvantages in capital combat as it is. No, seriously, that's stupid. Citadel torpedoes should simply be immune to smart bombs. It's beyond dumb that they can be hit by smartbombs as it is.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:26:00 - [72] What, apart from the graphics, is to stop the Naglfar from having 3/3 weapon mounts giving the pilot the choice of primary weapon system (and damage mods)? If you are working on a larger solution to the whole capital system, keeping this stop-gap measure simple would be a lot more beneficial. It is Minmatar so it is not as if it will be overpowered regardless
Lumy Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:26:00 - [73] Originally by: DigitalCommunist So basically a damage boost. How disappointing. This doesn't make the Naglfar any better than it makes the Phoenix better. Both are constricted by the speed of citadels and little else. Changes like this **** me off because they don't actually fix the problem, they just appease people who always have one thing on their mind: damage boost. Why don't you differentiate the capitals through capital stats? Jump range and fuel costs for instance, or ship bay and corporate hangars on the Carriers. Why is it that all of the races developed massive siege platforms with wildly different hull designs and the only differences are racial in nature? You could increase siege mode duration to 20 minutes but keep it at 10 for the Naglfar, while boosting jump range and cutting fuel consumption. To fix the missile flight time issue, you give all missiles a logarithmic speed curve where they start out slow and build up velocity to a max. Going the first 50km would take as long as going the next 100km. The same change to all missiles would make heavies and cruise viable at long range. And how would this help? If I had a dreadnought fleet, I would want them to get into position together, enter siege together, leave siege together, and if possible, return home together. Thou having carrier with signifficant logistical advantage could be interesting. But this is Naglfar thread. Joomla! in EVE - IGB compatible CMS.
Brennah GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:27:00 - [74] These are not the changes the Naglfar needs to be inline with the other dreads. It needs 1 weapon system with 1 set of damage mods and it needs to be clearly a shield tanker or armor tanker. The proposal is a nice buff, but as the head of our capital fleet if this is it, I will continue to offer subsidies to Nag pilots to fly Phoenixes.
Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:28:00 - [75] This is ****ing worthless, the dread is still worthless, and obviously ccp is still worthless. Support Fixing the Naglfar!
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:30:00 - [76] Originally by: Noodly Appendage !!!!! An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. !!!!! **** You. You've had the "SB's make phoenix's/naglfails redundant" train long enough. If anything smartbombs should not effect torpedo's, capital or elsewise. At all. ever. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:30:00 - [77] The problems with the Nag is several. 1. It has too little CPU to be an effective shield tanker. If you want to shield tank a Nag, you need a co-proc. 2. It has too few midslots to be an effective shield tanker. With a sensor booster being essential on any fleet dread, this leaves it with a four slot tank. This is not sufficient to bring it in-line with other dreads in terms of EHP. 3. It cannot armor tank without sacrificing its DPS. A four-slot armor tank plus damage control leaves it with a single slot for a damage mod. 4. It has a mixed main armament, meaning that to match other dreads, it needs to fit twice as many damage mods. 5. It's main armament is... pathetic. To emphasise point 5, let me take current numbers: An ArtyNag with max skills does 1149 DPS from its artillery before counting damage mods. This includes a 37.5% RoF bonus, which equals an increase of 57.5% of total DPS (1/0.625 = ~1.575) A BeamNag using Giga Beam lasers does 1235 DPS before counting damage mods. This is WITHOUT any bonuses from the ship. Yes, that's right. Beams on a Naglfar do more DPS without bonuses than arties do WITH bonuses. The proposed changes to bonuses and guns does increase Arty DPS by approximately 22%. This brings us to 1405 DPS with shipbonuses at maximum, finally making the ArtyNag a better option than the BeamNag. HOWEVER, if the Nag's pilot skills are only at lv4 for minmatar dreadnought (this is the skill level most pilots play at), the ArtyNag drops to 1311 DPS for its artillery. It's still more than the unbonused beams, but only 6% more. What we still have is a dreadnought that has to choose between having comparable DPS but less tank (instant primary), or a comparable tank but less DPS than any other dread. We still have a dread that with it's 10% DPS per level bonus for its signature weapon, still only outdamages an UNBONUSED giga beam laser by 6% for most pilots. Yes, the proposed changes do increase the Naglfar's DPS but it still totally misses the main issue. It's a poorly designed shup from the start. Mixed weapon systems don't work. The fitting options don't work. You're stuck with a ship that forces you to pick the lesser evil rather than build a setup that is actually good. Now, what I propose is the following: Drop the Naglfar's highslots to four rather than five and give it 3 turret slots and 3 missile slots. This, coupled with suitable bonuses, allows it to EITHER be a missile boat OR a gunboat. Fix arties to be comparable to other race's guns. I don't want to need 60% of damage bonuses to match a vanilla giga laser. These two changes are all that are needed. I'm sure a lot of Naggy pilots will agree. I'd be more than happy to run a four-slot shieldtank if that means I can drop three gyros or BCUs in my lows for a sweet DPS, rather than having to waste five lowslots worth of damage mods just to keep up. Bottom line is: The naglfar is poorly designed from the start. Swapping bonuses and grid/cpu around won't help it. Fix its weapon systems. That's the big issue with the ship.
Sertan Deras Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:31:00 - [78] Originally by: Lumy Originally by: DigitalCommunist So basically a damage boost. How disappointing. This doesn't make the Naglfar any better than it makes the Phoenix better. Both are constricted by the speed of citadels and little else. Changes like this **** me off because they don't actually fix the problem, they just appease people who always have one thing on their mind: damage boost. Why don't you differentiate the capitals through capital stats? Jump range and fuel costs for instance, or ship bay and corporate hangars on the Carriers. Why is it that all of the races developed massive siege platforms with wildly different hull designs and the only differences are racial in nature? You could increase siege mode duration to 20 minutes but keep it at 10 for the Naglfar, while boosting jump range and cutting fuel consumption. To fix the missile flight time issue, you give all missiles a logarithmic speed curve where they start out slow and build up velocity to a max. Going the first 50km would take as long as going the next 100km. The same change to all missiles would make heavies and cruise viable at long range. And how would this help? If I had a dreadnought fleet, I would want them to get into position together, enter siege together, leave siege together, and if possible, return home together. Thou having carrier with signifficant logistical advantage could be interesting. But this is Naglfar thread. It doesn't help, you are correct, his ideas are silly. Dreadnoughts are not a versatility tool, they are a very specific instrument of destruction with a very specific purpose. You are 100% correct when you say a Dread fleet wants to move together, siege together, and leave together. This is because, again, Dreads have a single purpose. All his changes would end up meaning is that Naglfars use two times the stront (because they have to siege twice as often to stay with the other dreads), and they have to do different range calculations (annoying) every time the dread fleet moves.
Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:32:00 - [79] Originally by: Pallidum Treponema The problems with the Nag is several. 1. It has too little CPU to be an effective shield tanker. If you want to shield tank a Nag, you need a co-proc. 2. It has too few midslots to be an effective shield tanker. With a sensor booster being essential on any fleet dread, this leaves it with a four slot tank. This is not sufficient to bring it in-line with other dreads in terms of EHP. 3. It cannot armor tank without sacrificing its DPS. A four-slot armor tank plus damage control leaves it with a single slot for a damage mod. 4. It has a mixed main armament, meaning that to match other dreads, it needs to fit twice as many damage mods. 5. It's main armament is... pathetic. To emphasise point 5, let me take current numbers: An ArtyNag with max skills does 1149 DPS from its artillery before counting damage mods. This includes a 37.5% RoF bonus, which equals an increase of 57.5% of total DPS (1/0.625 = ~1.575) A BeamNag using Giga Beam lasers does 1235 DPS before counting damage mods. This is WITHOUT any bonuses from the ship. Yes, that's right. Beams on a Naglfar do more DPS without bonuses than arties do WITH bonuses. The proposed changes to bonuses and guns does increase Arty DPS by approximately 22%. This brings us to 1405 DPS with shipbonuses at maximum, finally making the ArtyNag a better option than the BeamNag. HOWEVER, if the Nag's pilot skills are only at lv4 for minmatar dreadnought (this is the skill level most pilots play at), the ArtyNag drops to 1311 DPS for its artillery. It's still more than the unbonused beams, but only 6% more. What we still have is a dreadnought that has to choose between having comparable DPS but less tank (instant primary), or a comparable tank but less DPS than any other dread. We still have a dread that with it's 10% DPS per level bonus for its signature weapon, still only outdamages an UNBONUSED giga beam laser by 6% for most pilots. Yes, the proposed changes do increase the Naglfar's DPS but it still totally misses the main issue. It's a poorly designed shup from the start. Mixed weapon systems don't work. The fitting options don't work. You're stuck with a ship that forces you to pick the lesser evil rather than build a setup that is actually good. Now, what I propose is the following: Drop the Naglfar's highslots to four rather than five and give it 3 turret slots and 3 missile slots. This, coupled with suitable bonuses, allows it to EITHER be a missile boat OR a gunboat. Fix arties to be comparable to other race's guns. I don't want to need 60% of damage bonuses to match a vanilla giga laser. These two changes are all that are needed. I'm sure a lot of Naggy pilots will agree. I'd be more than happy to run a four-slot shieldtank if that means I can drop three gyros or BCUs in my lows for a sweet DPS, rather than having to waste five lowslots worth of damage mods just to keep up. Bottom line is: The naglfar is poorly designed from the start. Swapping bonuses and grid/cpu around won't help it. Fix its weapon systems. That's the big issue with the ship. I'm actually agreeing with a BCDI and -A- member (aside from the fact they should make it 2 guns and 100% damage bonus so they don't have to redo the model), this should tell you something ccp (IE wake the **** up). Support Fixing the Naglfar!
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:33:00 - [80] Plz rename thread to: Official confirmation that nags will always be ****, just train into a revelation.

armageddon's phoenix	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:33:00 - [81] where is ur home system....... hehehehe.....
ike eisonhower	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:34:00 - [82] agree geddon...... woot for his home lesgo PIRATE IT YARR
Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:37:00 - [83] Originally by: Anahid Brutus Plz rename thread to: Official confirmation that nags will always be ****, just train into a revelation. Support Fixing the Naglfar!
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:44:00 - [84] Honestly, I would be happy with +1 mid and +200 cpu. The proposed slight boost to artillery on top of that would probably put it right in line with the other dreads.
Noodly Appendage	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:44:00 - [85] Originally by: Sertan Deras Edited by: Sertan Deras on 29/04/2009 20:23:18 Originally by: Noodly Appendage !!!!! An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. !!!!! Yes, indeed, lets go back to the days when Phoenixes couldn't hurt a Carrier because the Carrier was mounting enough smartbombs to nullify it's torps. It's not like Phoenixes don't have enough disadvantages in capital combat as it is. No, seriously, that's stupid. Citadel torpedoes should simply be immune to smart bombs. It's beyond dumb that they can be hit by smartbombs as it is. You clearly missed the issue. They were buffed awhile ago because 1 smartbomb could kill them. Nowadays you need 4-5 smartbombs which is much more 'balanced', and an increase in velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in hp so that (on average) 4-5 smartbombs would have the same effect.
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:45:00 - [86] As for the topic; Do with the Naglfar what you did with the nightmare (to some extent). 2 Guns, 50% base damage modifier bonus, 7.5% tracking and 5% damage, -1high. That leaves room for siege + a utility, which is true diversity. Not this split weapon bull****. You don't have to remodel it either. It gives it 3.3 (effective) turrets with base skills, or 4.3 effective turrets (roughly) with dreadnought 4 and capital projectile 4. Then add the high you took away to a lowslot. And as for the phoenix, Just fixing citadels will not fix both the naglfail and the phoenix's problems, focus on citadels and the phoenix independently from the Naglfar. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Arakcheev Caldari hirr	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:45:00 - [87] give us higher damage on the torps, keep the speed they are now and decrease the flight time as you mentioned. Also give us cit. cruise launchers with a high speed (little higher then suggested) with torp damage now and make it same speed as suggested above. PLEASE
Noodly Appendage	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:46:00 - [88] Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: Noodly Appendage !!!!! An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. !!!!! **** You. You've had the "SB's make phoenix's/naglfails redundant" train long enough. If anything smartbombs should not effect torpedo's, capital or elsewise. At all. ever. CCP clearly expressed that they didn't want the missiles to be immune, only less vulnerable when they made the HP change.
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:48:00 - [89] I thought about it a bit more on the "more slots" angle. Give it one more mid and one more low. Add enough CPU to fit 3 gyros, 3 BCUs, 1 DC2 and a shield tank in the mids. Check the DPS and the tank that gives you. It prolly would need other base stats on arties and the ship itselt tweaked but I think it's a good basis for reflexion Let's be realistic guys, split weapons ain't going away, the wailing of us Minmatar pilots having trained two weapons systems would probably be too annoying. They want us to shut up about the naglfar, not start whining about citadel SP ;) I also don't think we're ever getting three turret slots, CCP has better things to do with their time than modify the Nag's ship model.
Stretchmeat Crotchquake GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:49:00 - [90] Originally by: Noodly Appendage An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. I agree. Furthermore, I think it is completely unfair that railguns and lasers are not affected by smartbombs!

Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:49:00 - [91] Can anyone think of a reason why +1 midslot and +200ish cpu would not fix the Nag? Essentially it gives it two slots, one mid and one low (liberated from a co-processor), and I feel the Nag is only deficient in its slot layout, or lack thereof.
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:50:00 - [92] Plz rename thread to: Official confirmation that nags will always be ****, just train into a revelation. uhh, i thought i posted that reply before but it isnt showing when i refresh, anyone else having problems with the forums?!?
Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:52:00 - [93] Originally by: Anahid Brutus Plz rename thread to: Official confirmation that nags will always be ****, just train into a revelation. uhh, i thought i posted that reply before but it isnt showing when i refresh, anyone else having problems with the forums?!? Looks like they are deleting things they dont like again lotka.org
Cingach GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:52:00 - [94] Originally by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake Originally by: Noodly Appendage An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. I agree. Furthermore, I think it is completely unfair that railguns and lasers are not affected by smartbombs!
Sertan Deras Gallente Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:53:00 - [95] Originally by: Noodly Appendage Originally by: Sertan Deras Edited by: Sertan Deras on 29/04/2009 20:23:18 Originally by: Noodly Appendage !!!!! An increase in citadel torpedo velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in the torps hitpoints so as to not make them invincible to smartbombs. !!!!! Yes, indeed, lets go back to the days when Phoenixes couldn't hurt a Carrier because the Carrier was mounting enough smartbombs to nullify it's torps. It's not like Phoenixes don't have enough disadvantages in capital combat as it is. No, seriously, that's stupid. Citadel torpedoes should simply be immune to smart bombs. It's beyond dumb that they can be hit by smartbombs as it is. You clearly missed the issue. They were buffed awhile ago because 1 smartbomb could kill them. Nowadays you need 4-5 smartbombs which is much more 'balanced', and an increase in velocity should be accompanied by a nerf in hp so that (on average) 4-5 smartbombs would have the same effect. I'm not missing the issue. The issue is that the fact that torps are even effected by smartbombs is dumb. Five or six smartbombs in a carrier blob is not very hard to come by. Especially if all the carriers are using 7.5km faction smartbombs (most do). So you get this gigantic web of smartbomb coverage to the point that Phoenixes can do no damage, and Naglfar's do half. It's dumb, it's not a good idea.
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:53:00 - [96] Originally by: Yorda I'm actually agreeing with a BCDI and -A- member (aside from the fact they should make it 2 guns and 100% damage bonus so they don't have to redo the model), this should tell you something ccp (IE wake the **** up). Agreeing with a goon. I'd be more than happy with a 2 gun variant actually, even if it means slightly less DPS, as long as I don't have to deal with mixed weapon systems.
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:54:00 - [97] Edited by: Anahid Brutus on 29/04/2009 20:56:23 Ok going to use the p4 top spot for this: Plz rename thread to: Official confirmation that nags will always be ****, just train into a revelation.
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:56:00 - [98] no but really, split weapon system doesnt work on any other ship in this little game we call eve online, why should it work on the nag
Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:58:00 - [99] Originally by: Anahid Brutus no but really, split weapon system doesnt work on any other ship in this little game we call eve online, why should it work on the nag This would require thinking and change 2 things CCP is not very good at dealing with.
musgrattio H A V O C	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:58:00 - [100] Whether you want to acknowledge it or not, you NEED to add a 3rd turret slot. If the ship were capable of fitting 3 turrets, 1 missile, 1 siege, it would turn into an awesome ship. It's the fact that you force split weapons on it that makes it useless. Please, please, 3rd turret. It would require some graphics work, but it would not be that big of a deal. Small price to pay for fixing a ship that's been broken for years. And don't let yourself say that you'd rather make new content than fix your game, puh leeze.

Linas IV	Posted - 2009.04.29 20:59:00 - [101] Well I hope my math is wrong, but the Nag wont be able to fit 2 Arti + 2 Citadel + Siege + Dualrep anymore after this "Fix" Are you serious to "force" us to Shieldtank with 5 meds? Maybe you should reconsider this.
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:03:00 - [102] In addition to the buffs (and powergrid nerf lol) from OP, give the ship: - 3 turret slots (add a new turret hardpoint to the model) - 3 missile slots Remove a high and a lowslot and give it 2 more mids; - 4 highs - 7 mids - 5 lows
Clueless Alt	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:05:00 - [103] I'm disapointed.
Spacebar Minmatar Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:08:00 - [104] Originally by: Pallidum Treponema The problems with the Nag is several. 1. It has too little CPU to be an effective shield tanker. If you want to shield tank a Nag, you need a co-proc. 2. It has too few midslots to be an effective shield tanker. With a sensor booster being essential on any fleet dread, this leaves it with a four slot tank. This is not sufficient to bring it in-line with other dreads in terms of EHP. 3. It cannot armor tank without sacrificing its DPS. A four-slot armor tank plus damage control leaves it with a single slot for a damage mod. 4. It has a mixed main armament, meaning that to match other dreads, it needs to fit twice as many damage mods. 5. It's main armament is... pathetic. To emphasise point 5, let me take current numbers: An ArtyNag with max skills does 1149 DPS from its artillery before counting damage mods. This includes a 37.5% RoF bonus, which equals an increase of 57.5% of total DPS (1/0.625 = ~1.575) A BeamNag using Giga Beam lasers does 1235 DPS before counting damage mods. This is WITHOUT any bonuses from the ship. Yes, that's right. Beams on a Naglfar do more DPS without bonuses than arties do WITH bonuses. The proposed changes to bonuses and guns does increase Arty DPS by approximately 22%. This brings us to 1405 DPS with shipbonuses at maximum, finally making the ArtyNag a better option than the BeamNag. HOWEVER, if the Nag's pilot skills are only at lv4 for minmatar dreadnought (this is the skill level most pilots play at), the ArtyNag drops to 1311 DPS for its artillery. It's still more than the unbonused beams, but only 6% more. What we still have is a dreadnought that has to choose between having comparable DPS but less tank (instant primary), or a comparable tank but less DPS than any other dread. We still have a dread that with it's 10% DPS per level bonus for its signature weapon, still only outdamages an UNBONUSED giga beam laser by 6% for most pilots. Yes, the proposed changes do increase the Naglfar's DPS but it still totally misses the main issue. It's a poorly designed shup from the start. Mixed weapon systems don't work. The fitting options don't work. You're stuck with a ship that forces you to pick the lesser evil rather than build a setup that is actually good. Now, what I propose is the following: Drop the Naglfar's highslots to four rather than five and give it 3 turret slots and 3 missile slots. This, coupled with suitable bonuses, allows it to EITHER be a missile boat OR a gunboat. Fix arties to be comparable to other race's guns. I don't want to need 60% of damage bonuses to match a vanilla giga laser. These two changes are all that are needed. I'm sure a lot of Naggy pilots will agree. I'd be more than happy to run a four-slot shieldtank if that means I can drop three gyros or BCUs in my lows for a sweet DPS, rather than having to waste five lowslots worth of damage mods just to keep up. Bottom line is: The naglfar is poorly designed from the start. Swapping bonuses and grid/cpu around won't help it. Fix its weapon systems. That's the big issue with the ship. ^^this. Sums up my feelings exactly.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:09:00 - [105] So, i'm still not seeing what the payoff for gimped tank and split weapons systems is even with the proposed changes. Could someone with a better grasp of the maths behind it please break it down comparatively? Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Linas IV	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:11:00 - [106] Edited by: Linas IV on 29/04/2009 21:12:11 And we basicly get a ~3% DPS increase on Arties (+13% Stats -10% ship bonus), a 10% Damage loss on ACs (-10% ship bonus), and a 20% DPS Increase on Citadels (+20% ship Bonus). Thats an overall about +5% DPS increase on Shortrange +11% on Longrange DPS, and need to focus more on Citadels It's nice but I dont really think thats enough to compensate the missing Slot to other Dreads and the the still inferior Tank.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:11:00 - [107] Originally by: Spacebar Now, what I propose is the following: Drop the Naglfar's highslots to four rather than five and give it 3 turret slots and 3 missile slots. This, coupled with suitable bonuses, allows it to EITHER be a missile boat OR a gunboat. Fix arties to be comparable to other race's guns. I don't want to need 60% of damage bonuses to match a vanilla giga laser. These two changes are all that are needed. I'm sure a lot of Naggy pilots will agree. I'd be more than happy to run a four-slot shieldtank if that means I can drop three gyros or BCUs in my lows for a sweet DPS, rather than having to waste five lowslots worth of damage mods just to keep up. Looks good. Chronnie comment? Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:12:00 - [108] Originally by: RedSplat So, i'm still not seeing what the payoff for gimped tank and split weapons systems is even with the proposed changes. Could someone with a better grasp of the maths behind it please break it down comparatively? Train for revelation
Lumy Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:15:00 - [109] Edited by: Lumy on 29/04/2009 21:16:19 Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Lumy Imho idea 7.5% ROF and 5% DMG bonus to capital projectiles is good one. This will put Naglrofl to 4 effective turrets at level 5. Remove one high sloth with missile bay and move it low slot, or move it with another low to mid. Getting a) 4 highs (2 hardpoint + 1 bay), 5 mids, 7 lows b) 4 highs (2 hardpoint + 1 bay), 7 mids, 5 lows PS: what would Caldari pilots say about 4 highs (3 bays + 1 hardpoint), 8 mids, 4 lows configuration? Assuming b) would be put to life, Phoenix wouldn't have same distribution of mids/lows. Ok, no more theorycrafting from me since I don't actually fly a dread. Those bonuses ALOGNSIDE a citatel launcher would be overpowered. With those bonuses it shoudl have only 2 turrets.. nothing more.... Actually it wouldn't. After doing some math I stand corrected, it would still suck: Revelation (pulses): 3 / 0.75(rof bonus) * 96 (Multifrequency XL) * 6 / 13.5 = 170.66 Moros (railguns): 3 * 1.25 (dmg bonus) * 96 (Antimater XL) * 5.5 / 14.35 = 137.98 (+insane damage from drones) Naglfar (old arties): 2 / 0.625 (rof bonus) * 1.25 (dmg bonus) * 88 (EMP XL) * 8.4 / 28.69 = 103.06 Naglfar (new arties): 2 / 0.625 (rof bonus) * 1.25 (dmg bonus) * 88 (EMP XL) * 12.075 / 35.438 = 119.93 (+ single unbonused launcher) Maybe 7.5% rof and 7.5% dmg would work: Naglfar (new arties): 2 / 0.625 (rof bonus) * 1.3752 (dmg bonus) * 88 (EMP XL) * 12.075 / 35.438 = 131.93 (+ single unbonused launcher) Note: I'm assuming all relevant skills are on the same level, so I'm not including them to calculation. Joomla! in EVE - IGB compatible CMS.
Tarminic Aliastra	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:17:00 - [110] My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)

Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:17:00 - [111] hey someone post how long it takes to get max-skilled with a nag compared to a rev, that always gets laughs
Linas IV	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:20:00 - [112] I'm totaly for the 2 Turret, 1 Launcher + Dual Projectile Bonus + 1 Slot Alternative!
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:25:00 - [113] Originally by: Tarminic My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses My suggestion of 3 turrets, 3 launchers is better; not forcing the pilot to dual train
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:33:00 - [114] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Tarminic My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses My suggestion of 3 turrets, 3 launchers is better; not forcing the pilot to dual train Two turrets. base 50% ship bonus. 5% damage 7.5% ROF bonus/level. Minus one high, plus one low. Adjust powergrid and CPU to apply. 4/5/7, Leaves one high for a utility slot (Surprisingly useful), Gives enough lowslots for a real tank + damage mods. Hell you could even remove a mid. No modifications to the model. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
ChalSto LOCKDOWN. Cult of War	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:36:00 - [115] NAGLFAR?? You seriously look at first at the NAGLFAR?? God damit, fix blasters allready and not the stupid capital crap... Originally by: Agmar ----------------------------------------------- "The North is so ghey that even the NPCs fly ravens."
sahtila hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:41:00 - [116] Naglfar has two big problems: a) Not enough DPS b) Not enough EHP And those changes do nothing to cure that. Trying to balance ships is pretty difficult when not understanding problem... just saying.
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:45:00 - [117] Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Tarminic My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses My suggestion of 3 turrets, 3 launchers is better; not forcing the pilot to dual train Two turrets. base 50% ship bonus. 5% damage 7.5% ROF bonus/level. Minus one high, plus one low. Adjust powergrid and CPU to apply. 4/5/7, Leaves one high for a utility slot (Surprisingly useful), Gives enough lowslots for a real tank + damage mods. Hell you could even remove a mid. No modifications to the model. I like your thinking; less guns and more bonus would also mean less ammo usage and less reloads (making it a baby step closer to a revelation)
Min Qa	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:47:00 - [118] The core problem with the Nag is that it losses a low + mid slot for a high. Unless the trade off is crazy DPS for that extra high, it will always be behind the other dreads. As it stands, it does sub par DPS, must train longer, and has the crappiest tank. The new changes don't do anything to fix this. * You still dont have the CPU to shield tank * You are still short a low/mid slot compared to the other dreads. Capless weapons dont make up for this when you have less cap to begin with. * You still need very very good support skills in 2 weapon systems. Actually now you need missile skills more than gunnery. * alpha is meaningless in any fight where a dread would be used. I agree with the gunnery focused design (Rupture, hurricane, tempest, etc). Make Nag pilots need gunnery and missile skills, but focus on gunnery and allow them to get good usage out of damage mods: + 1 mid + enough cpu to shield tank without a co-proc + projectile dmg bonus -1 high slot -1 launcher slot - cap launcher bonus
Mad Ilya eXceed Inc. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:49:00 - [119] Sorry but versatility still equals crap. Figure out a preferred tank/fitting for it first and adjust the slots. Then worry about getting the DPS in par with other dreads by bonuses and turret stats. I'm thinking something like: shield tank, move 1-2 lows to mids, give even more extensive ship bonuses due to limited low slots (less damage mods). 2 turret bonuses to make artillerys stand out. Still ability to fit launchers but without bonuses - or use them as utility slots with a bit less dps than other dreads.
Tarminic Aliastra	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:50:00 - [120] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Tarminic My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses My suggestion of 3 turrets, 3 launchers is better; not forcing the pilot to dual train Except that CCP won't redo the model, so 3 turrets is out of the question. I don't see why you people think otherwise. ---------------- Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.83 (Updated 7/3)

Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:52:00 - [121] Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Tarminic My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses My suggestion of 3 turrets, 3 launchers is better; not forcing the pilot to dual train Two turrets. base 50% ship bonus. 5% damage 7.5% ROF bonus/level. Minus one high, plus one low. Adjust powergrid and CPU to apply. 4/5/7, Leaves one high for a utility slot (Surprisingly useful), Gives enough lowslots for a real tank + damage mods. Hell you could even remove a mid. No modifications to the model. you idea has legs but it needs 6 mids not 7 lows its a shield tanker not armor. Also no other Dread gets a utility high why should the nag be any different.
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:58:00 - [122] Originally by: Professor Dumbledore you idea has legs but it needs 6 mids not 7 lows its a shield tanker not armor. Also no other Dread gets a utility high why should the nag be any different. So it can remote rep the other dreadnaughts... ...it's in siege with yeah give it 3 guns
Espoir Trans-Solar Works Rooks and Kings	Posted - 2009.04.29 21:59:00 - [123] Only thing I'd like to see is: Turret only. In my opinion on such a vessel a split setup is very ugly. When I think about how much SP you need to fly a phoon really good... the thing with damage mods was already mentioned. I mean why not turrets only? Caldari has missiles. Gallente drones and Amarr lasers. Please don't always stick to the minmatar as a race which can't decide whether their ship shall fire missile/turrets and armor/shield tank ;)
Hertford Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:00:00 - [124] Just man up and redo the Naglfar model to have three turrets, and ditch the torpedoes. It's not rocket science.
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:02:00 - [125] Originally by: Hertford Just man up and redo the Naglfar model to have three turrets, and ditch the torpedoes. It's not rocket science. Hey an hour spent on modelling is an hour away from making walking-in-stations
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:04:00 - [126] I realize it isn't common practice, but I would like the devs to point out where this new Naglmao excels over the other dreads, and where it is intentionally inferior, when examples. Who knows? Maybe Chronotis is balancing this ship around a lol-fit.
To mare	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:08:00 - [127] 3 turrets please, its not a problem if you guys would need alot of time (i doubt it) but please do it, spilt weapons is one of the worst thing of minmatar race.
DigitalCommunist November Corporation	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:16:00 - [128] Originally by: Lumy And how would this help? If I had a dreadnought fleet, I would want them to get into position together, enter siege together, leave siege together, and if possible, return home together. If you don't see the advantages, you probably haven't spent enough time on dread ops.
ByFeve Caldari Big Shadows Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:21:00 - [129] This post is written by a former Phoenix pilot - former since it far to often always get the lowest damage dealer on killmail, and that it also often is there with zero damage done in a capital fight. I'm gonna suggest some different changes to brainstorm abit. 1b) Make Citadel Torpedoes do most damage among all dreads, so that the stupid low speed is compensated for an possibility for best damage dealer more often (today it's almost always only Relelations/Moros in top for a long while before the other dreads appear). And this is said even if the small speed boost would be made U mentioned since it doesn't change much. 1b) Introduce Citadel Cruise missiles as a sniper alternative, of course with lesser damage, but with higher speed. And of course in an own launcher. 2) Give Phoenix ability to fit Capital Hybrid Turrets also (that means 3 turret + 3 launcher slots) as an alternative so it can get insta-damage - even if it would mean with less damage than the other dreads when choosing this weapons. At least the Phoenix pilots can assure to get some damage on the killmails then, if they get tired on being at the bottom with no damage at all. 3) More CPU to Phoenix/Naglfar, and yet more again :)
Lumy Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:25:00 - [130] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Originally by: Lumy And how would this help? If I had a dreadnought fleet, I would want them to get into position together, enter siege together, leave siege together, and if possible, return home together. If you don't see the advantages, you probably haven't spent enough time on dread ops. Enlighten me, please. Joomla! in EVE - IGB compatible CMS.

xithus Titan Industries Technology Team Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:44:00 - [131] sigh...... why not just startover when you realize the design that is there sucks +1 turret -2 launchers -1 high +1 mid change missile bonus to something else interesting either proj or ship related change proj rof to proj dmg bonus enough cpu to properly shield tank it just make em a dread sized maelstrom and problem solved, alpha + burst tank would be a nice dread for cap fights and would still work just fine for pos, the only two rolls you have to make these ships work at right now. problem solved...... why is that so hard...... and this is from someone who doesnt fly them, I just want them to stop sucking so hard when they are in my fleets.
Bertn Erney The Fudge Packers Union	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:50:00 - [132] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Tarminic My Suggestion, Very Simple: 1. Two turrets, two launchers 2. Remove 1 high, Remove 1 low 3. Add 2 mids 4. Two projectile bonuses My suggestion of 3 turrets, 3 launchers is better; not forcing the pilot to dual train Except that CCP won't redo the model, so 3 turrets is out of the question. I don't see why you people think otherwise. if that is really the only thin preventing the nag from being fixed properly then this is a sad day for minmatar pilots.
plastastic	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:51:00 - [133] needs a new slot layout 5/7/4 275m3 dronebay 125bandwith (+50m3) (so 2sets of heavy/sentry 1 set of lights) allow a fit like 2 quad siege 2 cit torps 1 siege mod cap SB Boost Amp 3 hardeners 2 sensor boosters 1 DCU 2 gyros 1 BCU 3 Rigs allow cap stability out of seige with 2 CCC and about 3-5 min in siege while your at it can you look into cit torp exp velocity, because this also affects the nag as well as the phoenix, this thread points out why they are CLEARLY broken 3.5m/s Expl velocity make for crappy torps love the lines Phoenix deals more dps out of siege to a Chimera or Thanatos moving at max speed and In fact if a carrier is flying at ~45 m/s or above, a rage siege Raven out damages it.(siege Phoenix)
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:52:00 - [134] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Professor Dumbledore you idea has legs but it needs 6 mids not 7 lows its a shield tanker not armor. Also no other Dread gets a utility high why should the nag be any different. So it can remote rep the other dreadnaughts... ...it's in siege with yeah give it 3 guns You underestimate the usefulness of a Nuet on capital ships. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Succubine Caldari Succubine Dynasty Technologies	Posted - 2009.04.29 22:52:00 - [135] In addition to those changes, my suggestions are: +1 mid slot, -1 low slot, more cpu and increase explosion velocity on citadel torps to reduce capital speed tanking. A bit more incentive for the extra training time to use the naglfails split weapons would be great too. Is there any clear situation where citadel torpedoes are better than xl guns?
5higsy Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:01:00 - [136] Edited by: 5higsy on 29/04/2009 23:02:14 Didn't read thread except op but: Remove two highslots Keep turret hardpoints/missile hardpoints the same Give nag 100% bonus to projectile/missile damage Watch as nags become good ???? Pay shigsy for epic solution
Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:04:00 - [137] 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. Support Fixing the Naglfar!
Etien Aldragoran DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:15:00 - [138] I'm a bit confused. Dont these numbers actually have the dps come out lower than the naglfar currently is now?
Linas IV	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:22:00 - [139] Originally by: Linas IV Edited by: Linas IV on 29/04/2009 21:12:11 And we basicly get a ~3% DPS increase on Arties (+13% Stats -10% ship bonus), a 10% Damage loss on ACs (-10% ship bonus), and a 20% DPS Increase on Citadels (+20% ship Bonus). Thats an overall about +5% DPS increase on Shortrange +11% on Longrange DPS, and the need to focus more on Citadels
Voculus The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:29:00 - [140] No disrespect intended, CCP, but this "buff" to the Naglfar is a waste. For the love of God, remove the torpedoes, give it three turret hardpoints, and be done with it already. _________________________________________________________

Kelbesque Crystalis Minmatar	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:33:00 - [141] It's still easier to train up lasers and Amarr BS 5 instead of two weapon systems (+ support) and 2 tanking systems. Why would you train longer for a inferior dread? ~10% DPS bonus and a stronger dependence on missiles doesn't fix this ship. Make this ship less missile focused, fix the 5 high slot garbage (and add mid/low), and give it a clear tanking preference (swap a low/mid).
LiquidSteele Canadian Imperial Armaments Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:40:00 - [142] 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. ^^
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:55:00 - [143] 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. Lets see. Simple solution, with precedent of mechanics on the NIghtmare. Effective. Bridges in some small way the dps's issues between an arty fit Nag and a Rev when factoring reload time into long term dps. Boni and slot layout that favour shield tnaking. Dependence on multiple wep systems gone. .... Wait I'm missing something. Oh yes. It makes CCP look bad. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Soenan	Posted - 2009.04.29 23:58:00 - [144] Originally by: Voculus No disrespect intended, CCP, but this "buff" to the Naglfar is a waste. For the love of God, remove the torpedoes, give it three turret hardpoints, and be done with it already. QFT. And while you're at it add 2 more turret hardpoints to the phoenix and delete capital torps.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:02:00 - [145] The only way i see Citatel torps being useful is if you make them MASSIVELY more powerful against static targets thatn turrets (sicen they are trash against anything faster than a turtle). But on massive i don 't mean 10- 20 % I mean like 2 times more effective as BASE dps over turrets. THEN the citatel dreads woudl be at least the choice on ninja pos finishing work... and therefore the common hot drop bait :P
maya ibuki2 THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:08:00 - [146] Originally by: RedSplat 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. Lets see. Simple solution, with precedent of mechanics on the NIghtmare. Effective. Bridges in some small way the dps's issues between an arty fit Nag and a Rev when factoring reload time into long term dps. Boni and slot layout that favour shield tnaking. Dependence on multiple wep systems gone. .... Wait I'm missing something. Oh yes. It makes CCP look bad. QFT i fly the naglfail specifically so the reds take longer to start killing the real dreadnaughts, which really shouldnt be the case. split weapon systems fail, for all the reasons cited so far. slot layout, indecision regards just what the hell the nag tanks, and utterly fail decision that half an hours modelling is not worth the effort to create a halfway decent dread are all fail as well. maya ibuki2-currently thorn alliance pvper, proud member of the 54th knights templar and genral shooty type
Lachesis Moirae Gallente Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:17:00 - [147] If you can only change one thing about the Naglfar, make it a projectile only ship. It doesn't matter if there isn't a visible hardpoint for the 3rd gun, just get rid of the split weapon system. It's been said thousands of times before, but split-weapon bonuses are terrible. You can RP it as the Matari wanting to use their racial weapon system or something. If you can change multiple things, tweak the slots/fittings in addition to the above change. After giving it 3 turret hardpoints, drop the high slots to 4 like the other dreads. At that point, either decide on if it's going to be a shield tanker or an armor tanker. If shield, give it the same layout as the Phoenix, 4/7/5. For armor, make it like the Moros, 4/5/7. You'll also need to increase base CPU if it's going to be a shield tanker (all those shield mods take up a ton of cpu), and increase the grid if it's going to be an armor tanker (dual cap reps + arties suck up a ton of grid). Those two changes are all that is needed.
Arele Minmatar The Hull Miners Union	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:18:00 - [148] Split weapon would be fine if there were also split weapon damage mods. Since there aren't, split weapon systems have no where to go from baseline but down compared to anything else.
BurntCornMuffin GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:18:00 - [149] Originally by: Voculus No disrespect intended, CCP, but this "buff" to the Naglfar is a waste. For the love of God, remove the torpedoes, give it three turret hardpoints, and be done with it already. This would be the ideal fix, as what I'm seeing proposed doesn't cut the root of the problem. The currently proposed changes give the Nag a good alpha, but that doesn't help you in a POS shot or any activity that requires sustainable high DPS. Not only this, but in a cap fight, the missiles are wasted anyway, as primaries die too quickly for them to get there (which is why missile ships in general don't have a place in large fleet fights). The split slots mean that you still have to train double the skills, fit double the damage mods, and still come out with a lackluster ship. Removing the torpedoes and granting an extra turret would be the most effective fix for the problem. And if your artists can't be arsed to add room for a turret, then it's time to find some new artists who can.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:28:00 - [150] As several on the first page said (didn't read farther), citadel torps need the explosion velocity increased to make the Nag and Phoenix truly viable. Until then, they are sill only useful against targets moving 10m/s or less.

Psyflame ZiTek Deepspace Explorations	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:35:00 - [151] Edited by: Psyflame on 30/04/2009 00:36:20 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. Do want.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:51:00 - [152] Originally by: Psyflame Edited by: Psyflame on 30/04/2009 00:36:20 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. Do want. don 't even need to resort to role bonuses.. just give a simple 10% rof bonus ( at elvel 5 makes it 4 effective turrets.. matching revelation turretwise)
JForce The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.30 00:58:00 - [153] THE NAGLFAR IS INFERIOR IN EVERY SINGLE ASPECT TO EVERY OTHER DREAD, AND TAKES LONGER TO LEARN TO FLY. Until even a single aspect of the above is fixed, then you've failed.
FugginNutz Caldari Chinchilla Industries Manifest Destiny.	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:00:00 - [154] Someone asked me to pass this along: BLUF: Three turrets are the only reasonable way to improve the Naglfar to parity with other dreads. 1. Extra training time for two separate captial weapon systems. -Using two weapon systems requires nearly double the training time to be effective. Even though many Minnie pilots have decent missile skills because of their subcapital split weapon ships, requiring pilots who don't to train for missiles to achieve similar performance is inequitable and should be changed. If the split weapon system is retained, the Naglfar must have a clear advantage over other dreads to compensate for the increased training. Equal performance is not enough. Even though the Moros gets a drone bonus, every capital uses drones (mostly sentries), so there isn't a large disparity among them in this regard. 2. Split weapons and damage mods. -Split weapon systems require two different types of damage modules to increase the effectiveness of their weapons. Whereas the Moros, Revelation, and Phoenix can simply use three of their lowslots for their homogenous weapon systems, the Naglfar would have to devote the entire low slot rack to damage mods to receive comparable increases in performance. 3. Split weapons and tanking. -Because of the issue with split weapons and damage mods, the Naglfar would be forced to shield tank because of the complete use of it's low slots. Even were we to not use six damage mods (resulting in a lower damage output than other dreads), we would still only have four primary slots for tanking (after you add a sensor booster in the mids). This results in a lower burst tank than the Phoenix, while still retaining the Naglfar's lack of EHP when compared to other dreads. 4. Split weapons and primaries. -Because of the issues Citadel torpedos have (a separate matter entirely), torpedo users frequently have to shoot separate primaries in order to effectively apply damage before the target dies. With a split weapon system, Naglfars are forced to either a.) double task and shoot two primaries with different weapon systems to effectively apply damage, or b.) write off a large part (up to half of their damage) by shooting the same primary with both weapon systems and run the risk of none of their torpedos connecting because the target has died before they've arrived. 5. Split weapons and tactics. -Again, this is an issue which affects the Phoenix and the Naglfar because it is an issue with Citadel torpedos. The Naglfar can be setup to snipe; however, it will be the second least effective dread in this role (second only to the Phoenix). This is due to the fact that Citadel torpedos are for all intents and purposes, short range weapons. While it may be possible to increase the range to a point where sniping is feasible, traveling the 100km to the target would probably take the entire 10m siege cycle. Due to this, the Naglfar only has two effective weapons when attempting this tactic.
Tamo Isrect 4Chan.org	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:02:00 - [155] My idea of the Minmatar philosophy is something like "weaker-ships-in-general-but-more-fun-when-applied-properly-which-takes-skill-and-sp". People fly Minmatar cause they chose NOT TO GO FOR THE EASY WAY, but there has to be the potential that this risk pays off big time. * Massive shield boost before your cap runs dry after like 10 seconds (X-L Sleipnir, 2 Heavy-Injector Maelstrom...) * Real fast ships, which are dead instantly if you don't concentrate (Vagabond ...) * Carrier and MS which have the potential to save lots of friends, before being auto-primary * Alpha monsters (Artillery), which want to RUN as soon as you delivered your initial blast So just bringing the Nag "in line" with the other DNs (same dps, same tank) would be the easy but boring way to fix it. I could think of somethink like this: * Keep the same layout, but add some sort of smartbomb bonus aswell. * You'll still be the weakest DN if you fit 2+2 weapons * 2 weapons + 2 smartbombs give you new abilities: Harder to tackle & offensive ship with defensive opportunities (helping your titan friend getting out of bubbles, getting rid of enemy drones and fighters) - yet your dps is reduced & your tank still sucks Tamo
Austintatious Overview Glitch	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:04:00 - [156] get rid of the citadel torps! 3 turrets, 4 highs Flying Minmatar ships is like riding an office chair down stairs while firing an oozy.
ImmortalKalo Overview Glitch	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:05:00 - [157] 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. FO SHO
T2Ibis	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:05:00 - [158] Originally by: ImmortalKalo 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. FO SHO 3rded!
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:06:00 - [159] Originally by: T2Ibis Originally by: ImmortalKalo 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. FO SHO 3rded! You do realise this gives it four guns to start with and thus will not happen. It will probably only ever happen at 50% inbuilt ship bonus. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Psyflame ZiTek Deepspace Explorations	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:25:00 - [160] Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: T2Ibis Quoted text omitted You do realise this gives it four guns to start with and thus will not happen. It will probably only ever happen at 50% inbuilt ship bonus. Four guns that do hilariously pathetic damage. Damage so low that a 3 gun revelation still exceeds them. Revelation: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 2469dps. Proposed Naglfar: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 2388dps Revelation, 3 heatsinks: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 4083dps Proposed Naglfar, 3 gyros: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 3508dps Exactly where are you going with this?

ZigZag Joe Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:39:00 - [161] This is made of fail.
Nikita Alterana Gallente The-Kissaki	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:42:00 - [162] How to make the Naglfar Better and make it ACTUALLY Versatile: Give the nag a large enough damage bonus to both its weapon systems that it doesn't need to waste its low slots on damage mods. This means the ship can be fit two ways, fitting the lows with damage mods, turning the ship into a glass cannon, doing more damage then other dreads; or fitting it with a tank so it does slightly less damage then other dreads, but tanks just as well as them. __________________________________________________ I was Amarr before they were the FOTM and I'll be Amarr after it! I'm also training Minmatar Capitals! And I eat Lions!
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:47:00 - [163] Originally by: Psyflame Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: T2Ibis Quoted text omitted You do realise this gives it four guns to start with and thus will not happen. It will probably only ever happen at 50% inbuilt ship bonus. Four guns that do hilariously pathetic damage. Damage so low that a 3 gun revelation still exceeds them. Revelation: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 2469dps. Proposed Naglfar: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 2388dps Revelation, 3 heatsinks: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 4083dps Proposed Naglfar, 3 gyros: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 3508dps Exactly where are you going with this? ok now wait. The projectiles do have a few little advantages.. like no cap usage (helps beign ready to cyno out as soon as pos dies) and a MODERATE capability of selecting damage. And does that numbers you ran use the NEW XL arties ?
Bal Dee	Posted - 2009.04.30 01:48:00 - [164] If we imagine the nag as being a pile of manure, the proposed changes simply alter the size and shape of the manure pile in subtle ways. But it is still a pile of manure. How clear can it be? Your players do not like split weapon systems. The product is unpopular. Remove it from the marketplace.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:11:00 - [165] Edited by: prefectro on 30/04/2009 02:17:09 Originally by: CCP Chronotis At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome! Here is my feedback. Forget the fundamental issues with dreads, you are missing the fundamental problem with the Naglfar. Unlike sub-cap ships there is only one way to be protected and that is with your tank. You can't quickly warp away or burn out of range from fire. Once you go in siege you are a sitting duck along with all the other dreads with you. So now the hostiles just need to cherry pick what they want to shoot first. Any competent FC will shoot the Naglfar because they have the worst tank. Why does every other race have 12 mid/low slots and the Matar only has 11. The extra high slot is a joke as the DPS is still worse then the other races. Then to top it off you have the most required training. And it is not just the Torp skill, you need to learn all the supporting missile skills.
Zeerover DeadSpace Exploration and Investigations	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:12:00 - [166] To give a constructive comment: Figure out what role you want for each dread and then change the layout and bonuses accordingly. For instance: Phoenix - massive but delayed damage, superb but brief tank. Revelation - Excellent for capital vs. capital and POS sieges, but very capacitor defendant. Moros - Good all-round ship, with added bonus of being able to fight sub-capitals with drones. Naglfar - ?!?!?
Artassaut Minmatar Oblivion Amalgamated	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:15:00 - [167] Edited by: Artassaut on 30/04/2009 02:15:45 How one could place a 3rd turret on the Naglfar. Naglfar. Place turret where X is. --- The Gate: Lol, try targeting me in a fleet fight. The Station: No U.
Elaron Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:17:00 - [168] Originally by: Clueless people We want the Naglfar to have three turrets! It's only a small art change! *CCP will not make art changes at all* as part of balancing**. With that off my chest, I have say I am disappointed with the proposed changes - in fact, it almost seems like a 'bait and switch' manoeuvre, intended to give the appearance of an improvement while keeping the Naglfar firmly at the bottom of the Dreadnought heap. Please consider any one of the excellent suggestions in this thread, especially those that revolve around removing the necessity to use Citadel torpedoes while still only using two turret slots. At the very least, please give a detailed explanation of why you think that the Naglfar will be balanced compared to the other dreads with your proposed changes.
something somethingdark	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:24:00 - [169] Split weapon systems ahoy! first of all ... redesign the naglfar ... comon its gona take like a week to remodel it propperly so it has a 3rd turret hardpoint its complicated but it aint rocket science second ... fix the nagl in stations so it doesnt stabb them ... tyvm third slot layout 5 / 6 / 5 a number higher Increasing the base CPU to 800 (+100) yet another number higher give it the folowing 3 turret hardpoints and 3 launcher hardpoints add in your proposed xl projectile and citadel changes and... voglia .... a dread that truly versatile, doesnt suck and isnt overpowered srsly thou.. redesign it... its a bit anoying but its not impossible and it wont take as long as the doom prophecys your graphics designers tell you infact it will be long done before you implement the changes on tq
Drave McClay GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:28:00 - [170] 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. One thousand times this.

Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:30:00 - [171] Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: T2Ibis Originally by: ImmortalKalo 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. FO SHO 3rded! You do realise this gives it four guns to start with and thus will not happen. It will probably only ever happen at 50% inbuilt ship bonus. You do realize that beams do base 40% more damage than artillery. right? Even with "4" gun slots the rev will outdamage the nag. Support Fixing the Naglfar!
Orb Lati Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.30 02:53:00 - [172] Edited by: Orb Lati on 30/04/2009 02:54:00 I would prefer it if CCP would keep the dual weapon system, but make it much more effective through citadel torp changes plus gun clip sizes and DPS. Just because up and coming Minmatar capital pilots don't like the idea of having to train more skill sets don't penalize those players that have already spent that time training all the skills needed to fly the Nag in its current form. I wouldn't mind the idea that nag pilots will always be automatic primaries of that reason was to get rid of ungodly DPS instead off killing the easy target. "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
Rocius Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.04.30 03:16:00 - [173] Originally by: Orb Lati Edited by: Orb Lati on 30/04/2009 02:54:00 Just because up and coming Minmatar capital pilots don't like the idea of having to train more skill sets don't penalize those players that have already spent that time training all the skills needed to fly the Nag in its current form. I wouldn't mind the idea that nag pilots will always be automatic primaries of that reason was to get rid of ungodly DPS instead off killing the easy target. QFT ! I have invested alot of time training my current skills to be totaly maximized for both weapon system, and I'll be damned if I want them to negate ALOT of skills by yanking the torps off of the ship. Keep the current weapon systems as is, just give it another set of bonuses. Is there some hard set rule that all the ships ahve to have the same number of bonuses? While I am not really sure the BEST way to improve the Nag, what is listed so far by CCP, is definitly not it. Of course, in some other thread the prospect of a Nag that does seige and can still move is good Nadlbond FTW !! Nag NEEDS LOVE...... Its freaking vertical man
Halycon Gamma Caldari The Flying Tigers United Front Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.30 03:21:00 - [174] I don't fly dreads, nor do I ever plan on it. But I do have a question. According to CCP at the start of this thread, the issue with balancing the Naglfar is that dreads ships have two roles. Anti-POS, and Anti-Capital. So my question is. When are the proposed changes to Sov supposed to happen? Once that goes live, wouldn't the issue of balancing around POS fights go away? In which case you'd have to re-balance all the dreads for more of a anti-capital role anyway? Does CCP see this as a stop gap fix, until Sovereignty is re-deployed in a new manner which allows a base redesign on the entire Dreadnought class? The reason I want to know is, knowing there is a true change coming makes this at least a little more palatable.
Danthomir Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.04.30 03:35:00 - [175] I trained for the Nidhoggur 'cuz it looks cool and all carriers run logistics just fine. As far as I can tell, the only advantage the Naglfar has over the other dreads is looks. In everything else (everything) it's outmatched. Advantages: Looks kinda cool. Disadvantages: Killing small ships: owned by Moros. Long boring POS shoots: owned by Revelation. Training time: ****ing owned by everything. Dread fights: lol
Min Qa	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:23:00 - [176] Originally by: Rocius Originally by: Orb Lati Edited by: Orb Lati on 30/04/2009 02:54:00 Just because up and coming Minmatar capital pilots don't like the idea of having to train more skill sets don't penalize those players that have already spent that time training all the skills needed to fly the Nag in its current form. I wouldn't mind the idea that nag pilots will always be automatic primaries of that reason was to get rid of ungodly DPS instead off killing the easy target. QFT ! I have invested alot of time training my current skills to be totaly maximized for both weapon system, and I'll be damned if I want them to negate ALOT of skills by yanking the torps off of the ship. Keep the current weapon systems as is, just give it another set of bonuses. Is there some hard set rule that all the ships ahve to have the same number of bonuses? While I am not really sure the BEST way to improve the Nag, what is listed so far by CCP, is definitly not it. Of course, in some other thread the prospect of a Nag that does seige and can still move is good Nadlbond FTW !! Nag NEEDS LOVE...... Its freaking vertical man So give it 2 guns and 1 launcher, but double bonus the guns to get the DPS right (no ship bonus to the launcher). Move a high slot and a low to give it +2 mids, and enough cpu to shield tank. You still need missile skills, but you get much better results from adding gyros.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:42:00 - [177] Your right, the Naglfar is not up to scratch. Doesn't look like it will be when your done with it. We don't want the BEST dread, we want you to FIX your ****. You know WHY this ship is subpar but you won't address the slot issue, the weapon hard points, the practical flaws of citadels, the need to be competitive at ranges other dreads will hotdrop at.... Your not fixing anything, your trying to throw us a bone to shut us up. In fact i think you sort of eluded to that in your post, so i thank you for at least that much. Seriously, if you don't want to fix the ship, they just say so. Tell us "it's simply too much work for us to fix it, we don't have our priorities on maintaining things in the game we are too busy making new shiny stuff" and we will all appreciate the honesty and go train something else. It's great you guys are making the first steps to acknowledge SOME of the game problems, but fact is you release this stuff (change it through sweeping nerfs/boosts) and then never revisit it for months/years. You have players getting very frustrated because it takes well over a year for you to simply ACKNOWLEDGE that a problem MIGHT exist. Real change and fixes are very very few, excuses and 'someday's are plenty
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:45:00 - [178] Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 30/04/2009 04:46:37 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. stop being smart. you make CCP angry. you won't like it when they are angry. you should have used reverse psychology when you suggested this. say "WHATEVER YOU DO, DONT MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES" everyone knows when you pose a logical and intelligent change they will NEVER EVER do that (possibly, solely because you said it)
BuyMyNarcotics	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:54:00 - [179] Disclaimer: I only read the first page. With that out of the way. How about this? - Tweak Citadels (helping the phoenix and naglfar) - Boost XL Projectiles - New Naglfar gets 4 highs, 3 turret, 3 missile launcher - Other boosts for tank can be recommended by someone who knows better This gives Minnie pilots the option to train one or the other depending on what the FOTM is.
John Blackthorn Foundation Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:58:00 - [180] A few dread fights back I was flying a Phoenix the ship that I've had for a very long time. We got attack by some battleships and I was in siege and fired at an abbadon. It took 2-3 minute for the torps to hit and they hit for 30 damage it. I looked over at my wife's screen she was flying a moros and was hitting for 2k per gun. When I returned from the op I put the Pheonix up for sale and took 35 days to cross train to Moros. I was so ***ed at having to do that to be effective when the Pheonix (as well as Nag pilots) have to put up with when using Cit Torps. (level 5 Cit Torp skill here too). -John

Zakon Minmatar 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:58:00 - [181] Honestly Chronotis i got scared when reading your proposed changes. If that was what u call fixing the nag, then i dont know what to think about your balancing competence. That fix off yours is laughable and so fundamentaly wrong. There is no need of repeating what other players already said in this thread, but it seams that u guys are in need off some serious basic understanding off the ships in question. "alpha" ??? but LOL, common man, its atleast laughable. Capital fights take time (u should know that). Can u explain what exact use have u spoted suddenly alpha?? and with split weapon sistem. 4 weapon slots and still worse damage off all the dreads Worse tank, nice changes indeed
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.04.30 05:04:00 - [182] Edited by: Random Womble on 30/04/2009 05:04:51 Nag needs its missing mid/low slot since the extra high slot provides no real bonus as it only serves to actually allow the split weapon system get close to competing. So far the only real positive change is the much needed CPU boost. so basically +70 cpu = good +1 med also needed to bring it inline with other dreads Other changes actually make it worse.
Gespenst Jager Pumpkin Scissors Bright Side of Death	Posted - 2009.04.30 05:34:00 - [183] Now we have three dreds in game: Moros, Revel and Nagl. Moros can kill support, Revel have the most rigid tank and a powerful damage (including sniper distances). And what we have at Nagl? Just give to this ship any sense for existence, besides that [censored] VERTICALITY.
Jelmer Minmatar The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 05:35:00 - [184] Tbh, due to the fact that the naglfar is always primaried, has a **ty tank and is not even remotely near the best dps, I am seriously considering crosstraining to Moros. And that's with a char that HAS the dual weapon systems maxed. Doesn't that tell you just how lousy the naglfar is atm? * A noob a day takes the boredom away ***
Osant	Posted - 2009.04.30 05:47:00 - [185] Edited by: Osant on 30/04/2009 05:47:24 Yeah! Remove all bonuses to citadels, make them like additional missile hardpoint on Stiletto 20-25% per level (Minmatar Dreadnought) for Capital Projectiles?
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:01:00 - [186] Originally by: Random Womble Edited by: Random Womble on 30/04/2009 05:04:51 Nag needs its missing mid/low slot since the extra high slot provides no real bonus as it only serves to actually allow the split weapon system get close to competing. So far the only real positive change is the much needed CPU boost. so basically +70 cpu = good +1 med also needed to bring it inline with other dreads Other changes actually make it worse. I agree 100%! However, I said this 5 pages back. And it needs more than 70 cpu.
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:07:00 - [187] Edited by: Beyond Horizon on 30/04/2009 06:07:48 Originally by: DigitalCommunist Originally by: Lumy And how would this help? If I had a dreadnought fleet, I would want them to get into position together, enter siege together, leave siege together, and if possible, return home together. If you don't see the advantages, you probably haven't spent enough time on dread ops. Dude... seriously... different dreads having different siege cycles is ret arded, mkay? - BH
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:18:00 - [188] To everyone asking for three turret nags. It took us the better part of a year to get them to involve the balance team. How long do you think it'd take us to get them to involve the graphical team too? And no, it's not a "quick" change, it won't take only a week. So to me the only two proposals that are realistic are the "nightmare" option (2 guns with 100% role bonus) or the "more slots and way more CPU" option. I prefer the second one personally as it won't make millions of my SP useless. Give the nag +1 low and +1(2?) mid and at least 100CPU more. That way you can fit a full rack of damage mods for our "lovely" dual weapon systems. Ideally in that fit the nag would do best DPS and be able to fit an average shield tank without requiring silly faction mods. Or you could armor tank it and have the best tank of all dreads but do the worst damage. It doesn't require a lot of graphical redesign and it makes the naglfar useful again.
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:27:00 - [189] Originally by: Vlip To everyone asking for three turret nags. It took us the better part of a year to get them to involve the balance team. How long do you think it'd take us to get them to involve the graphical team too? And no, it's not a "quick" change, it won't take only a week. So to me the only two proposals that are realistic are the "nightmare" option (2 guns with 100% role bonus) or the "more slots and way more CPU" option. I prefer the second one personally as it won't make millions of my SP useless. Give the nag +1 low and +1(2?) mid and at least 100CPU more. That way you can fit a full rack of damage mods for our "lovely" dual weapon systems. Ideally in that fit the nag would do best DPS and be able to fit an average shield tank without requiring silly faction mods. Or you could armor tank it and have the best tank of all dreads but do the worst damage. It doesn't require a lot of graphical redesign and it makes the naglfar useful again. Oddly enough, if you fit the Nag just like a Phoenix, it takes +1 mid, +1 low, and +200 CPU to make them about the same. Nag is a bit less tanked (3%?) and does a bit less damage (5%ish less with 4 damage mods) which I consider to be equal since you have more choice of damage type. That probably isn't the optimal way to fit a Nag, but it needs love, more than the Devs have stated.
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:29:00 - [190] Yeah, I still think arties need a buff in general which would give the nag more dps in that "mod" than other dreads.

Tea Spoon Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:35:00 - [191] Alpha strike is very much important in hit-and-run combat which the Minmatar should use given their in-game history. These tactics make no sense at all when you are dealing with sieged dreads and a split weapon system which delivers half your damage 30 seconds later then your direct fire weapons. CCP should go for the 2 100% bonused guns to make the Nag equal in training effort or make it a better dread then the rest to compensate for having to train two main weapons with support skills for them. Going from terrible to just crap is not the answer. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed dimensions of 400x120 pixels and filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected])
SavageBastard Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:47:00 - [192] 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. Supporting the Nag pilot instead of the poor scrub that the job got pawned off on.
Mr Adebisi GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 06:47:00 - [193] 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. please do this thanks in advance
Drad Lord	Posted - 2009.04.30 07:11:00 - [194] I think this post created for laugh at all minmatare race and say go to your hurricane, rupture and rifter, before they still work. And forget about dreads they too large for minmatares philosophy, slaves cant siege POSs and forms capitals fleets they only can catch, hit and run. Naglfar was worst and will worst in future as large artillery. If you want fly at decent capitals go cross train like snipers bs.
Lexa Hellfury Incura	Posted - 2009.04.30 07:13:00 - [195] Edited by: Lexa Hellfury on 30/04/2009 07:15:32 I know I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said before, but as long as the Naglfar has it's current slot layout, split weapons system, and fitting specs, it's going to be a fail dread. Minor tweaks to Citadel Torps and XL Projectiles aren't going to change that. -2 Launcher Points, +1 Turret Point (fix the graphics model, don't fix the graphics model, who really cares?) -1 High Slot, -1 Low Slot, +2 Mid Slot +150 CPU Bonuses changed to: 5% Bonus to Capital Projectile Damage and Capital Projectile Turret Rate of fire per level. This sits quite nicely as it mirrors the bonuses of the Rupture, Hurricane, and Tempest quite nicely (Good from an RP standpoint).
Morel Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 07:20:00 - [196] Nerf all other dread to nalg level - it's a simple solution
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 07:52:00 - [197] Edited by: Beyond Horizon on 30/04/2009 07:54:00 Originally by: Morel Nerf all other dread to nalg level - it's a simple solution so it'll take more time to kill anything with a dread fleet? how is that a solution? And effort wise - its much more simple to fix one ship instead of 3 - BH
Saylin Kitsune	Posted - 2009.04.30 07:55:00 - [198] Edited by: Saylin Kitsune on 30/04/2009 07:56:34 Edited by: Saylin Kitsune on 30/04/2009 07:56:18 Simply bring 'em in-line with oter Dreads: 3 Hybrid X-Large Turrets - Morros 3 Laser X-Large Turrets - Revelation 3 Citadel Launcher - Phoenix 3 Projectile X-Large - Naglfar
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:19:00 - [199] Originally by: Soenan Originally by: Voculus No disrespect intended, CCP, but this "buff" to the Naglfar is a waste. For the love of God, remove the torpedoes, give it three turret hardpoints, and be done with it already. QFT. And while you're at it add 2 more turret hardpoints to the phoenix and delete capital torps. If the Phoenix is left as the only Dread using missiles - together with their gimped explosion velocity that means that Carriers, MS and Titans must be multiple-webbed (duh how does that work?) - then it becomes completely obsolete in Dread fights. Just bin the Citadel Torps altogether. They're as pointless as Cruise in a sniper BS fleet. Give the Phoenix bonuses to hybrid optimal and something else.
Drad Lord	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:21:00 - [200] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Damage Control II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Photon Scattering Field II Capital Shield Booster I Heat Dissipation Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Guristas Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Guristas Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I It looks not bad but need 225 CPU (you may decrease PG to 600000) and 10% projectile damage bonus per level rather rate of fire its will be enough for this one, except speed of citadel torpedo they need fix too. And nothing break minmatare philosophy, and whole world will be happy

Warrio GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:23:00 - [201] God I hope CCP doesn't give into the **y whiney little ***es crying about training up two weapon systems. sXe
Feonfan	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:46:00 - [202] 5 high (3 turret 2 torpedo) 6 med 5 low
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:49:00 - [203] Originally by: Warrio God I hope CCP doesn't give into the **y whiney little *es crying about training up two weapon systems. There's nothing wrong with having to train 2 weapon systems, except when both those weapon systems are piles of *. If you have to invest twice the SP into a Nag then it should at least* be on par with the Rev and Moros.
Seph Res Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:58:00 - [204] i know this is maybe not the right thread for it, but is it possible to have a look at the phoenix too? capital fights with phoenixes is a pain. given the maximum allowed locked targets is two, paired with the WORSTEST scan resolution of all dreadnoughts and the delayed volley damage its just not usable in any way. considering the fact that my torpedoes even dont hit the target after i locked it cause the turret dreads melt it away in 10 seconds makes the phoenix even useless at 30km fighting range, not taking into account on 150km and more its only 2 minutes till my torps hit at this range, so i maybe can shoot at the 6th called target then high slot layout of phoenix as it is for capitalfights: siege mod, cynosural field generator, neutralizer, smartbomb = more useful than now. rant
Lin'ka	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:00:00 - [205] Give the chance to move in siege.
Morel Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:11:00 - [206] Originally by: Beyond Horizon Edited by: Beyond Horizon on 30/04/2009 07:54:00 Originally by: Morel Nerf all other dread to nalg level - it's a simple solution so it'll take more time to kill anything with a dread fleet? how is that a solution? And effort wise - its much more simple to fix one ship instead of 3 it was irony ma'man (related to nano nerf) wink-wink
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:14:00 - [207] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Feedback is most welcome! So, what should you be looking to do with the Naglfar? * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. * Increasing the citadel launcher rate of fire bonus to 7.5% per level. * Increasing the base CPU to 875 (+175) * Decreasing the base powergrid to 560,000 (-65,000) * Add one midslot * Remove one lowslot And what about capital projectile turrets? Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I : * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) Citadel Torpedoes * Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 2,500 m/s (from 750) * Citadel Torpedo flight time decreased to 60 secs (from 90) * Citadel Torpedo explosion velocity increased to 100 m/sec (from 29 m/sec)
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:15:00 - [208] Originally by: Morel Originally by: Beyond Horizon Edited by: Beyond Horizon on 30/04/2009 07:54:00 Originally by: Morel Nerf all other dread to nalg level - it's a simple solution so it'll take more time to kill anything with a dread fleet? how is that a solution? And effort wise - its much more simple to fix one ship instead of 3 it was irony ma'man (related to nano nerf) wink-wink oh ok ^_^ yeah nerfing other dreads to the nag level is as sucky as making different dreads having different siege cycles
Hertford Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:33:00 - [209] Originally by: Saylin Kitsune Simply bring 'em in-line with oter Dreads: 3 Hybrid X-Large Turrets - Morros 3 Laser X-Large Turrets - Revelation 3 Citadel Launcher - Phoenix 3 Projectile X-Large - Naglfar Engage the art team. Get this done. The quote above is probably the most succinct way of putting it. Like I said earlier, it's not rocket science. For example, chop the model in two, in between the two turrets. Move the halves apart, put in a flat chunk to provide room for the third turret. It'll be even more vertical, which is an added bonus. Anything else is just sheer laziness. Stop beating around with stupid role bonuses, bite the bullet (well, shell) and get an modeller onto the case right now. Cease the procrastination. Fix the Naglfar (and I mean fix, I don't mean botch job patchup).
Spacebar Minmatar Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:49:00 - [210] Originally by: Drad Lord Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Damage Control II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Photon Scattering Field II Capital Shield Booster I Heat Dissipation Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Guristas Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Guristas Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I It looks not bad but need 225 CPU (you may decrease PG to 600000) and 10% projectile damage bonus per level rather rate of fire its will be enough for this one, except speed of citadel torpedo they need fix too. And nothing break minmatare philosophy, and whole world will be happy Sensor booster mate... Dont forget.

Austintatious Overview Glitch	Posted - 2009.04.30 09:56:00 - [211] Originally by: ImmortalKalo 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. FO SHO agree
Drad Lord	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:02:00 - [212] Yep, I quite agree but if you will not alone your corp mate can use TP to a game. 1 mid slot rather 1 low is so good that i cant mind about.
Gespenst Jager Pumpkin Scissors Bright Side of Death	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:13:00 - [213] Edited by: Gespenst Jager on 30/04/2009 10:14:04 Minmatar Dreadnought Skill Bonus: 15% reduction in Strontium consumption for Siege Module activation and 15% reduction in Siege Module ROF per level. This give some sense to big volley damage, agility and those "hit-n-run" minmatar strategy.
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:20:00 - [214] Originally by: Gespenst Jager Edited by: Gespenst Jager on 30/04/2009 10:14:04 Minmatar Dreadnought Skill Bonus: 15% reduction in Strontium consumption for Siege Module activation and 15% reduction in Siege Module ROF per level. This give some sense to big volley damage, agility and those "hit-n-run" minmatar strategy. Why not give it a target painting bonus while you're at it?
To mare	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:22:00 - [215] Originally by: Hertford Originally by: Saylin Kitsune Simply bring 'em in-line with oter Dreads: 3 Hybrid X-Large Turrets - Morros 3 Laser X-Large Turrets - Revelation 3 Citadel Launcher - Phoenix 3 Projectile X-Large - Naglfar Engage the art team. Get this done. The quote above is probably the most succinct way of putting it. Like I said earlier, it's not rocket science. For example, chop the model in two, in between the two turrets. Move the halves apart, put in a flat chunk to provide room for the third turret. It'll be even more vertical, which is an added bonus. Anything else is just sheer laziness. Stop beating around with stupid role bonuses, bite the bullet (well, shell) and get an modeller onto the case right now. Cease the procrastination. Fix the Naglfar (and I mean fix, I don't mean botch job patchup). ^^ this ccp take your time but please fix the damn things
Anahid Brutus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:26:00 - [216] Originally by: Anahid Brutus Edited by: Anahid Brutus on 29/04/2009 20:56:23 Ok going to use the p4 top spot for this: Plz rename thread to: Official confirmation that nags will always be ****, just train into a revelation. qft
Larkonis TrassIer Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:28:00 - [217] Citadel torps are also a big issue... all but useless in longer range cap fights. All other races get two flavours of cap guns, why not introduce 'citadel cruise launchers' with a high velocity (5000+m/s?) with slightly lower damage than torps, at the same time buff the damage and reduce the range on citadel torps.
TuRtLe HeAd KrayZ Inc Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:41:00 - [218] Grrrr...... so thats why someone bought my Nagflar yesterday..... whoever it was can i have it back please
Evelgrivion Ignatium. Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:42:00 - [219] The Naglfar model; now with 100% less rofl. This took me about one hour with Google Sketchup. Unfortunately, I have no ability what so ever with texturing.
HankMurphy Minmatar Pelennor Enterprises	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:44:00 - [220] Originally by: Hertford Originally by: Saylin Kitsune Simply bring 'em in-line with oter Dreads: 3 Hybrid X-Large Turrets - Morros 3 Laser X-Large Turrets - Revelation 3 Citadel Launcher - Phoenix 3 Projectile X-Large - Naglfar Engage the art team. Get this done. The quote above is probably the most succinct way of putting it. Truth, this has been quoted for The model is flawed. Unless your going to do the 'nightmare thing' with the turrets, it's just flawed. Your split weapon systems suck, period. There isn't a better example of this than the Naglfar. Hell, if the typhoon didn't have a huge drone bay NO ONE would fly it. You want to taunt 'versatility' as the allure and advantage of the Matar. In some cases this is true, in other cases it's like your only goal was to create the split weapon/slot layout with no regard to how the ship would actually perform. Versatility a great idea but until you are able to implement it other than == a nerf and a waste of excessive SP to do what your Gallente or Amarr friend is doing with a fraction of the SP, sing the song somewhere else (especially on this capital ship issue). Yay, i can fit 2 launchers and 2 turrets.... tell me where the advantage of that is if i still deal less dps than the guy w/ 3 turrets??? Remember, if i want to up my dps for all my weapons i have to fit 2x the low slot modules the other guy does. Oh, and the "we CBA to add a turret, its IMPOSSIBLE" is a complete line of crap. It's not that you can't, it's because someone said they didn't want to. Think of how that looks to a customer "yeah we should do this, but we aren't going to, sorry". If I told my customer's I couldn't redesign something because it was IMPOSSIBLE that customer would leave. Strapping cardboard wings to my arms and flying to the moon is impossible. Adding a turret to the Naglfer is inconvenient AT BEST. thanks for reading this and thanks for making the attempt to start addressing the balancing issues. we do appreciate it, just sometimes you make everyone want to face palm. I'm dont want to be 'that guy' but i'm putting a lot of faith in this rebalancing effort. However, if you do what you've been known to and make the changes you announce regarless (almost in spite of) what your community suggests, after pages and pages of discussion... i'm friggin done with this game. I want to have faith in CCP, there are so many things you have done well, but if you can't see the inherent flaws in some of your own designs (or if you can and just can't bother with actually fixing them) why should we have any faith that you will do anything but continue to implement poor changes? /rant off

Soyemia Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 10:49:00 - [221] Yay!!!!!! Volley damage relevant (400% to HP of caps) oh wait.... Not to mention about POSes Can't fit a tank with arty, not enough grid for 2x cap armor rep and can't fit shield tank. Still needs twice the amount of damage mods.You're making ti even worse. Back to training Revelation.
Pallidum Treponema Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:01:00 - [222] 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.
Myz Toyou Ministry of Destruction	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:03:00 - [223] 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. This tbh. I¦m pure Matari specced and only refusing to go for the Nagl till now cos it would be a total waste of time/SPs and the fact its freakin vertical don`t equal the letdowns.
Ound	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:03:00 - [224] Good to see that the problem is being looked at. Well it will be very uncool if you drop Citadels when you have just trained them, I would rather see boost for them. Because if you put 3x Projectiles on Nagrofl and some new shiny bonues, it's obvious that Pheonix will be the worst Dreadnought to fight against other Capitals.
zetonton	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:06:00 - [225] Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii Nag is the worst dps, worst tank, and twice as much SP of any dread. that is a good summarize of the situation. And this conclusion comes from only one characteristic of the naglfar : split weapon system. It (almost) works on the Typhoon because of its slot layout and its drone, but for the Naglfar, it makes my eyes bleeding ! we spend a lot more sp in order to get the worst dread (... and the worst capital ships in fact :x) even with your change, you will just improve our situation to "oh crap, my dread makes laugh any non-minmatar" to "ho crap, my dread STILL makes laugh any non-minmatar". Please, PLEASE, give us a third arty and correct bonus (dps + ?) and everyone would be happy. We will not have the best Dread but you will restore our pride (and please, about 3D graphic model, there is enough place on the current model -on the bottom part-)
Amy Wang	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:12:00 - [226] Edited by: Amy Wang on 30/04/2009 11:16:07 Oh, nice you came on the idea with the rof changes to 10%/7.5% (which I suggested like one or two years ago already). It is a start, even a good start, but frankly that alone just makes up for the less effective damage mods due to split weapon system. The gun changes are also a good way, like the increased range and better alpha and the effective dps increase is also not too shabby, the increased grid use, reduced ship grid and the fact that it only effects 50% of the weapons on the ship kinda mitigate it though. There is still the issues that the Naglfar is far more skill intensive then other dreads (again due to split weapon system) and has one less med/low slot and frankly the increased dps from the 4th high is not all that big even with the new bonus to justify that. There is also the issue that the ship is a crappy armor or shield tanker, even worse at armor with the proposed pg changes, but minni pilots are probably used to that I guess To make up for these shortcomings there is still something missing, ideas: - add a med or low (I would prefer a low hands down) - reduce the rank of the minmatar dreadnought skill to make up for the increased training time due to split weapon system (or reduce rank of xl projectile and dread skill both but by smaller amount) - give it the same (or slightly smaller) drone bonus and bay of the Moros and make it into a capital sized phoon that way So yea, so far not too impressed and not yet even tempted to reconsider training Minni dread 5 instead of Amarr dread 5, so keep it coming
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:14:00 - [227] Originally by: Vlip To everyone asking for three turret nags. It took us the better part of a year to get them to involve the balance team. How long do you think it'd take us to get them to involve the graphical team too? And no, it's not a "quick" change, it won't take only a week. So to me the only two proposals that are realistic are the "nightmare" option (2 guns with 100% role bonus) or the "more slots and way more CPU" option. I prefer the second one personally as it won't make millions of my SP useless. Give the nag +1 low and +1(2?) mid and at least 100CPU more. That way you can fit a full rack of damage mods for our "lovely" dual weapon systems. Ideally in that fit the nag would do best DPS and be able to fit an average shield tank without requiring silly faction mods. Or you could armor tank it and have the best tank of all dreads but do the worst damage. It doesn't require a lot of graphical redesign and it makes the naglfar useful again. While its more work than simple balance work.. its NOT hard at all. Commign from someoen that worked 2 and half years in game industry.. doing guess what? interfacign development and art teams... I can say that takes 1 full day of a modeler and 1 full day of a texturer.. at MOST If CCP teams needs vastly larger ammounts of time then they need to be replaced ... I can point to few very good outsorcing studios that are able to achieve this minimal efficiency ratio and very likely charge 1/4th of what someoen in iceland likely bids for..
Sbl Dark Glitter Inc	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:18:00 - [228] Originally by: zetonton Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii Nag is the worst dps, worst tank, and twice as much SP of any dread. that is a good summarize of the situation. And this conclusion comes from only one characteristic of the naglfar : split weapon system. It (almost) works on the Typhoon because of its slot layout and its drone, but for the Naglfar, it makes my eyes bleeding ! we spend a lot more sp in order to get the worst dread (... and the worst capital ships in fact :x) even with your change, you will just improve our situation to "oh crap, my dread makes laugh any non-minmatar" to "ho crap, my dread STILL makes laugh any non-minmatar". Please, PLEASE, give us a third arty and correct bonus (dps + ?) and everyone would be happy. We will not have the best Dread but you will restore our pride (and please, about 3D graphic model, there is enough place on the current model -on the bottom part-) only reason it works with the phoon is because the phoon has a decent armor tank, small sig raduis to start with. As for the offensive power- im guessing phoon pilots mostly fit 4 missile weapons or 4 gunnery weapons rather than 4 of each on the ship. The other 4 slots i suspect are filled with neuts, nos, remote reps etc. Cit torps need to have their explosion velocity increased to be able to hit about 60-80ms capitals. There needs to be a Citadel cruise varient. As for artillery, its completetly hopeless with tracking as it is, being slightly bumped on a tower, just knocked 20ms means theres a good chance ill miss the tower... so making it worse is pretty terrible. Increase a low slot and remove a med slot. i dont need 5 meds with 4 cap rechargers when im not using any capacitor to fire my guns and im lucky to get one rep off on my repper before i pop with the hopeless EHP. I dont want to have to train for the cap shield booster now. Its completely out of line with the nidhoggour and you are more likely to have a nid and nag than a nag and Hel. split weapon bonuses are ******ed.
muxacb07 Eye of God Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:22:00 - [229] Please CCP I beg you make the naglfar a projectile boat that's all I ask, not this split group pretty please.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:22:00 - [230] Originally by: BuyMyNarcotics Disclaimer: I only read the first page. With that out of the way. How about this? - Tweak Citadels (helping the phoenix and naglfar) - Boost XL Projectiles - New Naglfar gets 4 highs, 3 turret, 3 missile launcher - Other boosts for tank can be recommended by someone who knows better This gives Minnie pilots the option to train one or the other depending on what the FOTM is. Tweakign citatels will NEVER do it for the naglfar. It can solve for phoenix but not the naglfar. Why? Because you need DOUBLE damage mods and DOUBLE the range mods/rigs to get it in line with other dreads. Its everyday more common extremely logn range fights. I need to spend 2 rig slots to make citatels hit the necessary range.. plus 2 range mods for arties. THen need 4 damage mods.. 2 for each weapon system. Then you comapre to a moros or revelation taht needs 2 range mods/rigs and 2 damage mods.... that means naglfar needs 4 slots MORE than the other dreads to deploy. But WAIT it already starts with 1 LESS slot! So it has a 5 slot shortage!!! repeat 5 SLOT SHORTAGE!!! Only way to sovel that is removing split weapons.

Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:24:00 - [231] or giving it said 5 slots or even more with the cpu/grid to fill them...
Lasakywa Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:28:00 - [232] Edited by: Lasakywa on 30/04/2009 11:28:51 Just make the Naglfar a 3-turrets dreads, plz k thx. 99% of the community wants this to be done like this.
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:40:00 - [233] Originally by: Lasakywa Edited by: Lasakywa on 30/04/2009 11:28:51 Just make the Naglfar a 3-turrets dreads, plz k thx. 99% of the community wants this to be done like this. And do the same for the Phoenix.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:44:00 - [234] Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: Lasakywa Edited by: Lasakywa on 30/04/2009 11:28:51 Just make the Naglfar a 3-turrets dreads, plz k thx. 99% of the community wants this to be done like this. And do the same for the Phoenix. the phoenix CAN be solved by changing the torps themselves (because beign single weapon system means it does nto have slot shortage. Multiply citatel explosion velocity by 5 ( yes! 400% ) and make their BASE speed 3000ms.
Gespenst Jager Pumpkin Scissors Bright Side of Death	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:54:00 - [235] Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: Lasakywa Edited by: Lasakywa on 30/04/2009 11:28:51 Just make the Naglfar a 3-turrets dreads, plz k thx. 99% of the community wants this to be done like this. And do the same for the Phoenix. No, giving pvp-ship to Caldari is too dangerous :)
SickSeven The Undead Righteous Knights	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:56:00 - [236] Originally by: Evelgrivion Edited by: Evelgrivion on 30/04/2009 11:06:19 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. ^^^^^^^ LOOK HERE CCP!!!!!!!! This guy just did your job for you!!! Now apply rate of fire and damage bonus and the the NAG is fixed!!
Sock Monster	Posted - 2009.04.30 11:59:00 - [237] Fair enough CCP, you've always wanted minmatar to tread the jack of all trades/master of none line, though the nag even post change is still not right. The problem is not enough slots to make it competitive without sacrificing either tank/gank to an extent no other dreadnaught has to deal with, even with the longer skill training requirements. If you want it to still be versatile, give us the options of either taking it down the citadel/projectile shield/armour tank with being comfortable second in mind rather than miserable last. If you don't want to change the model for extra turrets that's fine, you can make an interesting ship around it without having to change that. Yorda is right, bring it down to two capital weapons. For example: 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) 6 meds 7 lows Bonus: XL- Projectile damage per level (#%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (#%) XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo Explosion velocity per level (5%) 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level The first thing you'd think is holy bonus batman, but the slot layout will make 2/4 bonuses obsolete depending on your personal fitting preferences. The exact percentage numbers of the bonuses would need to be worked out, but the goal should be slightly below parity with the specialist dreadnaughts. With the quad siege dps should be roughly equal in a maxed skilled character to a moros without drones, if both use 3 damage mods. Because the nag will naturally be in a longer falloff than the moros or revelation at range it will still be the lowest dps turret dreadnaught as by design, but not unfairly so. The capital launcher is the same, all skill levels equal it should come in as less damaging than the phoenix by about 100-200 dps if the phoenix does not use kinetic torpedos, adjust the bonus for this effect. The secondary bonus ensures that whichever route you take you'll be compensated with a useful bonus which does not make anything too powerful but makes sure that you cannot take advantage of both without seriously reducing the effectiveness of the ship. It would have less slots than the average dreadnaught though less need of them due to the bonus. Fitting powergrid/cpu balance along these lines: 1) projectiles/armour tank: comes at the cost of fitting damage mods but with the highest possible EHPf or a single tank (flip the armour/shield values around) 2) projectiles/shield tank: best burst tank possible and effective damage but with less effective HP (the main tank used in large scale capital combat) 3) missiles/armour: less range, more damage though damage mods overlap with tank again 4) missiles/shield: good tank/good damage though keep the requirement that it should take one co-processor to fit with damage mods. There you have it, a jack of all trades/master of none dreadnaught with a lot of flexibility in fitting without outclassing dedicated dreadnaughts, capable of long range fleet combat as a serious contender. I havn't included exact numbers to most of the bonuses as I havn't mucked around with all the possibilities of something becoming unbalanced, but the theory is sound, keeping the minmatar as flexible and good natured losers without making them uncompetitive.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 12:06:00 - [238] Versatility has no place on a dreadnaught! These are the LEAST VEERSATILE ROLE based ships in game. There is no p;lace for makign a ship inferion on name of a versatility that has no use!! THe problem IS the lack of slots to achieve damage and range parity that is derived from both the stupid split weapon systems and the fact taht nalgafar has 1 less slot to start with.
Das Panzer Minmatar The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 12:26:00 - [239] Just give the Nag 3x Turret hard points and make a decision whether its gonna be a shield or an armor tanker. As it its its trying to do many things at once and doing them all 1/2 assed.
Sleyn Peade Twilight Fleet Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.30 12:31:00 - [240] Originally by: CCP Chronotis A bunch of sentences lacking any grasp in reality Are you kidding???? That's like trying to put out a fire with a flamethrower. That makes the following idea look realistic: Originally by: SHC Remove the high slots, make it perfectly clear that the Nag is eye candy in a cap fight. I'll have to admit that this comes from someone who likes the naglfar for all the crazy that it is, rusty, vertical, extra-high, split-weapon and all, and I keep seing people look to the extra high (or the lack of a med/low it causes) as the tank-problem, but I think the best way to fix the ship is to fix damage and tank seperately: The damage: ->Change the projectile RoF-bonus to 10% (that'll beef up the damage nicely enough) ->Capital projectile-gunz change: Ca. +20% dmg-modifier and +15% RoF (as higher RoF means less shooting it wouldn't be the biggest dps-change, but it'll mean a bigger alpha and less reloading) ->Optimal on the capital arty changed to 72.000m, more hits, more usefull ->Change drone capacity to 375 m3 (Room for 3 handfulls of sentry-drones. The fact that it can't carry 2 right now is just meh) The tank: -> +120.000 shield hp -> (shield recharge on caps may need to get looked at) -> +80.000 structure hp It's always going to have a worse active tank than anything else, no way around that, even if it got its low/med back it's just the minmatar-style. Giving it a huge shieldbuffer, which is pretty minmatar-characteristic last I checked, and a large structurebuffer, which goes with the ships looks, will make up for the lack of the low/med that was stolen to the highslots. -> +120 CPU. Even with that it won't be able to fit too good a shield-tank (do the damn math, +70 is just lol), but it'll bring it close enough that named mods and thinking the setup through and passing on the T2-ballistic controls that use 40 ****ing cpu will mean that you can fit the ship without a cpu-enhancer. That way the ship will be where it belongs, in the minmatar-style wtf-crazy category.

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 12:35:00 - [241] Originally by: Sleyn Peade Originally by: CCP Chronotis A bunch of sentences lacking any grasp in reality Are you kidding???? That's like trying to put out a fire with a flamethrower. That makes the following idea look realistic: Originally by: SHC Remove the high slots, make it perfectly clear that the Nag is eye candy in a cap fight. I'll have to admit that this comes from someone who likes the naglfar for all the crazy that it is, rusty, vertical, extra-high, split-weapon and all, and I keep seing people look to the extra high (or the lack of a med/low it causes) as the tank-problem, but I think the best way to fix the ship is to fix damage and tank seperately: The damage: ->Change the projectile RoF-bonus to 10% (that'll beef up the damage nicely enough) ->Capital projectile-gunz change: Ca. +20% dmg-modifier and +15% RoF (as higher RoF means less shooting it wouldn't be the biggest dps-change, but it'll mean a bigger alpha and less reloading) ->Optimal on the capital arty changed to 72.000m, more hits, more usefull ->Change drone capacity to 375 m3 (Room for 3 handfulls of sentry-drones. The fact that it can't carry 2 right now is just meh) The tank: -> +120.000 shield hp -> (shield recharge on caps may need to get looked at) -> +80.000 structure hp It's always going to have a worse active tank than anything else, no way around that, even if it got its low/med back it's just the minmatar-style. Giving it a huge shieldbuffer, which is pretty minmatar-characteristic last I checked, and a large structurebuffer, which goes with the ships looks, will make up for the lack of the low/med that was stolen to the highslots. -> +120 CPU. Even with that it won't be able to fit too good a shield-tank (do the damn math, +70 is just lol), but it'll bring it close enough that named mods and thinking the setup through and passing on the T2-ballistic controls that use 40 ****ing cpu will mean that you can fit the ship without a cpu-enhancer. That way the ship will be where it belongs, in the minmatar-style wtf-crazy category. errr you proposed to increase arti range to a SMALLER range that ccp proposed? what?
Sneer Quen E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.04.30 12:42:00 - [242] still after this changes i will train for another //any // dread
Rahjadan Shardur Minmatar Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.30 12:56:00 - [243] OK did anyone realise that the NAG still has one less slot in the Mid+Low Summ? If the tank is that much weaker than that of the other dreads and it is that much harder to fit damage mods because you'll have to fit two kinds it should be rewarded by massively more damage if you do fit this ship for damage, however the NAG does not outperform the other dreads in any way. Also i think the Devs should stop to try to microbalance everything into uniformity. this ships are supposed to be disigned by differnt engenieres of differnt empires, they should not perform the exact same task with the same performence. one might be designed with a straiget focus on starbase siege, another might ecceel in fighting other dreads and the moros for instance is in theory capable of fighting smaller ships in addition to the normal dread roles due to its drone bonus. As i see it the NAG should be disigned with an overwelming firepower but a bit lacking tank, making it a supreme damage dealer to POS and other capitals but also making it more likely (or faster because everything goes down) to go down in an encounter if it is beeing shot at by the enemy fleet. so while it shouldn't take as much firepower to bring down a NAG it sould also take fewer NAGs to take down a POS in an hour than any other kind of dread. Beeing on top of the Killmail and among the first to fall is the way you fight in a Rebellion and it's the minmatar way. ------------------ In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. (Douglas Adams)
muxacb07 Eye of God Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:02:00 - [244] Originally by: Rahjadan Shardur OK did anyone realise that the NAG still has one less slot in the Mid+Low Summ? If the tank is that much weaker than that of the other dreads and it is that much harder to fit damage mods because you'll have to fit two kinds it should be rewarded by massively more damage if you do fit this ship for damage, however the NAG does not outperform the other dreads in any way. Also i think the Devs should stop to try to microbalance everything into uniformity. this ships are supposed to be disigned by differnt engenieres of differnt empires, they should not perform the exact same task with the same performence. one might be designed with a straiget focus on starbase siege, another might ecceel in fighting other dreads and the moros for instance is in theory capable of fighting smaller ships in addition to the normal dread roles due to its drone bonus. As i see it the NAG should be disigned with an overwelming firepower but a bit lacking tank, making it a supreme damage dealer to POS and other capitals but also making it more likely (or faster because everything goes down) to go down in an encounter if it is beeing shot at by the enemy fleet. so while it shouldn't take as much firepower to bring down a NAG it sould also take fewer NAGs to take down a POS in an hour than any other kind of dread. Beeing on top of the Killmail and among the first to fall is the way you fight in a Rebellion and it's the minmatar way. Agreed couldn't have been put any better way then that...
RookieEG Sun Lin Tong Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:12:00 - [245] Edited by: RookieEG on 30/04/2009 13:12:59 funniest thing that Chronotis (or whoever..) throw us a bone with that lousy "changing with the Naglfar" and dissappeared from topic. will he even read all that was written? i doubt that. anyway: Quote: 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF 3/6/5 +15% cpu signed
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:16:00 - [246] Yup... MAke the naglfar do what its description says it does. But the only way to do it is to get rid of the citatel launchers. Because split weapons means you need 2 times more range modules and damage modules to deploy on equal condition to other dreads.. As was stated earlier. effectively naglfar is missing 5 slots to be able to deploy on euqal condition to other dreads! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Aya Vandenovich	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:16:00 - [247] Edited by: Aya Vandenovich on 30/04/2009 13:20:25 Edited by: Aya Vandenovich on 30/04/2009 13:20:02 While I'm no expert on cap ships, I'm inclined to agree with what's already been said about the split weapon systems on the Nagalfar. It seems that the issues with the nag are just part of a larger problem with split weapon systems that could perhaps be looked at first. Edit: The ECM drones thread seems to be going in a similar direction- with the real issues being with the effectiveness of other EWar drones and the ECM mechanic itself. Somewhere In England
Rhaegor Stormborn H A V O C	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:42:00 - [248] Originally by: Jelmer As one of those vertically inclined pilots - well, yes, the Nag is in need of some... loving. Yes, it is great to be vertical - but having to train two weapon systems, incl. ofc. supportive skills, to capital level is a pain for most. Sure, I don't care, I did it - but others will come after me. You do not see a caldari dread with both missile and hybrid... So, my suggestion would be - remove the missile slots and make this ship pure projectile. Thank you. /signed No missiles!!!
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:45:00 - [249] Originally by: Rahjadan Shardur OK did anyone realise that the NAG still has one less slot in the Mid+Low Summ? If the tank is that much weaker than that of the other dreads and it is that much harder to fit damage mods because you'll have to fit two kinds it should be rewarded by massively more damage if you do fit this ship for damage, however the NAG does not outperform the other dreads in any way. Also i think the Devs should stop to try to microbalance everything into uniformity. this ships are supposed to be disigned by differnt engenieres of differnt empires, they should not perform the exact same task with the same performence. one might be designed with a straiget focus on starbase siege, another might ecceel in fighting other dreads and the moros for instance is in theory capable of fighting smaller ships in addition to the normal dread roles due to its drone bonus. As i see it the NAG should be disigned with an overwelming firepower but a bit lacking tank, making it a supreme damage dealer to POS and other capitals but also making it more likely (or faster because everything goes down) to go down in an encounter if it is beeing shot at by the enemy fleet. so while it shouldn't take as much firepower to bring down a NAG it sould also take fewer NAGs to take down a POS in an hour than any other kind of dread. Beeing on top of the Killmail and among the first to fall is the way you fight in a Rebellion and it's the minmatar way. This! I fully approve of the minmatar philosophy exposed by the gentleman in that enemy alliance!
Slave 2739FKZ	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:49:00 - [250] This all is a waste of time because they will do whatever they want (i.e. not listen to what EVERYBODY is saying). Is disgusting they play at their will with game balance and us just to keep as subscribed training uselesss skills.

SecHaul	Posted - 2009.04.30 13:59:00 - [251] What we have here is CCP not paying attention to the top 3 list: 1.) Fix projectiles first. Please do not rebalance ship hulls before you fix projectiles. Right now you are attempting to fix capital projectiles and a ship hull in a single thread, they are separate issues. 2.) Fix Minmatar split weapon and split tanking systems. This concept blows, but while it may work 'kinda' in frigate and cruiser sized ships, it scales very very poorly. Probably the #1 reason why Minmatar battleships and capitals suck, high SP for low effectiveness when compared to 'specialized' roles. 3.) Once you have fixed 1 and 2, start paying attention to the ship hulls themselves, and if it requires remodeling, then it requires remodeling, but at least fix the drivers before fixing the hulls, otherwise you'll be in a permanent cycle of 'rebalancing', oh wait...
Asterisk Grat Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.04.30 14:02:00 - [252] The truth is that there is nothing Versatile about Naglfar at all. This false sense of versatility cost Naglfar pilots additional training time for torpedoes and both shield and armor tank for minmatar capitals in general to be half as effective as other dreads. I hope CCP will not just reshuffle some bonuses and make it seem it's been fixed. All the extra training time should really give advantages over other dreads, not disadvantages.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.04.30 14:14:00 - [253] This is pretty impressive. The belief that the OP is wrong and the Naglfar sucks is near unanimous. That is EXTREMELY rare. All other past changes always had two clear sides (even if one side was much stronger then the other). I am not sure what more CCP wants. You even got non Matar on the Matar side (though most of us, like me, have non Matar chars) I have hope that the right thing will be done with the Naglfar. Or at least a solution where half the people say it is great and the other half says it sucks. Kinda like every other solution.
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 15:49:00 - [254] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Yup... MAke the naglfar do what its description says it does. But the only way to do it is to get rid of the citatel launchers. Because split weapons means you need 2 times more range modules and damage modules to deploy on equal condition to other dreads.. As was stated earlier. effectively naglfar is missing 5 slots to be able to deploy on euqal condition to other dreads! Also noone mentioned implants, you can only get 1 set of implants at a time (projectile bonuses or missile bonuses), while other dreads can max out their dps with 1 set, the nag cant. Yeah CCP, nice thinking. Oh and good to see Chronotis replying to us guys, our feedback is most appreciated it seems! NOT.
Karenzi No Trademark	Posted - 2009.04.30 16:11:00 - [255] 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. ugh, this is almost too good for you CCP
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.30 16:48:00 - [256] Edited by: RedSplat on 30/04/2009 16:55:54 Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia trying to throw us a bone to shut us up. In fact i think you sort of eluded to that in your post, so i thank you for at least that much. well over a year for you to simply ACKNOWLEDGE that a problem MIGHT exist. Real change and fixes are very very few, excuses and 'someday's are plenty Also, I have a feeling CCP will say: 'We want to keep split weapons systems'. If that is the case, please tweak the boni on the Nagalfar so that with Torp and artillery fitted it does better dps and alpha than say a Rev or Railfit Moros. I see no benefit to having to suffer gimped tank as is. There is still no benefit with the changes proposed in the OP. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Tamo Isrect 4Chan.org	Posted - 2009.04.30 16:55:00 - [257] 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. You could swap the shield amount to "Ability to cancel Siege", could be fun and underline the hit-and-run style :>
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.04.30 16:58:00 - [258] Originally by: Tamo Isrect You could swap the shield amount to "Ability to cancel Siege", could be fun and underline the hit-and-run style :> Or have a siege cycle 1/4 the time of other races while using the same material requirements over time? Or increase its jump range massively? Or introduce capital MWD's and give the Nag a velocity bonus. Nagalbond is go. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
sinfulangel H A V O C	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:19:00 - [259] Agree, drop the stupid split weapon system or just delete the ship already. The proposed changes do nothing to address what is actually wrong with the Naglfar.

CCP Whisper	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:39:00 - [260] 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.


Incantare	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:40:00 - [261] Edited by: Incantare on 30/04/2009 17:43:38 There are plenty of good suggestions in this thread but I'm afraid they're all going to be wasted as CCP once again decide to do their own thing. For the Nag: scrap the split weapon system which massively fails on a dread. How many times does it need to be repeated? Citadels: boost the explosion velocity, change them in a similar way to regular torps (+ damage - range). Introduce capital cruise missiles for long range with enough velocity to be effective. Or just remove citadels from the game and be done with it. Make the Phoenix a dread sized Rokh. It's sadening that the long range race is the worst at long range capital fights. I have absolutely no faith in CCP getting any of these issues fixed in a reasonable amount of time. Revelation here I come. Quote: 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. You've already received an answer. Two turrets with 100% damage bonus and an extra mid. No modelling required.
Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:44:00 - [262] 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. We already told you how to fix it without chaning the model you stupid bone head. 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.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:44:00 - [263] Edited by: isdisco3 on 30/04/2009 17:47:27 Originally by: Sock Monster 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) 6 meds 7 lows Bonus: XL- Projectile damage per level (#%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (#%) XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo Explosion velocity per level (5%) 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level This is a fantastic idea. It keeps the dual-weapons people satisfied because they can fit whichever, makes the nag able to tank and fit one type of damage mod, and makes it able to fit a tank. It doesn't require re-making the ship model, at all. The model stays exactly the same. The bonuses should be geared to make up for a typical dread's damage (with 3 guns). IE, a rev gets 5% ROF for a max of 25% more DPS times 3 guns (making it 3.8 or something effectively). So make the nag's bonuses be 40% each, per level. At level 5, you'd have 200% damage on 2 guns / missiles, making it on par (slightly higher than most actually) with the other dreads damage. And buff the capital artilleries / ac's of course, something close to their proposed change. *40% may be too high, but hey the nag has sucked for so long, I think it would be fitting for it to suddenly become the most dps dread. And it does take the most skillage.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:59:00 - [264] Edited by: Seishi Maru on 30/04/2009 18:00:16 All that time to handle a model and yet every few patches we have notes of "missing textures on ship XX have been corrected " etc... Sorry but As someoen that worked with art deprtment on other game houses in work simmilar to yours.. I must say your art pipeline SUCKS! Suerly findign out time when you already have a complicated schedule is problematic.. but LOL for 1 year. Do not think everyone on these forums have zero knowledge of how this type of things are done. All places were I worked If we had asked for 1 MONTH to make that we woudl have been fired on spot... EVEN so the players here already gave answers taht do not require any modelling....
Ral K'Daro	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:06:00 - [265] 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.
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:08:00 - [266] Originally by: CCP Whisper 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. If we're going to keep the split weapons layout then the Nag must be able to shield tank, anything else just wouldn't make sense considering the need to fit twice as many damage mods to be effective. Unless you're prepared to give it 8 lows. To shield tank effectively the Nag will need: * 15-20% more CPU * At least 1 more mid slot * Possibly remove 1 low For the weapons to be brought up to par they'll need the bonuses mentioned earlier in this thread: * XL- Projectile damage per level (#%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (#%) * XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo Explosion velocity per level (5%) Or alternatively a 100% damage bonus to both weapon types PLUS regular ship bonuses of some kind, while dropping the number of high slots to 3.
Adeline Gray	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:08:00 - [267] CCP, you need to read this thread, and then read it again. Do not get hung up on ideas which you can not realistically implement, then go back over the other 5 or 6 very good points made over and over again by some of your experienced long time loyal customers. There are plenty of solutions in this thread, all of which make perfect sense and are excellent ideas on how to fix this ship. Once you have read the entire thread, do it again. Then start to think which solutions you would be willing to incorporate. DO NOT DO YOUR OWN THING AND IGNORE US. It has been proven time and time again in the history of Eve that when this happens CCP either overpowers or nerfs to obvlion. Just take these ideas, and meld them together into something that address the real problems. Split weapon systems Split/dual type tanks (i.e. Shield/Armor) Minmatar Artillery in general Compare The Nag (And Nid) To Every other capital Those are our problems.
Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:08:00 - [268] Edited by: Professor Dumbledore on 30/04/2009 18:07:58 Quote: - 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 actaully an intresting idea as you get to keep both weapon systems but if we change it so it effectively doubles the damage its doing 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) - 6 meds - 6 lows Bonus: - XL- Projectile damage per level (20%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (20%) Or a Role bonus of 100% the role bonus would likely work better. - XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo velocity per level (5%) - 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level
Megan Maynard Minmatar Out of Order Tenth Legion	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:08:00 - [269] * 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus * 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF * 4/6/5 * +15% cpu This TBH. And keep the missile hard point and have it be unbonused like most minmatar ships. Stop, hammer time.
Isaac Starstriker Amarr Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:12:00 - [270] Originally by: Seishi Maru Edited by: Seishi Maru on 30/04/2009 18:00:16 All that time to handle a model and yet every few patches we have notes of "missing textures on ship XX have been corrected " etc... Sorry but As someoen that worked with art deprtment on other game houses in work simmilar to yours.. I must say your art pipeline SUCKS! Suerly findign out time when you already have a complicated schedule is problematic.. but LOL for 1 year. Do not think everyone on these forums have zero knowledge of how this type of things are done. All places were I worked If we had asked for 1 MONTH to make that we woudl have been fired on spot... EVEN so the players here already gave answers taht do not require any modelling.... I'm sorry, but your games are?....I thought so. Not nearly as complex as this game I'm sure, so shut the heck up and quit being an egotistical person who thinks you know what your talking about. You don't. To everyone else, try and fix the current model (which is possible) and quit crying to CCP about it. --Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed

Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:16:00 - [271] Edited by: Lindsay Logan on 30/04/2009 18:17:34 Originally by: Professor Dumbledore Originally by: CCP Whisper We already told you how to fix it without chaning the model you stupid bone head. 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. Name calling, thats how you get your points across I for one like the dual weapon system on this ship, sure its more skill intensive, but still adds more flavour. Whats need to be changed imo is the nature of the missiles. The ohter turret changes was nice as well, as stated in the OP. Give the citadels even more speed and lesser flight time imo. I would increase the explosion velocity as well, so that capital ships can not mitigate so much damage by simply moving with their slow speed. This gives help the the Phoneix also. Two flies in one go. As for the tank, adding 1 mid will go a far way, adding emphasis on a shield tank. And is in line with the extra cpu given.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:16:00 - [272] Edited by: Seishi Maru on 30/04/2009 18:16:46 Originally by: Isaac Starstriker Originally by: Seishi Maru Edited by: Seishi Maru on 30/04/2009 18:00:16 All that time to handle a model and yet every few patches we have notes of "missing textures on ship XX have been corrected " etc... Sorry but As someoen that worked with art deprtment on other game houses in work simmilar to yours.. I must say your art pipeline SUCKS! Suerly findign out time when you already have a complicated schedule is problematic.. but LOL for 1 year. Do not think everyone on these forums have zero knowledge of how this type of things are done. All places were I worked If we had asked for 1 MONTH to make that we woudl have been fired on spot... EVEN so the players here already gave answers taht do not require any modelling.... I'm sorry, but your games are?....I thought so. Not nearly as complex as this game I'm sure, so shut the heck up and quit being an egotistical person who thinks you know what your talking about. You don't. To everyone else, try and fix the current model (which is possible) and quit crying to CCP about it. --Isaac http://www.taikodom.com.br/ and http://www.thunder-works.com/ The second one in specific is FAR FAR more complex than eve graphic wise... third one cannot post because has not been announced..
Professor Dumbledore Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:19:00 - [273] Originally by: Lindsay Logan Edited by: Lindsay Logan on 30/04/2009 18:17:34 Originally by: Professor Dumbledore Originally by: CCP Whisper We already told you how to fix it without chaning the model you stupid bone head. 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. Name calling, thats how you get your points across I for one like the dual weapon system on this ship, sure its more skill intensive, but still adds more flavour. Whats need to be changed imo is the nature of the missiles. The ohter turret changes was nice as well, as stated in the OP. Give the citadels even more speed and lesser flight time imo. I would increase the explosion velocity as well, so that capital ships can not mitigate so much damage by simply moving with their slow speed. This gives help the the Phoneix also. Two flies in one go. As for the tank, adding 1 mid will go a far way, adding emphasis on a shield tank. And is in line with the extra cpu given. It doesn't add flavor unless you count flavor as sucking like a pile of dog ****.
Audri Fisher Caldari VentureCorp Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:28:00 - [274] Originally by: CCP Chronotis It is clear that the Naglfar is not up to scratch with the other dreadnoughts. Many of you have been rightfully vocal on the issue and we have been looking into the issue with a view to a more balanced role and performance for each of the dreadnoughts. Most of you are acutely aware that the dreadnought's primary role is besieging starbases with a secondary role being fighting other capital ships to which they perform to a varying degree dependant on each scenario on who is being hotdropped and at what range for example. What we hope to achieve here is a focused fix to the biggest specific issues with dreads in an upcoming patch with an acknowledgement that there are deeper issues and problems which we need to address in the long term in future releases which require more indepth changes. So, what are we looking at changing with the Naglfar? * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. * Increasing the citadel launcher rate of fire bonus to 7.5% per level. * Increasing the base CPU to 770 (+70) * Decreasing the base powergrid to 560,000 (-65,000) And what about capital projectile turrets? The Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I will have some changes to base it of the 1400mm artillery: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) Citadel Torpedoes We are looking at an increase to missile velocity and a proportional decrease to flight time. * Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 1,250 m/s (from 750) * Citadel Torpedo flight time decreased to 54 secs (from 90) Summary At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome! I think the problem is that is suffers typhoon syndrome. The problem is that while a typhoon can be very effective with a lot of skill points ( 40 mil or so ) the training times on cap ship mods is well... insane.... I think a "fix" to the nag needs to look at all the caps.... Nag - based off the typhoon see above... Moros - based off the Domi Phoenix - based off the raven (only dread based off a tier II BS hull, because a dread ecm ship is well.... ) revelation - based off of 'geddon I think the best way to help out nag pilots is to give it a 3/3 weapon hardpoint. that way you can either fit 3 torps, 1 gun or 3 guns 1 torp system. The next step is tier II dreads. Minnie, based off of tempest Caldari, based off of rohk Ammar, based off of apoc Gallente, based off of mega, the additional tracking won't help against POS, but will make it harder to speedtank it in another cap ship.
blkmajik ZiTek Deepspace Explorations	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:29:00 - [275] 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. this please. no need for new models. much better than the original 'fix' in the OP. no need to train twice as much gunnery than any other dread. <3
Kelbesque Crystalis Minmatar	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:36:00 - [276] The heart of the problem is 5 high slots and being short a mid/low. Do one of the following: a) 2x guns and a massive damage bonus. b) 2x guns and 1x launcher with 2x projectile bonuses (and no missile bonus) like most minmatar gun ships (hurricane, rupture, tempest). Still needs good missile skills to do the best damage. Either way, get rid of a high slot, and add a mid/low and for the love of all things vertical, pick one tanking style and go with it. If you want to intentionally make it a weak tanker, you need to give it DPS.
Areo Hotah Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:37:00 - [277] Do not make it a shield tanker. After training dual capital weapons, I am not going to train dual capital tanks too. The Nidhoggur is an armor tanker, so the Nag needs to be as well. I don't care that the Hel and Ragnarok are shield tanked, 99.99% of the players will never fly one anyhow. Besides, MS and Titans need major revision anyhow. But whatever you choose, remember what the final Nag should look like: -DPS comparable to the other 3 dreads -EHP and ability to fit a tank comparable to the other 3 dreads -Ability to fit a tank AND some damage mods If you insist to sticking with 2 turret slots, here is my suggestion: 4 highs: 2 turret, 2 missile slots. 5 mids 7 lows. 10% cap projectile dmg 7.5% cap projectile ROF. Adjust Quad 3500mm so that maxxed skilled character does the most DPS in a Nag with just 2 guns + citadel launcher compared to the other 3 dreads with only guns fitted. Having to train dual weapons has to pay back at some point, and hardcore minmatar pilots do not mind if it takes 20M sp more, but the potential has to be there. The other dreads get more bonus from damage mods as it affects 3 guns, and not 2. Finally, introduce capital cruise launchers, as mentioned before. Cut range of torps to 75km (can keep current velocity).
Hertford Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:42:00 - [278] 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. Thanks for the feedback. So, 90% of the work needed to create a three-turret Naglfar has already been done then? (Textures, Shaders, Art Concept, Moving Parts, two out of three Turrets, faction variants, Thrusters, lighting, reflection)
Vertical Axis	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:43:00 - [279] 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. Although a 100% dmg role bonus would be fine as well, provided its for both torps and projectiles. We can't just get rid of the citadels because too many people have trained for them. Furthermore, in an ideal world, citadels would get a buff and be made to be markedly different than artilleries, giving nag pilots 2 viable choices for damage types.
Lachesis Moirae Gallente Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:46:00 - [280] While I can appreciate the effort that goes into redoing the model, I think a lot of us don't mind at all if the ship received another turret slot without a corresponding visual gun. Fixing the ship is far more important than making it look pretty. If it takes a year to get the extra turret hardpoint added, we'd rather have the gun added now, and we'll wait a year to get the shiny turret effects.

FugginNutz Caldari Chinchilla Industries Manifest Destiny.	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:52:00 - [281] 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. Tbh...you have made your bed with this mistake of a dread and should fix it to be inline with the rest of the dreads. We've given you suggestions and yet you come back with a OMG IT WILL TAKE 1 YEAR TO FIX IT CORRECTLY....better late than never.
TraderE Meatsickle Trading Anonymous	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:57:00 - [282] 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
To mare	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:57:00 - [283] 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. TBH split weapons its a issue old as the ship is and if you guys really cared to wht ppl said in these last years Naglfar would already be fixed by a good 2 years. and also i think most of ppl wouldnt care that much to wait 6-12 months to have finally the damn 3rd turret on the Nag. all the others thing like faction stuff difference between ship models are just lie to justify your lazyness.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:06:00 - [284] 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)
FugginNutz Caldari Chinchilla Industries Manifest Destiny.	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:07:00 - [285] Originally by: Vertical Axis 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. Although a 100% dmg role bonus would be fine as well, provided its for both torps and projectiles. We can't just get rid of the citadels because too many people have trained for them. Furthermore, in an ideal world, citadels would get a buff and be made to be markedly different than artilleries, giving nag pilots 2 viable choices for damage types. Skill point investment is not a reason to keep crappy mechanics around. Heck, it's not even a valid reason not to nerf something.
To mare	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:12:00 - [286] and seriously if to modify a ship take 6-12 month, when you programmed the game did it took you 50-100 years? not to mention station and all the other things
Nikita Alterana Gallente The-Kissaki	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:19:00 - [287] How to make the Naglfar Better and make it ACTUALLY Versatile: The problem with the Nag's current fit is that if you don't have the mids to shield tank it, and it needs all its lows for damage mods, since split weapons mean twice the mods needed. This can easily be fixed. Give the nag a large enough damage bonus to both its weapon systems that it doesn't need to waste its low slots on damage mods in order to do the same damage as a dread with them. That means a Nag without damage mods would do only a bit less then a rev with them would do. OP? not really, it just means more versatility to fitting, and since the ship is billed as being versatile and takes 2x as long to get into because of this, it should be, and because of how few lows it has, you can't tank it and fit damage mods, its one or the other. What does this mean for fitting? well it means the ship can be fit two ways, fitting the lows with damage mods, turning the ship into a glass cannon, doing significantly more damage then other dreads but not tanking at all behind the principal buffer; or fitting it with a tank so it does just a bit less damage then other dreads, and tanks just as well as them. This presents an interesting scenario, where the FC would be hesitant to primary a nag, since he can't be sure if its tanked or damage fit. Also, dps fitting your nag is a great way to show everyone how massive your balls are. this could be tweaked by reducing powergrid or taking out a low, limiting the player to damage mods or a tank, so you can't fit both and be a solopwnmobile. __________________________________________________ I was Amarr before they were the FOTM and I'll be Amarr after it! I'm also training Minmatar Capitals! And I eat Lions!
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:20:00 - [288] Originally by: Professor Dumbledore Originally by: CCP Whisper stuff We already told you how to fix it without chaning the model you stupid bone head. 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. 100% damage bonus means 4 turrets, making it better than any other dread, how about 50-75% ? Whisper, if it takes 1 year to slightly edit one ship, did you start creating eve when you were 5 years old? - BH
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:21:00 - [289] Edited by: Beyond Horizon on 30/04/2009 19:21:03 Originally by: Lachesis Moirae While I can appreciate the effort that goes into redoing the model, I think a lot of us don't mind at all if the ship received another turret slot without a corresponding visual gun. Fixing the ship is far more important than making it look pretty. If it takes a year to get the extra turret hardpoint added, we'd rather have the gun added now, and we'll wait a year to get the shiny turret effects. What this smart man said, my thoughts exactly. - BH
Incantare	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:22:00 - [290] Originally by: Beyond Horizon 100% damage bonus means 4 turrets, making it better than any other dread, how about 50-75% ? Already been covered, even with four turrets it would still be outdamaged by the rev.

Jalif Black Sinisters	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:23:00 - [291] Sorry CCP Wishper but I do not beleive your words on the fact that it takes so long to make a dread model a bit diffrent. I wonder how you guys pulled of to create then those t3 ships in such a short amount of time. And also solution has been giving. We only need 2 turrets and still achive the possiblity to get the effectiveness of 3 turrets. Please do not ignore the great ideas & Please do not show up with "excuses" about the fact you can't pull off to chance a model. You proved yourself wrong with the t3 ships.
Schmell	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:23:00 - [292] WHAT? HALF OF YEAR FOR MODEL CHANGE? Ahahaha, if all companies worked with this rate there would not have been computer games at all in whole world
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:24:00 - [293] Originally by: Beyond Horizon Originally by: Professor Dumbledore Originally by: CCP Whisper stuff We already told you how to fix it without chaning the model you stupid bone head. 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. 100% damage bonus means 4 turrets, making it better than any other dread, how about 50-75% ? Whisper, if it takes 1 year to slightly edit one ship, did you start creating eve when you were 5 years old? its not better because beams have a base damage quite higher than arties. I had made this same mistake earlier. Also revelation has 3 turrets with rof bonus So 4 turrets witha higher base damage. A naglfar with 4 effective turrets and no Citatels woudl stil have less dps than a revelation.
Beyond Horizon Caldari Solar Dragons SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:26:00 - [294] Originally by: Incantare Originally by: Beyond Horizon 100% damage bonus means 4 turrets, making it better than any other dread, how about 50-75% ? Already been covered, even with four turrets it would still be outdamaged by the rev. well tbh those are details that CCP staff should be covering, we're just here for feedback ^_^ Im just saying no need to overboost or underboost the ship, just make it as good as any other. - BH
Aoa Lux Caldari	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:27:00 - [295] Originally by: Areo Hotah Do not make it a shield tanker. After training dual capital weapons, I am not going to train dual capital tanks too. The Nidhoggur is an armor tanker, so the Nag needs to be as well. http://wiki.eveonline.com/wiki/Hel Originally by: Yorda 2 gun slots 100% damage role bonus 5% shield boost amount instead of missile RoF 3/6/5 +15% cpu This. But with the slight suggestion of "100% role bonus to weapons" (2 guns or 2 cit torps) to appease the missile people and maintain CCP's eccentric idea of "versatile dread"
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:32:00 - [296] Lot of confusion in this thread. Here's some graphs to help get a better handle on the dps issue. This assumes a full set of Bouncer IIs, seige mode, hitting large static targets (for full damage), and maxed skills except the dread skill on 4: You can see perhaps why the Nag was balanced as it was originally, even with the underperforming 1200mm based XL arties. It was just (very) naive balancing probably, not a typo. The changes proposed by Chronotis give it by far the best theoretical dps before damage mods right up until the distance torps run out. The changes to torps will mitigate the problem of their delayed damage. They're going to be reaching 100km for example in 53 seconds. It's still a bit meh but a whole crap load better than currently. Phoenix pilots should be chuffed, they can also get away with fitting 1 or 2 Hydraulic Bay Thrusters to further reduce that time. The Naglfar however can't really get away with fitting Hydraulic Bay Thrusters cos it has bigger headaches like hitpoints and raising dps. That's yet another reason why I think it's a mistake to turn it into a poor man's Phoenix with so much dps being torp based instead of arty based. This next graph assumes fully maxed skills (adding level 5 dread compared to the first graph). Phoenix & Naglfar gain slightly more from this last level than Moros & Rev, so bear that in mind along with the fact that Naglfar pilots already have to train a lot of extra skills and most will never reach this level of Naglfar perfection. I've also added here my previously proposed bonus changes intended to make it more projectile focused which were... Originally by: Blazde 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile damage This is not exactly poor dps, but wait! What about damage mods.. If you go for extreme gank fits and fit 3 damage mods things look like this: This is BCS2s in the case of Chronotis's torp based bonuses, Gyro2s for my proj based bonuses. It's obvious they aren't exactly suffering a total inability to fit damage mods due to the split weapon system. Two damage mods is more typical however so let's look at that: My previous suggestion tracks the moros dps pretty well with just arties alone and then has secondary torps on top once it's outside the moros's drone sweet spot. Neither version has slugish dps. So maybe it'd be overpowered... Well no cos the Nag has a truly horrific static tank as mentioned a lot of times already. I could do a lot of ifs and buts regarding effective hp but this simplest thing is to assume the Nag only fits 1 dmg mod while all other dreads fit 2, which brings it's tank up to scratch somewhat: _
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:32:00 - [297] Edited by: Blazde on 30/04/2009 19:34:26 ... For what it's worth this is basically what the NC dread fits do currently when it comes to dmg mods. It leaves the Nag with around 2 million EHP, Rev/Moros with around 2.2 million (and Phoenix potentially comparable but it depends on other stuff), so it still lacks just not as much. You can make up some of the remaing difference by sacraficing cap recharge for an Invuln field (or even two), which is also similar to the tactic shield tank Nags use to squeeze on more damage mods. Losing cap recharge isn't popular however because it screws up multiple jump trips and you don't want your entire cap fleet hanging in space waiting on a few Nags to recharge, but I'm pointing out there is versatility here. Similar can be said about fitting tracking comps etc.. for long range fits, the Nag has more to play with because it doesn't absolutely need good cap just to shoot like Rev/Moros do. I said I'd fly 7.5% proj rof / 7.5% proj dmg Nag, but I'm really not sure now. It turned out a tad less dps than I expected on closer inspection. And the Nag really does need a lot more dps to start with to offset it's appalling static hitpoints and poorer results with damage mods. So here's a revised suggestion (made by Areo too) and two more graphs: 7.5% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire 10% bonus to Capital Projectile damage (This is on top of the Quad 3500mm fix worth +16% arty dps I should mention) It looks too much just from the description (what other ship has such insane bonuses :o) but bear in mind this is a dread and not much counts besides damage and hitpoints. There's no complex arguments about velocity or sigradius or tracking or EW. If it's lacking 10% hitpoints even when it fits only one damage mod compared to other dreads two then it should make it up somehow with damage. Anyway here's with two gyro stabs: It looks immensely overpowered of course but remember this is with a fit that's at a 1.8mil hp vs 2.2mil hp disadvantage to Moros/Rev. If you only fit 1 Gyro and narrow the disadvantage to 2.0mil hp vs 2.2mil hp then you get this: It's still packing enough extra dps in the middle ranges to compensate for the lowered hitpoints, but it's tricky dps to deliver considering the skill requirements and lazy torps. It's likely to be primaried, but it has enough versatility to be a bit of an enigma on the battlefield. It can get a ton of dps if it wants to fly in paper tank mode. We're talking an expensive ship here so sacraficing it's survivability isn't an easy descion but at least it'd have a range of options like all other dreads already have, just the Nag would be more towards the gank end of the spectrum if it chose an extreme/abnormal fit, while for example an extreme Rev fit has massive armour resists. Lastly regarding Yorda's suggestion for slot changes and a shield tank bonus it's a fine suggestion but it's just going to annoy the 95% of people who currently armour tank their Nag, many of whom won't have general shield skills nevermind the ability to use Cap Shield Bosters. Shield tanking a Nag is admirably quirky but it's too late now to change it so dramatically. _
Jalif Black Sinisters	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:41:00 - [298] Good build-up Blaze. Lets hope this convinces CCP.
Juliette DuBois	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:56:00 - [299] 2 highs and 2 turret slots \| 2 missile slots with damage multiplier on both weapon types to get efficiency of three. And my personal preference would be for citadel torps to be the longest range weapon of all dread weapons since it¦s not instant hit. Either that or you need to speed up the missiles substantially, what you proposed probably isn¦t still good enough.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:56:00 - [300] Also need to keep in mind those graphics are only on damage agaisnt pos. Any carrier wil take far far less damage fromthe citatel torps... far less near zero to be more exact.

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 IÆd 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 wonÆt 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 donÆt 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 IÆd 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 wonÆt 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 donÆt 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.

EFT Warrior	Posted - 2009.05.01 01:50:00 - [331] I do like the idea of this change, and I can see the design behind it. Giving the extra 70 CPU lets you fit a shield tank and damage mods, and with the slight DPS increase this brings, it will balance the Naglfar so it is comparable to the other dreads. Observe: [Naglfar, Pipe Dream] Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Co-Processor II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II Photon Scattering Field II Heat Dissipation Field II Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Siege Module I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Bouncer II x5 Warrior II x10 Bouncer II x2 This setup lacks CPU as it is right now, but adding 770 cpu will let you fit this setup; 770CPU x1.25 for electronics = 962.5 at level V, exactly the amount of CPU this setup needs. I haven't run the numbers yet on damage, but I'll get to it (as far as I know someone already has). I can't comment on the changes to damage yet, but the tank seems perfectly viable this way.
Amberle Vale	Posted - 2009.05.01 02:02:00 - [332] Originally by: isdisco3 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. Agreed, I'd like to see this squared away sooner than later. Blasters and missiles are much more general issues, and they both are in serious need of revisions. Role bonus for the guns, drop the torp rof bonus, give it a specialized tank. My 2
Slayton Ford STK Scientific The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.05.01 02:25:00 - [333] Originally by: EFT Warrior I do like the idea of this change, and I can see the design behind it. Giving the extra 70 CPU lets you fit a shield tank and damage mods, and with the slight DPS increase this brings, it will balance the Naglfar so it is comparable to the other dreads. Observe: [Naglfar, Pipe Dream] Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Co-Processor II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II Photon Scattering Field II Heat Dissipation Field II Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Siege Module I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Core Defence Field Extender I Bouncer II x5 Warrior II x10 Bouncer II x2 This setup lacks CPU as it is right now, but adding 770 cpu will let you fit this setup; 770CPU x1.25 for electronics = 962.5 at level V, exactly the amount of CPU this setup needs. I haven't run the numbers yet on damage, but I'll get to it (as far as I know someone already has). I can't comment on the changes to damage yet, but the tank seems perfectly viable this way. No other dread requires a CPU to fit both tank and damage mods, why should the Nag? Additionally, your still lacking a sensor booster (something all other dreads can fit) so long rang sniping is out of the question. Move a low to a mid and bump the CPU to 825. That fixes the tank + damage mod very quickly. Damage bonus is a different issue. Oh, as to people whining about training shield skills. Your flying a minmatar ship, you should have trained these to IV when you were a baby in a rifter. --------------- This sig has been censored in fear of recieving the ban hammer...
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.01 02:26:00 - [334] 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 I like this slot layout the best. It is interesting as you still have the extra training of dual weapons, but you will also get a little more versatility by going 2xTorps 1xArty or 2xArty 1xTorp. The 7 lows gives us an equal tank to other dreads and forces us to pick dmg mods over tank. As for the bonuses above, they seem a little high, but that is something that can easily be tweaked. The best part is you won't need to change the model as it still has the 2 turrets and 2 missiles hard points.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.01 02:51:00 - [335] Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 01/05/2009 02:55:52 I suppose I'll post what my original concept of the ship was, a concept that made complete sense to me before I became acquainted with reality. I saw 4 weapon slots, which seemed like it would make the nagl very special in a particularly amazing way, it would do 33%(ish) more damage then the other dreadnaughts(ofc less because you have non-focused weapon upgrades). Now, as with all things, there are drawbacks: Twice as much weapons training, non-negligible in this class of ships A weak, weak tank(IE hard to focus slot layout) I thought these were fair trade offs, not to mention you're primary, always and every time, because your high damage/low tank. Many ship classes involve this trade off, you easily trade 15-25% damage when you make a gank geddon a tank geddon, or a gank mega a tank mega. The only difference is this is a situation you commit to when you start training. What I found when I met reality was: Crap Damage(unexpected) Crap Tank(expected) Heavy training regiment(expected) Vertical(I must joke) The fix in my eyes:To hell with fixing its ability to tank, I think its weak tank is perfect balance against what should be some obscene damage. Therefore, make the guns just as powerful as any other capital gun system(since that must be where they lack, torps provide sufficient damage for a pheonix to compete?), and fix explosion velocity on torps. Alpha is a complete waste of time, I think most are in agreement there And make it horizontal
Dame V'akko	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:03:00 - [336] Edited by: Dame V''akko on 01/05/2009 03:05:56 NO! Keep it vertical and unique as it is now. Please do not even consider making it shield tanking 2x time training the split gun system and now extra time to learn capital shield systems, come on this will be a joke! Let's be reasonable and think if we don't want to change the existing ship model for some other options which will bring it in line with the other dreads... High: 2+2+1 (no change so need some bonuses) Mid: -1 slot Low: 7 (will allow some damage mods) Welp I am tired of being primary in every cap fight coz of the crap tank!!!
EFT Warrior	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:24:00 - [337] Originally by: Dame V'akko Edited by: Dame V''akko on 01/05/2009 03:07:03 NO! Keep it vertical and unique as it is now. Please do not even consider making it shield tanking 2x time training the split gun system and now extra time to learn capital shield systems, come on this will be a joke! Let's be reasonable and think if we don't want to change the existing ship model for some other options which will bring it in line with the other dreads... High: 2+2+1 (no change so need some bonuses) Mid: -1 slot Low: 7 (will allow some damage mods) Welp, I am tired of being primary in every capital fight due to its crapy tank!!! It's always been a shield tanker, even if people never fit it that way. Same with the Nidhoggur, same with almost every other Minmatar ship. As such I'd rather want damage mods on the ship, even if a split weapon system is inefficient.
Slayton Ford STK Scientific The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:27:00 - [338] Originally by: Dame V'akko Edited by: Dame V''akko on 01/05/2009 03:07:03 NO! Keep it vertical and unique as it is now. Please do not even consider making it shield tanking 2x time training the split gun system and now extra time to learn capital shield systems, come on this will be a joke! Let's be reasonable and think if we don't want to change the existing ship model for some other options which will bring it in line with the other dreads... High: 2+2+1 (no change so need some bonuses) Mid: -1 slot Low: 7 (will allow some damage mods) Welp, I am tired of being primary in every capital fight due to its crapy tank!!! As long as its a split weapons system, it cannot be a armor tanker and still be equal to other dreads. This is because it requires 4 weapon upgrade mods vs 2 for other dreads; leaving it with crap for tank. --------------- This sig has been censored in fear of recieving the ban hammer...
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:34:00 - [339] Originally by: prefectro 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 I like this slot layout the best. It is interesting as you still have the extra training of dual weapons, but you will also get a little more versatility by going 2xTorps 1xArty or 2xArty 1xTorp. The 7 lows gives us an equal tank to other dreads and forces us to pick dmg mods over tank. As for the bonuses above, they seem a little high, but that is something that can easily be tweaked. The best part is you won't need to change the model as it still has the 2 turrets and 2 missiles hard points. Actually you get to choose from 2x arts, 2x torps, 1 art 1 torp since the last high slot is going for the siege module. Also the 100% damage role bonus is better than the huge per level bonuses since it won't wary the dps too much between dread 3 and 4 pilots.
ShadowGod56	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:34:00 - [340] Edited by: ShadowGod56 on 01/05/2009 03:34:40 give citadel torps more HP so smartbombing ships can't just destroy them...

Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:40:00 - [341] Originally by: ShadowGod56 Edited by: ShadowGod56 on 01/05/2009 03:34:40 give citadel torps more HP so smartbombing ships can't just destroy them... Didn't they fix that ages ago?
Kovid Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.01 03:46:00 - [342] Edited by: Kovid on 01/05/2009 03:46:20 Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 30/04/2009 18:02:08 Originally by: Sock Monster 3 highs (2 turret, 2 missile hardpoints) 6 meds 7 lows Bonus: XL- Projectile damage per level (#%), Capital Launcher Damage per level (#%) XL- Projectile fall off per level (5%) Citadel Torpedo Explosion velocity per level (5%) 99% CPU requirement for siege modules per level This is a fantastic idea. It keeps the dual-weapons people satisfied because they can fit whichever, makes the nag able to tank and fit one type of damage mod, and makes it able to fit a tank. It doesn't require re-making the ship model, at all. The model stays exactly the same. The bonuses should be geared to make up for a typical dread's damage (with 3 guns). IE, a rev gets 5% ROF for a max of 25% more DPS times 3 guns (making it 3.8 or something effectively). So make the nag's bonuses be 40% each, per level. At level 5, you'd have 200% damage on 2 guns / missiles, making it on par (slightly higher than most actually) with the other dreads damage. And buff the capital artilleries / ac's of course, something close to their proposed change. 40% may be too high, but hey the nag has sucked for so long, I think it would be fitting for it to suddenly become the most dps dread. And it does take the most skillage. I do think 6 mids may be too much. 5 would suffice I believe. Ever other dreads have 12 low and med slots. We don't even really need the second bonuses tbh. The damage for both projectiles and torps is perfectly fine on their own. Boost torp explosion velocity on their own (to fix the phoenix as well), and you've got yourself a very viable dreadnought. So, I propose: Quote:* - 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 YES YES YES! isdisco has got it! People who trained torps, get to use them if they want. Projectile people get their day. Everyone is happy, as long as this damage is comparable. Do it CCP! You get what you want. No rework of the model, and we get what we want. Get rid of split weapon systems and do things like this, real versatility. The ability to choose systems, not be forced to shoehorn them on and train everything under the sun.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.01 04:12:00 - [343] Edited by: prefectro on 01/05/2009 04:15:25 Originally by: Gloria Lewis Actually you get to choose from 2x arts, 2x torps, 1 art 1 torp since the last high slot is going for the siege module. Also the 100% damage role bonus is better than the huge per level bonuses since it won't wary the dps too much between dread 3 and 4 pilots. My mistake then. I would say go with.. - 4 highs (2 turret, 2 torp, one slot for Siege module) - 5 meds - 7 lows That versatility advantage of going (2xTorp / 1xArty) or (2xArty / 1xTorp) is offset by the extra training you have to do. Then tweak the stats so the dmg is similar to other dreads. Still won't need to change the model. And this won't make everyone happy, but that just means we got a good (and fair) idea going. And the Torps training sucks, but not a HUGE deal as you use it for the Phoon and the Stealth Bomber. And most should already have the Missile support skills trained up as nost Matar ships have missile slots.
Isaac Starstriker Amarr Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.05.01 04:29:00 - [344] Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii 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. I can pretty much confirm it did not take them "a few weeks" to make the T3 ships and etc. We only heard about it months ago that they were designing this (Fanfest) and who knows when it was started before that. It was certainly about 6 months from initial design to release. Quit kidding yourself. --Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.01 04:34:00 - [345] Again, simplest solution to fix the Nag: +1 mid + 150-225 cpu You can tweak capital artillery if you want. Nobody uses capital autocannons in their current form, and the proposed changes nerf them some more, so please consider that as well.
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.01 06:09:00 - [346] As has been amply explained in this thread split weapon ships come with a very heavy penalty. You usually have to compensate for losing a damage bonus (since you get one ship bonus on each weapon, effectively nerfing both) and you come pre-nerfed slot wise since you need to boost both weapons to catch up with other ship's dps. There are two way out of this, either you boost the ship's bonuses dramatically to compensate for the split weapon nerf or you give us more slots to compensate ourselves. Now Minmatars are supposed to be versatile, and it works actually quite well for smaller ship where what you lose in dps and tank you can make in sig radius and speed. The problem with that idea is that our racial attributes of sig radius and speed are borderline worthless on battleships and absolutely ridiculously useless on caps. That's why there needs to be another compensation for split weapons for some BS and the naglfar. I propose more slots, namely 5 highs, 6 mids and 7 lows and the grid/cpu boost required to use them. This allows true versatility, for example: Best Dread DPS (weapons/ship bonus need to be tweaked for this to be true), adequate shield tank. aka the glass cannon Highs: -Arty -Arty -Citadel -Citadel -Siege Mids: -Cap Shield booster -EM Hardener II -TH Hardener II -Inv II -Inv II -Sensor booster II Lows: -DCII -Gyro II -Gyro II -Gyro II -BCU II -BCU II -BCU II Or you can give it a very good armor tank but you'll sacrifice your dps. Or you can make it an adequate armor tank with average DPS. This solution could be used to fix a few other lacking minmatar ships, the tempest comes to mind, I don't think anyone here will argue that adding one or two slots to it would make it overpowered... L and XL weapons need a look independently of this though, I kinda like what Chronotis did and I think L arty needs something similar (especially the boost to optimal, it's ridiculous that us Minmatars have a range 30 to 40 km shorter than ALL other races... WTF).
ShadowGod56	Posted - 2009.05.01 06:27:00 - [347] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: ShadowGod56 Edited by: ShadowGod56 on 01/05/2009 03:34:40 give citadel torps more HP so smartbombing ships can't just destroy them... Didn't they fix that ages ago? they gave it a small extra amount of HP but as far as i know they can still be taken down by smart bombs
Kai Lae Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.01 06:43:00 - [348] Boy there seems to be a lot of people posting in here who haven't ever used a naggy in combat. I have - a lot - and it sucks. What are the issues with it? 1. Lowest number of midslots or lowslots available on dread for tank use, so ship has worst tank of any dread. 2. Despite having 1 more weapon than all other dreads (which would make you think that it should be a low tank, gank type weapon) instead it's DPS is effectively the worst of all types. This is due to the fact that if it is setup to armor tank (which is the common setup) you cannot use damage mods on it, and if you shield tank it (which is only used for gank setups, and quite rare) you ofc have to split the damage mods between the weapon platforms which limits the utility. In addition, capital projectiles are simply horrible. As noted already, currently you're better off fitting unbonused lasers to your boat than projectiles (if you use DPS only as your critera). 3. Citadel torpedoes are horrible weapons for shooting ships with. I want to make it clear that when I say horrible, I mean effectively worthless. If the engagement is beyond 30km they will never hit the target. In addition, if the target is not totally stationary, if they do hit the target, they'll do hardly any damage to it at all. This of course means that in a capfight, 1/2 of the weapons on the naggy are worthless. I'm guessing that I've fired about 300-400 citadel torps in capfights. After the fight is over I always go back over my damage logs so I can try to get an accurate accounting of what has happened for the after action debriefing. Off the top of my head I'd say probably about 30-40 have actually hit a target; in other words about 10%. This is a big big problem with this dread (worse ofc for a phoenix, but that's another issue). By design, it would seem that the general idea behind this ship is that it's supposed to do more damage than other kinds, but have a worse tank. It of course totally fails in this for the reasons listed. In concept the ship seems like a capital typhoon, however the typhoon works as a ship (despite crappy L guns) but the naggy really doesn't. The simple reason is that the bonuses on the typhoon, plus the large drone bay make up for the split weapons layout. With broken projectiles, broken citadel torps, and bonuses not big enough to counteract the issue with the split weapon systems, you get a ship that does not do damage while having a poor tank. How to fix this? I personally think that CCP have started somewhat on the right idea by addressing some of the issues but they haven't gone far enough. Any ship with split weapons will need bonuses that are bigger than one without to compensate for this layout. The base bonuses need to be high enough so that slots can be used for non damage mod purposes, because fitting damage mods on ships of this design is by definition inefficient and wasteful (espectially when the slots are needed for tanking anyway). Bonuses should be at least 10% I'd say. Also the fitting nerfs are totally unneeded. CPU boost is ok I suppose if you want to shield tank it (which is currently not a good idea for any kind of fight that will last longer than 5 minutes) but there's no reason to nerf PG, or increase fitting on the guns either. Capital projectiles need to be worked on as well. The increase in damage imod is nice, but what's with the decrease in ROF? I would have thought that people noting that lasers being a far better weapon on the nag would inform you that the weapon doesn't need to be NERFED in any way at a minimum. This is going in the wrong direction here. It should also be noted that capital autocannons have such a short range that even using carb lead ammo (16km+40km), you cannot shoot a large POS without being outside of optimal range, even if you're fortunate to be cynoed literally right on the shield edge. This makes these weapons useless for anything other than hotdrops on isolated enemy capitals (next page)
Kai Lae Gallente Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.01 06:47:00 - [349] Bah, full post eaten by CCP's wonderful servers. Not retyping it. To summarize though, to fix this ship you need working capital projectiles, you need to add capital cruise so that 1/2 the weapons on the ship aren't totally useless as they are now, and you need to have bonuses on the ship that combined with 1 more weapon than other dreads have, you can stay competitive on the DPS field without using damage mods. Otherwise, it's crap and will stay crap without scrapping the split weapons, which would require a model change which CCP in this very thread have said they're not going to do.
Sonreir Gallente Band of Builders Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2009.05.01 06:59:00 - [350] The slot layout of the Naglfar is fine. The damage definitely needs to be increased though (via bonuses) and it really needs more CPU. In my mind's eye, I see the Nag as a bit of a glass cannon. It should do as much damage as another dread (with damage mods) without having to fit damage mods of it's own. If the pilot then wants to fit damage mods on top of an already heavily bonused ship, then they sacrifice the already weak tank further. Possibly consider new ammo types for Citadel launchers as well? Perhaps a cruise variant that gets missile velocity of around 5 or 6km/sec and does less damage?

Davik Rendar NQX Innovations	Posted - 2009.05.01 07:14:00 - [351] Naglfar with CCP's prospected changes in EFT Doesn't look too bad on paper to me, maybe raising the HP a little bit would be nice. And here's the EFT .dat files if anyone wants to try it out: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DavikRendar/Modified_EFT_Naglfar.zip Copy these .dat files into your EFT "Data" folder and remove the "_n" from the end of the file name. And remember to either backup your existing .dat files, or just overwrite them with a clean install or whatever. Eve Online Ship Chart - Apocrypha Edition
Linas IV	Posted - 2009.05.01 07:40:00 - [352] -The new Naglfar is still not able to be Shield tanked without faction -We lost the Dual Armor-rep Alternative -(All) other Dreads Still outdamage it at Long Range (smaller difference now, but still) -Closerange Fitting isn't worth it => even bigger DPS difference -The Split-Weapon Problem with all these Facts, i wouldn't call the Naglfar actualy Fixed. I hope they come up with something better
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.01 07:45:00 - [353] TBH that's a terrible fit.
Gerry Actrick	Posted - 2009.05.01 08:42:00 - [354] Originally by: DigitalCommunist So basically a damage boost. How disappointing. This doesn't make the Naglfar any better than it makes the Phoenix better. Both are constricted by the speed of citadels and little else. Changes like this **** me off because they don't actually fix the problem, they just appease people who always have one thing on their mind: damage boost. Why don't you differentiate the capitals through capital stats? Jump range and fuel costs for instance, or ship bay and corporate hangars on the Carriers. Why is it that all of the races developed massive siege platforms with wildly different hull designs and the only differences are racial in nature? You could increase siege mode duration to 20 minutes but keep it at 10 for the Naglfar, while boosting jump range and cutting fuel consumption. To fix the missile flight time issue, you give all missiles a logarithmic speed curve where they start out slow and build up velocity to a max. Going the first 50km would take as long as going the next 100km. The same change to all missiles would make heavies and cruise viable at long range. YES! QFT
Cassius Hawkeye Minmatar Reikoku KenZoku	Posted - 2009.05.01 09:02:00 - [355] I'd like to see the Nagl with more slant towards projectile weaponry. Something like a Dual Damage Bonus to projectile with 3 proj 1 missile slot (missile slot to keep it 'minmater' (5% dmg 5% rof for guns for example. That way you got 3 dual damage slots to projectile, and 1 crap damage slot (missile) but at least it's true to it's roots. The missile slot truely would be 'lol wut' but - you can picture the minmater engineers actually faffing about trying to fit 4 guns then going - 'ahh crap we ran outta junk - lets stick that citadel on there'.
Loki Evil	Posted - 2009.05.01 09:45:00 - [356] Let's see what we have with naglfar: naglfar at all level 5 has base damage with 2 artys and 2 cit-torpedoes like revelation with level-4 amarr-dread and level-4 capital-energy-turrets with giga-beams How it takes to train naglafar to all level 5 ? It takes 6-8 times more than training revelation to level 4 with capital-energy-turrets 4... to have the same base dps... this is a point... and than you have to fit 2 damage-mod on each 1 damag-mod on revelation... I don't care how you do this rebalance, but i think that naglfar must have more dps with 2 damage-mods with all-level-5 skills than moros or revelation and the same tank and effective hit-points without any problems with fitings - no +5% CPU implants! no caldari-navy \ republic-fleet mods!!! no true-sansh\amarr-navy - just t2!!! Please calculate it carefully: 1) dps 2) tank 3) cost 4) training-time 5) torpedoes-speed problem 6) big fitting problem Now it's a the most expensive dread (+1 capital turret), the worst tank, the worst dps, the most training-time, usless torpedoes and very big problems with fittings then you are trying to put some damage-mods in low-slots - there is no CPU at all for shield-tank. thx p.s. sry for my english
To mare	Posted - 2009.05.01 09:56:00 - [357] Originally by: Davik Rendar http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/DavikRendar/Naglfar_-_Rebalanced.jpg Naglfar with CCP's prospected changes in EFT Doesn't look too bad on paper to me, maybe raising the HP a little bit would be nice. And here's the EFT .dat files if anyone wants to try it out: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DavikRendar/Modified_EFT_Naglfar.zip Copy these .dat files into your EFT "Data" folder and remove the "_n" from the end of the file name. And remember to either backup your existing .dat files, or just overwrite them with a clean install or whatever. i dont think that is what CCP is aiming for. if they want us to armor tank whts the point of the added CPU when you have 200+ unused they just removed the option to dual rep it. if they really want it to shield tank it need way more cpu. but anyway naglfar need to be a projectile platform, torp could be a bonus but its main damage output should be projectiles
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 10:12:00 - [358] Originally by: To mare Originally by: Davik Rendar http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/DavikRendar/Naglfar_-_Rebalanced.jpg Naglfar with CCP's prospected changes in EFT Doesn't look too bad on paper to me, maybe raising the HP a little bit would be nice. And here's the EFT .dat files if anyone wants to try it out: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DavikRendar/Modified_EFT_Naglfar.zip Copy these .dat files into your EFT "Data" folder and remove the "_n" from the end of the file name. And remember to either backup your existing .dat files, or just overwrite them with a clean install or whatever. i dont think that is what CCP is aiming for. if they want us to armor tank whts the point of the added CPU when you have 200+ unused they just removed the option to dual rep it. if they really want it to shield tank it need way more cpu. but anyway naglfar need to be a projectile platform, torp could be a bonus but its main damage output should be projectiles Think that is ONE of the options CCP was thinking. They want it to be really armor or shield tanker. But for that CCCP must open up CPU and make it 6/6 because you need slots for sensor boosters. My view of a truly versatile naglfar that i Hope will not make anyone mad. 4 highs - 2 turrets 2 citatel launcher (want to keep citatels.. ok.. but they are seocodary) 6 mids 6 lows Same changes as CCP suggested to weapons and fittigns. PLus another 30 cpu. Bonuses 7.5% rof proj 7.5% proj damage. That should do the trick Can armor tank as good as now. So no one compalisn because need to stop armro tanking. Peopel that want to shiedl tank can as well (that is truly versatile). Projectiles keep as main weapon system so that you can ignore torps when you need to escalate your dps and range. ALL of naglfar issues are solved while it continue to be unique. Lower tank but now really evrsatile and with really a bit more dmage potential.
Sleyn Peade Twilight Fleet Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.01 10:22:00 - [359] Originally by: Seishi Maru Originally by: Sleyn Peade Originally by: CCP Chronotis A bunch of sentences lacking any grasp in reality Are you kidding???? That's like trying to put out a fire with a flamethrower. That makes the following idea look realistic: Originally by: SHC Remove the high slots, make it perfectly clear that the Nag is eye candy in a cap fight. I'll have to admit that this comes from someone who likes the naglfar for all the crazy that it is, rusty, vertical, extra-high, split-weapon and all, and I keep seing people look to the extra high (or the lack of a med/low it causes) as the tank-problem, but I think the best way to fix the ship is to fix damage and tank seperately: The damage: ->Change the projectile RoF-bonus to 10% (that'll beef up the damage nicely enough) ->Capital projectile-gunz change: Ca. +20% dmg-modifier and +15% RoF (as higher RoF means less shooting it wouldn't be the biggest dps-change, but it'll mean a bigger alpha and less reloading) ->Optimal on the capital arty changed to 72.000m, more hits, more usefull ->Change drone capacity to 375 m3 (Room for 3 handfulls of sentry-drones. The fact that it can't carry 2 right now is just meh) The tank: -> +120.000 shield hp -> (shield recharge on caps may need to get looked at) -> +80.000 structure hp It's always going to have a worse active tank than anything else, no way around that, even if it got its low/med back it's just the minmatar-style. Giving it a huge shieldbuffer, which is pretty minmatar-characteristic last I checked, and a large structurebuffer, which goes with the ships looks, will make up for the lack of the low/med that was stolen to the highslots. -> +120 CPU. Even with that it won't be able to fit too good a shield-tank (do the damn math, +70 is just lol), but it'll bring it close enough that named mods and thinking the setup through and passing on the T2-ballistic controls that use 40 ****ing cpu will mean that you can fit the ship without a cpu-enhancer. That way the ship will be where it belongs, in the minmatar-style wtf-crazy category. errr you proposed to increase arti range to a SMALLER range that ccp proposed? what? Yes, since 80 km optimal is the same as capital energy-beams, and giving arties the same optimal as beams doesn't seem right.
Shura Gintoki	Posted - 2009.05.01 10:31:00 - [360] The best suggestion ive seen soo far is the: 3 hi slots with 2 turret and 2 launcher hard points and with bonus to both ,tbh it's a brilliant idea,u can either go full turrets or full launchers and get nice DPS out of both. Also ive read threw abit that how much time would it take to remodel the naglfar... If remodeling is the same as making some stuff from scratch for a mod like a vehicle or ship,it shouldnt take more then 5 days.

Grez Minmatar Core Contingency	Posted - 2009.05.01 10:38:00 - [361] Edited by: Grez on 01/05/2009 10:38:42 Why does everyone moan about the Rev when it's made obvious by Blaze's research that it does the lesser DPS of the dreads after this fix at certain ranges? All of the dreads need looking at tbh :(. --- Grez: I shot the sheriff Kalazar: But I could not lock the Deputy BECAUSE OF FALCON
Dan Brimstone THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:05:00 - [362] Any chance of dropping a low slot and adding a mid slot so the ship can have a viable tank?

CCP Abathur	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:07:00 - [363] Edited by: CCP Abathur on 01/05/2009 11:08:48 Just to reiterate: Originally by: CCP Chronotis At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome! We are following this thread. Several of the ideas suggested here mirror discussions the dev team has had in the office, out of the office, over beer, etc... It's good to know that many of our thoughts mirror your own. Yes, we've also considered a 'Marauder'-like bonus to the guns, changing slot layouts and a variety of other things to achieve a good end result. However, we do not just look at the numbers and make a decision; we adjust the ships on our internal development server and play test them. This takes time, and it is time well spent as we often find that something awesome in theory is horrid in reality. There have been a lot of tweaks and play testing done over the past few days and we want to make sure whatever fix is implemented is one that provides the most balance possible. Fixing the Naglfar is part of a broader look at capitals in general that goes beyond just making sure their current incarnations are balanced. Upcoming features that we want to implement such as Jump Fuel Bays and looking into the usefulness (or lack thereof) of current short range Dread weaponry are being taken into account as well. Changes will not appear overnight, but we are working on it. We understand that some of you have very strong emotions about this, but please try to keep your comments constructive and helpful. Thank you!

Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:11:00 - [364] Originally by: T2Ibis Originally by: ImmortalKalo 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. FO SHO 3rded! I like this idea best even if it's only 50% dmg bonus ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:13:00 - [365] Edited by: Blazde on 01/05/2009 11:19:41 Originally by: Grez Edited by: Grez on 01/05/2009 10:38:42 Why does everyone moan about the Rev when it's made obvious by Blaze's research that it does the lesser DPS of the dreads after this fix at certain ranges? All of the dreads need looking at tbh :(. Don'y pay too much attention to the extreme ranges. Noone is picking dread fights much above 220km, and when they do it intentionally it's with at least two range mods (which makes the turrets perform at 220km as if they were at ~165km for instance). No doubt the Moros is the king of sniping (and the Nag could be good too with projectile focused bonuses) but the Rev is just a great all round work horse. The Rev is also by far the commonest in a three damage mod setup by vitue of it's low slot advantage, especially when it hits level 5 and needs much less cap for guns. The Moros is fine too, works at all ranges but shines at sniping, and that awesome drone bonus which don't forget works out of seige mode. The Phoenix desperately needs that torp velocity bonus, maybe a bit faster still but I guess it's debateable. Phoenix has a wicked tank so it's okay it has some issues delivering damage. It could also use a CPU boost particularly to give better options when fitting missile rigs. It's noticeable that it's the only dread currently with tight fitting requirements. _
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:15:00 - [366] really though i think your doing this in the wrong order, one of the most asked for things in the thread before this is an artillery rework. So why are you planning a massive change to one of the ships that relies heavily on arty before you have a look at arty themselves? ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
TheMailman GreenSwarm Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:16:00 - [367] blah, just cut the price by 50% and everything is ok...(except the current builders get f'd off, but its not like it has not happened before...)
something somethingdark	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:34:00 - [368] Originally by: CCP Whisper stuff oh boy ... where to start ... 10098 polygons sounds like allot at first but if you look at it in more detail ... no its not... its just not How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year yes thats actualy true!... if your the only concept artist, model designer, texture guy, import to game guy, last but not least QA and you spend about 30 minutes a day on it here is how it should look 1 week for the concept artist to come up with a couple of preliminary designs 1-2 days to settle on one another few days for idk ... management type of things 2 weeks for the model crew to do the changes (srsly they work 8 hours a day not 5 minutes) 1 week for tweak and testing 1 week as a buffer for misc things an aditional week if your scared and another 2 months till the changes are actualy unleashed onto sisi because the other departments still twiddle their thumbs or do something completly diffrent do the arty changes and give it another medslot + some cpu done everybodys happy and your ar**** can sit arround designing stunning new faction variants (read : we play with the hue of a texture)
c0rn1 Seraphin Technologies KrautbreaK	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:40:00 - [369] Why don't we use a different approach to the Naglfar as to other Dreads? Just leave it as it is, BUT change it's role completely. Say we have the 2/2/1 layout in highslots. 2 turret, 2 missile, 1 siege module. BUT give this ship a role like the following: A Capital Killer: This requires the following upgrades to Eve: A Capital Energy Neutralizer: Power Grid: 125,000MW CPU Need: 100tf Activation Cost: 1600 Energy Energy Neutralized: 2000 Energy Activation time: 24s Special Abilities to the Naglfar: + 5% ROF and Damage to Capital Projectiles per skill level + 20% to Energy Destabilizers range and amount per skill level (Siege mode affects this as well as the damage above) 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module Screw the torp bonus completely and make it an even more than sup-par Dread to siege POSs but let its time come when capitals are to be killed! I think we don't need 4 dreads in line with each other. Give them certain roles what they are good at. At least do it to the Nag since that one has no character as of now. This would solve the solution of a redesign and it would make it invincible in the role it has. Just kill another capital better than any other dread but basically suck at shooting POSs. The above mentioned characteristica are just taken out of my mind and do not reflect a 100% thought through solution. I just want to show a different way to go with the naglfar. Cheers c0rn1 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Life's a waste of time ...
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:50:00 - [370] My suggestion: allow pilot to focus on either type of weapons, leaving the model untouched: 1. 2 turret hardpoints, 3 launcher hardpoints. 2. 7.5% RoF + 10% damage bonuses for projectiles, 5% RoF for launchers. 3. -1 high slot, +1 med. slot. 4. A bit more CPU. --- 20:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule

ArmyOfMe The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.05.01 12:05:00 - [371] Originally by: CCP Abathur Changes will not appear overnight, but we are working on it. its been freaking broken since it came out, so its more like changes doesnt happen over years with you guys. im pretty damn sure ccp have known this ship have needed a fix for quite some time, still you have been more busy pushing out new content then actually fixing whats already in game
Clark Manson	Posted - 2009.05.01 12:22:00 - [372] Why not drop the citadels altogether, give it a bonus similar to marauders to make up the difference, and either lose the 2 launcher hardpoints or convert them to utility only slots like the marauders.
D0INK Minmatar Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2009.05.01 12:51:00 - [373] In all honesty, the pure projectile Naglfar would be the best fix. Currently the naglfar can be taken down the quickest, and have pretty **** poor DPS compared to any other dread. Phoenix - Great Burst tank, obscene volley damage at close range (Fail at mid to long range) Moros - Drones. It carriers a support fleet in it's drone bay. Revelation - Excellent tank, good DPS output and relatively flexible range. Naglfar - What's a tank? BRB, training caldari shield skills and missile skills, amarr/gallente armor tanking, guns, and drones. I understand the naglfar is supposed to stand out, but does it have to stand out as the "loldread"? It needs to be focused as projectiles being the primary DPS output. __________________________________________________ D0INK [V-H-I] <MLTOV> Contract Manager Alliance Co-Diplomat
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 13:49:00 - [374] Originally by: Sleyn Peade Originally by: Seishi Maru Originally by: Sleyn Peade Originally by: CCP Chronotis A bunch of sentences lacking any grasp in reality Are you kidding???? That's like trying to put out a fire with a flamethrower. That makes the following idea look realistic: Originally by: SHC Remove the high slots, make it perfectly clear that the Nag is eye candy in a cap fight. I'll have to admit that this comes from someone who likes the naglfar for all the crazy that it is, rusty, vertical, extra-high, split-weapon and all, and I keep seing people look to the extra high (or the lack of a med/low it causes) as the tank-problem, but I think the best way to fix the ship is to fix damage and tank seperately: The damage: ->Change the projectile RoF-bonus to 10% (that'll beef up the damage nicely enough) ->Capital projectile-gunz change: Ca. +20% dmg-modifier and +15% RoF (as higher RoF means less shooting it wouldn't be the biggest dps-change, but it'll mean a bigger alpha and less reloading) ->Optimal on the capital arty changed to 72.000m, more hits, more usefull ->Change drone capacity to 375 m3 (Room for 3 handfulls of sentry-drones. The fact that it can't carry 2 right now is just meh) The tank: -> +120.000 shield hp -> (shield recharge on caps may need to get looked at) -> +80.000 structure hp It's always going to have a worse active tank than anything else, no way around that, even if it got its low/med back it's just the minmatar-style. Giving it a huge shieldbuffer, which is pretty minmatar-characteristic last I checked, and a large structurebuffer, which goes with the ships looks, will make up for the lack of the low/med that was stolen to the highslots. -> +120 CPU. Even with that it won't be able to fit too good a shield-tank (do the damn math, +70 is just lol), but it'll bring it close enough that named mods and thinking the setup through and passing on the T2-ballistic controls that use 40 ****ing cpu will mean that you can fit the ship without a cpu-enhancer. That way the ship will be where it belongs, in the minmatar-style wtf-crazy category. errr you proposed to increase arti range to a SMALLER range that ccp proposed? what? Yes, since 80 km optimal is the same as capital energy-beams, and giving arties the same optimal as beams doesn't seem right. mega beams and 1400mm DO have same base range.. and those are the weapons upon wich the XL ones are based.
Elaron Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.05.01 15:06:00 - [375] Originally by: CCP Abathur We understand that some of you have very strong emotions about this Please understand that this is an issue that has been complained about for quite some time by a broad range of people, so don't get too offended that what appeared to be a half-baked proposal that did not adequately address the failings of the ship was flamed to a crisp. And once again: people calling for a model change, give it up. I expect the result of this to be a quick-and-dirty balance change for the short to medium term while they ponder the more underlying dread and capital warfare issues, and with their long art pipeline and what I expect will be a strong management desire for a lot of the art team that worked on Apocrypha to get back to making Ambulation and World of Darkness, I can't see there being any real motivation on CCP's part to make changes to what is currently a perfectly fine model. Originally by: Loki Evil <stuff to do with calculating balance> From what little information that has escaped CCP with regards to their balancing methods, it appears that training time and cost of construction are not factors. It's entirely based on role and relative racial balance. Finally, I would like to see the Naglfar balanced with just normal-sized dynamic bonuses (ie, those that scale with the relevant ship skill, like 5% ROF).
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.01 15:11:00 - [376] Originally by: CCP Abathur Edited by: CCP Abathur on 01/05/2009 11:08:48 Just to reiterate: Originally by: CCP Chronotis At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome! We are following this thread. Several of the ideas suggested here mirror discussions the dev team has had in the office, out of the office, over beer, etc... It's good to know that many of our thoughts mirror your own. Yes, we've also considered a 'Marauder'-like bonus to the guns, changing slot layouts and a variety of other things to achieve a good end result. However, we do not just look at the numbers and make a decision; we adjust the ships on our internal development server and play test them. This takes time, and it is time well spent as we often find that something awesome in theory is horrid in reality. There have been a lot of tweaks and play testing done over the past few days and we want to make sure whatever fix is implemented is one that provides the most balance possible. Fixing the Naglfar is part of a broader look at capitals in general that goes beyond just making sure their current incarnations are balanced. Upcoming features that we want to implement such as Jump Fuel Bays and looking into the usefulness (or lack thereof) of current short range Dread weaponry are being taken into account as well. Changes will not appear overnight, but we are working on it. We understand that some of you have very strong emotions about this, but please try to keep your comments constructive and helpful. Thank you! Well you sound like the most useful dev i've ever seen post in these forums lets hope you do indeed get it right.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.01 15:49:00 - [377] Off topic, but while you're looking at capital ships in general how about adding small corp hangars and/or ship maintenence bays to dreads? No more than 1/2 of a carrier one, probably less. Not enough to have people start using dreads for logistics, but enough that dread pilots can carry a few small ships around with them without having to rely on carriers. Please? -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Sbl Dark Glitter Inc	Posted - 2009.05.01 15:56:00 - [378] why do people want to make the dread a shield tanker? add a low, remove a mid and its a perfectly fine armor tanker just like the carrier counterpart. Having to train for two tanking systems at the non-super cap level, and two weapon systems is out of order.
TimGascoigne The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.01 16:01:00 - [379] Edited by: TimGascoigne on 01/05/2009 16:04:22 The current proposals are terrible as they will reduce both damage and tank despite the fact that the nag is already lacking in these areas. The nag need 2 turret slots and no Missile hard points thus 3 high slots in total. It needs to lose 2 lows and gain 2 med slots and have a complete rethink as to bonuses. my naglfar. 3 high (2 turret slots) 7 med 4 low 100% role improvement on damage modifier of capital projectiles. 10% bonus to capital projectile damage per Minmatar dreadnought level. I would then change capital artillery with 10% lengthening to rate of fire with 10% improvement in damage to compensate. As for the nags role in fleets (special ability) I would love to see this dreadnought being a cap ship killer ( maybe less so for sub-caps ). This would be achieved with the scan resolution improved and the signature resolution on capital projectiles reduced. I would keep the improved optimal range as stated in the OP (80km Optimal maybe more). This would make the naglfar the most efficient dreadnought at killing other capital ships. leave the game with two shield thanked dreads and two amror tanked dreads. Make the naglfar more effective at POS sieges whilst not being the best. Remember Dev's the description says "the Naglfar is capable of holding its own against opponents of all sizes and shapes. While its defenses don't go to extremes" a statement which needs some truth added to it. This is also a good way to make use of projectile turrets ability to use all 4 damage types.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 16:25:00 - [380] Originally by: Sbl why do people want to make the dread a shield tanker? add a low, remove a mid and its a perfectly fine armor tanker just like the carrier counterpart. Having to train for two tanking systems at the non-super cap level, and two weapon systems is out of order. No its not. The nidhogur was a shield tanker up to not so long ago. Also if you fly minamtar ships you do have all shiedl tanking skills except the capital one. Also a shield tanked dread turns intoa more gank focused ship, and taht si what the naglfar has always been presented as. Also if you just make it ANOTHER 7 low slots dreads would be just another of same other things we have. 6 mids 6 lows and you can do BOTH.. easy painless and interesting. Split weapon systems do not work on armor tankers that is somethign everybody understands. So or the citatels go away or it becomes a viable shield tanker.

Succubine Caldari Succubine Dynasty Technologies	Posted - 2009.05.01 16:29:00 - [381] Originally by: Typhado3 really though i think your doing this in the wrong order, one of the most asked for things in the thread before this is an artillery rework. So why are you planning a massive change to one of the ships that relies heavily on arty before you have a look at arty themselves? Perhaps they are afraid people will fit artillery to other capitals because cap stability is so much more important than dps for dreadnoughts.
Psyflame ZiTek Deepspace Explorations	Posted - 2009.05.01 16:49:00 - [382] Edited by: Psyflame on 01/05/2009 16:50:57 Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 01/05/2009 01:30:11 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? Originally by: isdisco3 - It's got one less low+mid than every other dread. Arbitrary numbers... ftw? Naglfar would not need low + mid so very much with proposed changes. Originally by: isdisco3 - It shield tanks, which is the opposite of the carrier. Hel shield tanks. Tempest shield or armor tanks. Nanophoons were shield tanked. The entire Matar ship line has evidence of split tank. Originally by: isdisco3 - It will tick off people who trained the month+ or so for citadel torps. Perhaps you missed the nano nerf? This argument is particularly hilarious. CCP has stated repeatedly that balancing will occur regardless of player isk or SP investment. Originally by: isdisco3 - No need for shield tank because 1 weapon type means there's no need for dual weapon modifiers in lows. No need for armor tank because it would get a shield boost bonus. Originally by: isdisco3 - 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. The slot layout is complimented by the shield boost bonus. In addition: CCP has already stated that they have no intention of changing the model. Yorda's solution leaves the model as-is AND fixes the ship. Double win. Next. Originally by: Typhado3 I like this idea best even if it's only 50% dmg bonus, also if it goes with the 2 high slots for guns but 2 of each hardpoint so you can fit one or teh other but not both that would work as wel.. This has been covered... Originally by: Psyflame Four guns that do hilariously pathetic damage. Damage so low that a 3 gun revelation still exceeds them. Revelation: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 2469dps. Proposed Naglfar: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 2388dps Revelation, 3 heatsinks: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 4083dps Proposed Naglfar, 3 gyros: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 3508dps Exactly where are you going with this?
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:00:00 - [383] Thanks for the feedback CCP. Unlike many of the armchair-designers here, I won't be telling you how to run your internal business. I do think that my proposal is full of merit, and is better than the other popular proposal for the reasons I've already listed, most notably because the slot layout blows and will make the nag still be primaried in every fleet fight due to bad tank. To make sure my proposal doesn't get lost, I'm copying it again. Quote: - 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 *easily replacable with a role bonus of 100%
DigitalCommunist November Corporation	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:04:00 - [384] This isn't specific to the Naglfar, but since you're probably working on the issue right now I'll say it anyway. All capital ships need an overhaul that does two things: 1. Refines capital and related mechanics to be more interesting and tactical. Examples: jumpdrive mechanics, siege mechanics, hangars & ship bays.. etc. 2. Differentiates them using capital stats, and not just common everyday racial stats. Examples: fuel cost, jump range, hangar/bay capacity. Note, I'm only talking about standard capitals. Supercapitals are, in my opinion, not going to be balanced without a completely separate set of mechanics. Here are some examples of changes.. Jumpdrive Spooling - To hamper login traps, easy escapes, and give enemies a bigger window to interfere during travel/undock. Spooling would stop all capacitor recharge and count down. If at the end of the countdown, you don't have enough cap, jump is cancelled. And whether a jump is successful or not, the drive goes into a cooldown period. Siege Mode Options - Longer cycle time for higher damage output and fuel efficiency, but that means you're vulnerable for hotdrop for longer periods. It would be a nice option to clean up POS that are no longer defended. Ships like Naglfar and Nidhoggur can have half the duration with all the benefits because <obligatory Minmatar hit and run reference>. In other words, have 10 minute and 20 minute cycle times. For Naglfar it would be 5 minutes and 10 minutes respectively. Fuel Resupply - When you manage to put this into the game, allow for friendlies in gang to open, view and resupply them in space. Right now, the most practical way to refuel is in station via trade window, followed by slowboating to a carrier or hangar array at POS. During combat, the only viable option is jettison cans which is crap. So capitals that run out of fuel during deployment are pretty much screwed. Doing this means both sides can keep the fight going if their resupply ships can survive. Locking & Range - Only as a start, give all dreads a default 250km lock range. Without this, sensor boosters are pretty much a mandatory fitting. Because of that, their cap suffers and damage+buffer setups become the standard fitting even in smaller engagements. Yet, dreads have the most powerful rep with the most powerful repair bonuses. Ideally though, all Dread and POS weapon ranges need to be multiplied by a factor of three. This would mean dreads can hit (and be hit by) POS at up to 400-500km. By increasing the distance, they become viable as long range artillery support in fleet battles - assuming they can get a lock on enemy battleships. It also increases the distance between fleets to a point where you can't defend your own dreads AND attack enemy dreads from one position. Weapons - Let citadels warp at ranges above 150km and give them a logarithmic speed curve for shorter distances. That way, hitting something is never 'instant' at any range, but it's also not painfully long either. Cyno Changes - Like jumpdrive, give it a slight delay before it can be used. If the duration is 300 seconds, it should go active halfway through. However, a friendly jumpdrive should be able to lock onto it immediately for spooling. If the cyno gets destroyed, the capital ship should be able to jump anyway - but it would get dumped into a random location within 1au of the cyno. Cyno Jammer Changes - Does not block cyno activation or jumpdrive, merely scrambles it. So if you get a perfect lock on an active cyno you'd end up within 1au of it in some random direction. If the cyno gets destroyed in a cyno jammed system, you'll jump into a completely random position within 200au of the system. For single ships traveling, this isn't too much of an issue. For fleets trying to siege a defended system, or hotdrop something, you're giving the enemy potentially dozens of targets to scan down and gank - and making regroup slow and painful. One more thing.. dreads in siege act as a cyno.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:09:00 - [385] Originally by: Psyflame Arbitrary numbers... ftw? Naglfar would not need low + mid so very much with proposed changes. The lack of equality with regards to low + mid slots directly affects the nag's ability to tank and gank. Removing one automatically puts it at a disadvantage, even with a 5% shield-boosting increase. Originally by: Psyflame Hel shield tanks. Tempest shield or armor tanks. Nanophoons were shield tanked. The entire Matar ship line has evidence of split tank. Nobody shield tanks a tempest, unless its an extremely specific-role tempest. Nanophoons are dead, and weren't shield 'tanked', they just had LSE's because they didn't have grid for anything else. Those are two extreme examples that are far from the 'normal' type of fit they use. Yes, the matar line has split tanks. Originally by: Psyflame Perhaps you missed the nano nerf? This argument is particularly hilarious. CCP has stated repeatedly that balancing will occur regardless of player isk or SP investment. This is true, but I'm saying my proposal doesn't require those people to get ticked off. Why ** them off if you can come up with an equally good solution that doesn't have to? Originally by:** Psyflame No need for armor tank because it would get a shield boost bonus. Yes, but we wouldn't have the option, and the shield tank would still be very sub-par due to the poor slot layout. Originally by: Psyflame The slot layout is complimented by the shield boost bonus. At level 5, you've got a 25% boost to shield amount. That's less than a shield boost amp, which would go in one of the mids which we, according to the argument, "don't need." Originally by: Psyflame In addition: CCP has already stated that they have no intention of changing the model. Yorda's solution leaves the model as-is AND fixes the ship. Double win. Next. Mine doesn't require re-making the model either, at all. Originally by: Psyflame Four guns that do hilariously pathetic damage. Damage so low that a 3 gun revelation still exceeds them. Revelation: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 2469dps. Proposed Naglfar: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 2388dps Revelation, 3 heatsinks: 3x Dual Giga Beam Laser I - 4083dps Proposed Naglfar, 3 gyros: 2x 100% bonus Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I - 3508dps That's a balancing issue with the siege artilleries.
Vasili Z Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:23:00 - [386] Why the **** would you want more volley damage on a dread? What are you gonna insta-pop? 3rd turret, more dps. All we ask for is a REASON to train the worst-tanked dread in space by far, making it do more volley damage is completely useless. ------- P0GS is recruiting; no fatties
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:26:00 - [387] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Stuff All of these ideas/suggestions make captial combat even more labours then is already is and its terribly long and boring already how about no.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:33:00 - [388] Originally by: Vasili Z Why the **** would you want more volley damage on a dread? What are you gonna insta-pop? 3rd turret, more dps. All we ask for is a REASON to train the worst-tanked dread in space by far, making it do more volley damage is completely useless. altpough woudl be funny if they removed the citatel bonus and introduced a 40% trackign bonus per level on its place

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:12:00 - [389] Originally by: DigitalCommunist Good Post Certainly in the longer term as we have hinted at previously, we are looking at deeper more complex changes and overhauls which open up the variety of possible strategies in cap ship warfare. Siege module variations is definitely one of those which has a lot of potential for example and your other suggestions are interesting and have been discussed before internally as possible ideas. Spooling is quite an old one for example when hot dropping started to become widespread or in the first days of titans. It would definitely be good to open a thread in the Features and Ideas forum to discuss longer term and larger scale high level ideas like yours and the subject of 0.0 warfare as a whole which is being pursued internally and with the CSM aggressively (pretty much every CSM has covered some aspect of it to some degree with more recent indepth high level discussions), and here on the open forums. In the short term, we are looking at making a very specific focused set of changes to the Naglfar and citadel torps with as we said an acknowledgement that there is definitely a lot more that needs to be done. For those naysayers who think this will be the only pass at a possible change to the Naglfar, we can only say that we are hoping to change that perception now and in the future though the proof will be the pudding as they say. As Abathur said, we are currently playtesting a variety of possible changes and approaches to the Naglfar and citadel torps. The feedback here, especially the good constructive feedback and in depth work by Blazde amongst others has been very useful and it is great to see such passion and interest from you all whilst keeping it largely constructive. Next week, we will update on the changes we would like to push to Sisi for testing. In the meantime, please continue with the constructive feedback.

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:20:00 - [390] When you and the rest of game balance teams make an overhaul to the dreads as a whole. May I suggest give a look on the concept of short range guns for the dreadnaughts that clearly are not working very well (since static deployment of the dread make range issues more prevalent)


CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:27:00 - [391] Originally by: Seishi Maru When you and the rest of game balance teams make an overhaul to the dreads as a whole. May I suggest give a look on the concept of short range guns for the dreadnaughts that clearly are not working very well (since static deployment of the dread make range issues more prevalent) Already mentioned by Abathur as one of the 'deeper issues' we are looking at previously in the thread. We are acutely aware that the short range capital guns are not good for a ship that cannot control range easily. The arbitrary way the capital turrets were scaled is certainly far from great and we are looking at the capital turrets as whole though any such changes as a result of that would be after the upcoming patch where we intend to boost the Naglfar and ciatdel torps.

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:32:00 - [392] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Seishi Maru When you and the rest of game balance teams make an overhaul to the dreads as a whole. May I suggest give a look on the concept of short range guns for the dreadnaughts that clearly are not working very well (since static deployment of the dread make range issues more prevalent) Already mentioned by Abathur as one of the 'deeper issues' we are looking at previously in the thread. We are acutely aware that the short range capital guns are not good for a ship that cannot control range easily. The arbitrary way the capital turrets were scaled is certainly far from great and we are looking at the capital turrets as whole though any such changes as a result of that would be after the upcoming patch where we intend to boost the Naglfar and ciatdel torps. surely not expecting that solved too soon. The current game balance model with 2 or 3 issues ran at each iteration seems much better than previous ones. Just glad to know its on the list :) My personal idea would be to scrap the short/long range concept on the dreads. Both be long range. But one lower damage but far higher tracking.. other very low tracking high damage . So good against POS and dreads vs good against carriers and sniper battleships. But the simple fact that your andyour team are tacking the naglfar issue and really takign into consideration the users input (as was done in the ECM and Sbomber threads) is a huge improvement that I dar to say make most of us quite happy.
Jaabaa Minmatar Dental Drilling Corporation	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:42:00 - [393] I think what c0rn1 said earlier has a lot of merit. I'm not too sure about the cap neutralizer but giving the Naglfar a role would be awesome. I would drop the cap torp bonuses and have them for supporting POS killing only (that bit of extra damage), this way the training invested in those skills isn't totally wasted. As for the turrets, I would adjust the artys so that they are the main damage dealers against other caps ships and change the auto cannons to be anti BS. This would give the Naglfar an awesome role in capital fleet warfare. -- EVE Mobile Skill Planner V3 !! http://evemsp.sourceforge.net/
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:44:00 - [394] You've mentioned citadel torpedoes several times but not the specific issues you are looking at. I would like to know wether you consider explosion velocity one of those issues. It is a serious problem that makes them inferior to all gun types when firing at moving capitals of all sizes. A thanatos moving at 20 m/s negates about 50% of citadel damage through explosion velocity alone. While guns have to deal with tracking they aren't affected anywhere near the extent citadels are. Here is a graph showing the damage dealt by different dreads to a full speed thanatos. Even with two more damage mods and in a max transversal worst case scenario citadels deal pathetic damage compared to guns against their intended target.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.01 18:48:00 - [395] this isn't a thread for overall capital ship warfare changes. its too large a topic and is too in-depth. we should try and stick to nag fixes.
Conwen Minmatar Nefantar Tribe The Wrong Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.01 19:13:00 - [396] Originally by: Midjutetur Originally by: Jelmer So, my suggestion would be - remove the missile slots and make this ship pure projectile. Thank you. PLEASE PLEASE
Mean McCrabby	Posted - 2009.05.01 19:20:00 - [397] HEY CCP WAKE UP AND FIX THE CITADEL EXPLOSION VELOCITY!!!!!!!!!! I CANT HIT A MOVING CAPITAL SHIP FOR S#$% AND ITS RIDICULOUS
Nikita Alterana Gallente The-Kissaki	Posted - 2009.05.01 19:25:00 - [398] Nag changes I've proposed mapped out, numbers aren't exact: 6x Lows 5x Mids 5x Highs bonuses: 15% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire per level 15% bonus to Citadel Launcher rate of fire per level 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module I ran the numbers for this in EFT, with all gun/missile support skills at 4, and the XL gun/missile skills at 0 formula: (((initialdamage)bonus%)shipskilllevel)+initialdamage)#ofguns (((277.15)5)+277)2=969.5 (missiles) (((371.15)5)+371)*2=1298.5 (guns) for a total of 2268 dps before damage mods what does this mean? it means you can use all your low slots to tank, and still hit for comparable damage to the other dreads, OR you can use all your low slots for damage mods and do insane DPS at the cost of a tank. __________________________________________________ I was Amarr before they were the FOTM and I'll be Amarr after it! I'm also training Minmatar Capitals! And I eat Lions!
dann otheym Fusion Enterprises Ltd Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 19:54:00 - [399] I am a Naglfar pilot. As pointed out, the ships sucks. What I would suggest is to drop the citadel torps and have 3 projectile turrets. Yes, I trained torps allready, but meh. Atleast don't force others to do the same in the future, it's copletely unfair. Other improvements can be made, but this is most important IMHO.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.01 21:15:00 - [400] What part of "we're not going to rework the ship model for a third turret" are people in this thread having so much trouble with? If people want pure projectile, propose a role bonus giving them the EQUIVALENT of three guns. Three turrets isn't happening and CCP has said that multiple times, a few times in this thread even. ffs

Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.01 21:36:00 - [401] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert What part of "we're not going to rework the ship model for a third turret" are people in this thread having so much trouble with? If people want pure projectile, propose a role bonus giving them the EQUIVALENT of three guns. Three turrets isn't happening and CCP has said that multiple times, a few times in this thread even. ffs We have. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Orb Lati Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.01 22:02:00 - [402] Originally by: Nikita Alterana Nag changes I've proposed mapped out, numbers aren't exact: 6x Lows 5x Mids 5x Highs bonuses: 15% bonus to Capital Projectile rate of fire per level 15% bonus to Citadel Launcher rate of fire per level 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module I ran the numbers for this in EFT, with all gun/missile support skills at 4, and the XL gun/missile skills at 0 formula: (((initialdamage)bonus%)shipskilllevel)+initialdamage)#ofguns (((277.15)5)+277)2=969.5 (missiles) (((371.15)5)+371)*2=1298.5 (guns) for a total of 2268 dps before damage mods what does this mean? it means you can use all your low slots to tank, and still hit for comparable damage to the other dreads, OR you can use all your low slots for damage mods and do insane DPS at the cost of a tank. I would possibly advise look at altering the bonuses to a damage increase percentage instead of ROF which can get seriously screwed up hot dropping on non reinforced nodes. "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.01 22:35:00 - [403] Originally by: Blane Xero Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert What part of "we're not going to rework the ship model for a third turret" are people in this thread having so much trouble with? If people want pure projectile, propose a role bonus giving them the EQUIVALENT of three guns. Three turrets isn't happening and CCP has said that multiple times, a few times in this thread even. ffs We have. I have seen several since CCP's post continue to suggest it (three turrets). I'm not yelling at everyone in this thread, just the stupid ones.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.01 22:45:00 - [404] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert What part of "we're not going to rework the ship model for a third turret" are people in this thread having so much trouble with? If people want pure projectile, propose a role bonus giving them the EQUIVALENT of three guns. Three turrets isn't happening and CCP has said that multiple times, a few times in this thread even. ffs I tough the whole concept of asking 3 turrets was to cause a lot of arkward moments when a CCP game designer passes by the art team on their office....
Voculus The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.02 01:11:00 - [405] Give the Naglfar 3 turrets, and you can just make the last set invisible. I'm curious, if it takes anywhere from 6 months to a year to make a ship, did you start developing Eve shortly after WW2 ended? Anything less than a 3-turret solution is a waste of everyone's time. What are we paying you for when you refuse to listen to reason, tell us your entire art department is inept, and berate your customers with snide replies? _________________________________________________________ Give me three turrets on the Naglfar, or give me death!
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.02 03:57:00 - [406] Edited by: prefectro on 02/05/2009 03:58:02 Originally by: Voculus I'm curious, if it takes anywhere from 6 months to a year to make a ship, did you start developing Eve shortly after WW2 ended? Anything less than a 3-turret solution is a waste of everyone's time. What are we paying you for when you refuse to listen to reason, tell us your entire art department is inept, and berate your customers with snide replies? Obviously not many people here have worked in large development shops. The EFFORT of work might be 2 weeks, but the process to ensure QUALITY ASSURANCE can make the duration an easy 4-6 months from concept (in a persons head) to actually transitioning the deliverable to production. There are fixed costs (time costs) in this process that do not care if you are changing 1 ship or 10 ships. Example would be a Requirements review. If you are changing 5 ships or 1 ship, you still spend almost the same time to setup that 1 hour meeting to go through those requirements. Look up economies of scale, to change just one Model (versus 20) is not efficient. And THEN they have other work they have to do. Other changes/bugs/requests that they also need to do. They are not going to drop everything so that you can have a 3 slot Naglfar that is not needed as there are alternate solutions that require less work and can yield the similar results. When you factor in the opportunity cost, then it would be complete idiotic stupidity to change the model. So, just give us an extra low slot and be done with it. Change nothing else and I think you will get at least 50% of the people happy. You can't ask for much more.
FugginNutz Caldari Chinchilla Industries Manifest Destiny.	Posted - 2009.05.02 04:50:00 - [407] Edited by: FugginNutz on 02/05/2009 04:52:06 The problems with the Naglfar (from someone else...not me) 1. The Naglfar is missing a slot. -Before any other issues can be solved, this needs to be addressed. All dreadnaughts have the same total number of slots. Because the Naglfar requires five high slots to accommodate its split weapon system, the decision was made to give it one less low/mid slot. This puts it squarely behind every other dread from the very beginning. 2. Split weapons are . a. Extra training time for two separate capital weapon systems. -Using two weapon systems requires nearly double the training time to be effective. Even though many Minnie pilots have decent missile skills because of their sub-capital split weapon ships, requiring pilots who don't to train for missiles to achieve similar performance is inequitable and should be changed. Even though the Moros gets a drone bonus, every capital uses drones (mostly sentries), so there isn't a large disparity among them in this regard. b. Split weapons and damage mods. -Split weapon systems require two different types of damage modules to increase the effectiveness of their weapons. Whereas the Moros, Revelation, and Phoenix can simply use three of their low slots for their homogenous weapon systems, the Naglfar would have to devote the entire low slot rack to damage mods to receive comparable increases in performance. This is further compounded by the missing slot mentioned above. c. Split weapons and tanking. -Because of the issue with split weapons and damage mods, the Naglfar would be forced to shield tank because of the complete use of its low slots. Even were we to not use six damage mods (resulting in a lower damage output than other dreads), we would still only have four primary slots for tanking (after you add a sensor booster in the mids). This results in a lower burst tank than the Phoenix, while still retaining the Naglfar's lack of EHP when compared to other dreads. d. Split weapons and primaries. -Because of the issues Citadel torpedoes have (a separate matter entirely), torpedo users frequently have to shoot separate primaries in order to effectively apply damage before the target dies. With a split weapon system, Naglfars are forced to either a.) double task and shoot two primaries with different weapon systems to effectively apply damage, or b.) write off a large part (up to half of their damage) by shooting the same primary with both weapon systems and run the risk of none of their torpedoes connecting because the target has died before they've arrived. e. Split weapons and tactics. -Again, this is an issue which affects the Phoenix and the Naglfar because it is an issue with Citadel torpedoes. The Naglfar can be setup to snipe; however, it will be the second least effective dread in this role (second only to the Phoenix). This is due to the fact that Citadel torpedoes are for all intents and purposes, short range weapons. While it may be possible to increase the range to a point where sniping is feasible, traveling the 100km to the target would probably take the entire 10m siege cycle. Due to this, the Naglfar only has two effective weapons when attempting this tactic. 3. ôVersatilityö scales extremely poorly with size, especially at the capital level. -Versatility is all well and good, and mostly works for the Minmatar sub capitals (the Tempest is the notable exception). Unfortunately, versatility and dreadnaughts are the antithesis of each other. The role of the dreadnaught is simple: sit in one place and blow everything the **** up. To do this requires an extremely specialized ship, which leads me to my next point:
FugginNutz Caldari Chinchilla Industries Manifest Destiny.	Posted - 2009.05.02 04:51:00 - [408] Edited by: FugginNutz on 02/05/2009 04:51:36 4. The Naglfar is having a teen identity crisis. -The Naglfar canÆt decide what it wants to do. Its low and mid slots are very ambiguous. WhatÆs more, it has exactly the same amount of shield and armor hit points. Every other dread has a skew towards its racial tank (Amarr and Gallente have more armor HP than shields; Caldari has more shield HP than armor). ThatÆs not to mention the split weapons. ItÆs a Minmatar ship, but most of its DPS comes from missiles and not the Minmatar racial weapon system, projectiles. What we can draw from this analysis: 1. First, add the extra slot in somewhere. The Naglfar is missing one right now, and this needs to be changed. 2. Second, axe the torpedoes. As long as missiles are substantially different from turrets with regards to how they do damage, a split weapon Naglfar will not work. It is unfortunate that so many people have trained for them, but assuming they have trained Citadel torpedoes to V, this change will only invalidate 1,792,000 SP. The rest of the missile support skills are still useful on other Minmatar ships. 3. Third, pick a tank type, and give it the slot layout, HP, and fittings to match. If you believe the Naglfar should be a shield tanker, make it so. If you think it ought to be an armor tanker, do likewise. But please, please donÆt try to make it so that there is no clearly identifiable tanking style. On a ship with a role this specific, the slot layout must be unambiguous. The Phoenix still has a problem with Citadel torpedoes, but its tank is up to scratch. Likewise, the Moros and the Revelation have proper tanks because there is a clear cut method to fit them. My suggestion: 3/7/5, 2 turrets (you end up with one less overall slot than the rest of the dread, but have the correct number of mids+lows). Keep the OPs suggested fitting adjustments (might actually need to be cut slightly to account for the lack of a third turret). 50% role bonus to capital projectile damage (gives an effective three weapons, equaling every other dread before bonuses). 5% ROF and 5% damage to capital projectiles per level of Minmatar dreadnaught (standard Minmatar gunship bonus, see: Tempest and Rupture). This solves every single issue listed above. Naglfars would have a proper weapon system, it would be able to snipe, would not have an inequity in training requirements, would be able to fit a single damage mod , a proper tank, and it would have the amount of slots and correct layout to do so. To reiterate, unless Citadel torpedoes are modified to become just another type of turret, trying to balance the Naglfar with their use will always result in a sub-par dreadnaught. The only solution which removes the problems is the complete removal of the split weapons. Once this is complete, Citadel torpedoes should be looked into and adjusted, because the Phoenix still retains some of the issues mentioned above because its damage remains focused on missiles. This is not to say if Citadel torpedoes are fixed, a split weapon system will be fine. A split weapon Naglfar, regardless of the balance of Citadels, will never be able to snipe properly; it simply hasnÆt the fitting to do so. It will always have to use its two weapon systems on two primaries, even if the torpedoes travel much faster and you only have to skip one or two caps on the overview instead of the three to four that is prevalent nowadays. The only reasonable solution is one which does not contain split weapons.
Destructor1792 Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.02 05:10:00 - [409] Have it so: High: 3 Mid: 6 Low: 7 25% damage & 15% ROF to XL projectiles per lvl 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module Remove Citadels completely - Make it a pure Gun boat With 6 mids & 7 lows, you have the flexibility to either go shield or armour. Keep the tracking low for the Arty's but give the AC's a massive boost (Anti BS or Cap ship killer mode ) and keep it V E R T I C A L ______________________________________ Bringing The Fun Back [gold]I Have No Fear, That's your Problem[/go
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 05:45:00 - [410] Originally by: Destructor1792 Have it so: High: 3 Mid: 6 Low: 7 25% damage & 15% ROF to XL projectiles per lvl 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module Remove Citadels completely - Make it a pure Gun boat With 6 mids & 7 lows, you have the flexibility to either go shield or armour. Keep the tracking low for the Arty's but give the AC's a massive boost (Anti BS or Cap ship killer mode ) and keep it V E R T I C A L You have too many low + mid slots. Every other dread has 12, whereas your idea has 13. Additionally, your bonuses are completely overpowered. As an aside, I don't understand why people insist on trying to make dreadnaughts versatile. They have only one purpose and one purpose only. Any attempt to make them versatile detracts from that purpose and is therefore not a desirable trait.

Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.02 06:08:00 - [411] Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 02/05/2009 06:13:08 I don't think the nagl should go to one weapon system, I think if both weapon systems worked comparable to any other weapon system it would be fine. The phoon works well because torps and autocannons work. Capital torps and projectiles don't, citadels have various problems in their implementation, and projectiles have **ty damage. I appreciate the split weapon system of the nagl, it stays inline with the minmatar philosophy, which is basically the concept of EVE on hard mode. Minmatar ships in general are the hardest to train for, and in return you get a broad diversity in fitting options and strategies. Of course, the nagl is still a dread, and dreads are only made to do one thing. I think they should be able to do that one thing differently, however. I saw some support for giving the nagl a capital killing role, with various fittings and such. I don't know about that. I think it just needs damage, lots and lots of damage. That's the pilots reward for training dual weapon systems and flying a ship with a sub par tank. That does ultimately make it quite a capital killer. And its a fair trade off. Hell, the thing has one more capital weapon than all the other dreads, percentage wise, it has 33% more weapons, why that isn't reflected in its damage output is beyond me. Fix the weapon systems on the nagl and I think you've fixed the nagl. To hell with alpha, give it DPS that reflects the fact that it has 4 weapons instead of 3. Leave its tank as it is, its a fair trade imo... we minmatar(yeah my character is caldari, we all have made bad decisions at a young age) are used to accepting sub par tanks and high training requirements, but on every other ship we've felt we got something in return. This is not the case with the nagl. I think, before damage mods, a properly skilled nagl should out damage any other dread with damage mods(I say this because those ships can fit a decent tank and damage mods, the nagl really just can't). Then, the nagl pilot can accept his somewhat higher damage and fit his sub-par armor tank, or he can commit to serious, gank style capital damage with weapon upgrades, having to fit a shield tank we all know is very** sub-par.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 06:29:00 - [412] Originally by: Sexorella hotz I don't think the nagl should go to one weapon system, I think if both weapon systems worked comparable to any other weapon system it would be fine. The phoon works well because torps and autocannons work. Capital torps and projectiles don't, citadels have various problems in their implementation, and projectiles have **ty damage. Please go take a look at points 2d. and 2e. in that very large post just up the page. That should help you understand why split weapons aren't effective for capitals. Additionally, as mentioned, a sniping Naglfar (a tactic which is becoming increasingly popular) does not have enough slots to reach the ranges available with the other dreadnaughts. Originally by:** Sexorella hotz I appreciate the split weapon system of the nagl, it stays inline with the minmatar philosophy, which is basically the concept of EVE on hard mode. Minmatar ships in general are the hardest to train for, and in return you get a broad diversity in fitting options and strategies. Of course, the nagl is still a dread, and dreads are only made to do one thing. I think they should be able to do these things differently, however. Diversity may be a good thing at times, but the unfortunate reality is that there is really only one way to effectively accomplish the dreads mission: put damage on target. There is nothing wrong with Minmatar being hard mode, the problem comes when fundamental aspects of game mechanics prevent Minmatar ships from being equitable with other races. In this particular case, versatility (a.k.a. split weapon systems) actually limit the strategies available to Naglfar pilots by preventing them from being effective snipers. Originally by: Sexorella hotz I saw some support for giving the nagl a capital killing role, with various fittings and such. I don't know about that. I think it just needs damage, lots and lots of damage. That's the pilots reward for training dual weapon systems and flying a ship with a sub par tank. That does ultimately make it quite a capital killer. And its a fair trade off. Hell, the thing has one more capital weapon than all the other dreads, percentage wise, it has 33% more weapons, why that isn't reflected in its damage output is beyond me. The tank is already subpar, and in many situations (basically anything but shooting towers), the DPS from Citadels is greatly reduced. This can be caused by anything from moving targets, to targets which don't have sufficient signature radius or simply targets that die before the torpedoes can reach them. This issue also effects the Phoenix, but because it's tank is the best burst tank, it is often overlooked. This is a problem with Citadels, but even with fixed Citadels, you'll run into issues where the (split weapon) Naglfar will have vastly reduced damage compared with other dreadnaughts simply because it has two separate weapon engagement profiles. Originally by: Sexorella hotz Fix the weapon systems on the nagl and I think you've fixed the nagl. To hell with alpha, give it DPS that reflects the fact that it has 4 weapons instead of 3. Leave its tank as it is, its a fair trade imo... we minmatar(yeah my character is caldari, we all have made bad decisions at a young age) are used to accepting sub par tanks and high training requirements, but on every other ship we've felt we got something in return. This is not the case with the nagl. Fixing the weapons will not address the underlying problems with the hull. They will only serve as a band-aid and as a diversion from the true problems with the Nag.
James Draekn X.E.N.O. OWN Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.02 06:32:00 - [413] Naglfar (new) Special Abilities: -10% bonus to Capital Projectile damage/7.5% bonus to Citadel Launcher rate of fire per level -7.5% Bonus to Capital Shield Boost amount per level -99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module + 1 Mid slot + 1 Low slot add CPU powergrid as required to fit artillary/torps and shield booster (or two). This fixes the main problem I see with your split layouts setups, twice the training for a ship that usually falls short versus a specilized ship. This combines the bonuses into one and adds a bonus to tanking this ship badly needs. No polygons hurt to do it. The character still has to skill torpedos and large projectiles and still has to fit twice the amount of damage mods, but might get a better ship out of it (I haven't run the numbers on this proposal). Making a combo bonus would fix the DPS/Alpha to a degree and let the ship fit some kind of a decent tank. Your fix to artillary is a welcome sight, might some of these damage increase percentage changes be making their way down the food chain to large, medium, small projectile guns.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.02 06:37:00 - [414] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Stuff, deleted cause it was cutting off my posts and people can scroll up I had read your post fully before I posted, but meh. Just because split weapons don't work in their current implementation doesn't mean they don't work. Fix the weapons(and this includes citadels) and leave everything else alone and you have a different sort of dread. I'm sorry but I don't think it should have the same tank and damage as the other dreads(3 turrets and a big tank, why the hell did I bother training for a nagl when I could've trained for a moros or revelation? I trained a nagl cause I thought it was something different, I thought that maybe, though the training is a lot heavier, and the tank a lot flimsier, you'd get something in return. I thought it would be damage, and it wasn't, you get nothing in return. I don't want it to be like all the other dreads. I want it to be a nagl, not a moros in a nagl costume. The problems with citadels are fixable, granted the two weapon systems are fundamentally different, if they both worked properly then we could almost certainly find ways to take advantage of their differences, right now there's no incentive cause one doesn't work(citadels) and one is sub-par(projectiles).
PrincessKnight	Posted - 2009.05.02 06:40:00 - [415] Edited by: PrincessKnight on 02/05/2009 06:41:49 Originally by: James Draekn Naglfar (new) Special Abilities: -10% bonus to Capital Projectile damage/7.5% bonus to Citadel Launcher rate of fire per level -7.5% Bonus to Capital Shield Boost amount per level -99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module + 1 Mid slot + 1 Low slot add CPU powergrid as required to fit artillary/torps and shield booster (or two). This fixes the main problem I see with your split layouts setups, twice the training for a ship that usually falls short versus a specilized ship. This combines the bonuses into one and adds a bonus to tanking this ship badly needs. No polygons hurt to do it. The character still has to skill torpedos and large projectiles and still has to fit twice the amount of damage mods, but might get a better ship out of it (I haven't run the numbers on this proposal). Making a combo bonus would fix the DPS/Alpha to a degree and let the ship fit some kind of a decent tank. Your fix to artillary is a welcome sight, might some of these damage increase percentage changes be making their way down the food chain to large, medium, small projectile guns. Srsly....SPLIT WEAPONS NEEDS TO DIE. Get over it people and fix this tower of fail...
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 06:55:00 - [416] Originally by: James Draekn Naglfar (new) Special Abilities: -10% bonus to Capital Projectile damage/7.5% bonus to Citadel Launcher rate of fire per level -7.5% Bonus to Capital Shield Boost amount per level -99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module You're barely increasing the damage here. This Nag might be on par with the other dreads without damage mods, but once those are added, it rapidly falls behind like the current iteration. Originally by: James Draekn + 1 Mid slot + 1 Low slot add CPU powergrid as required to fit artillary/torps and shield booster (or two). You now have 13 mids + lows. All the other dreads have 12. The Nag is in need of a boost, but the addition of two extra turrets (bringing the total to one more than all the others) will probably not fly. Originally by: James Dreakn This fixes the main problem I see with your split layouts setups, twice the training for a ship that usually falls short versus a specilized ship. This combines the bonuses into one and adds a bonus to tanking this ship badly needs. No polygons hurt to do it. The character still has to skill torpedos and large projectiles and still has to fit twice the amount of damage mods, but might get a better ship out of it (I haven't run the numbers on this proposal). Making a combo bonus would fix the DPS/Alpha to a degree and let the ship fit some kind of a decent tank. The problem is not as much the lack of a bonus (all the other dreads tank just fine without one), it's the lack of a proper layout for a good tank. Fit the sensor booster which is pretty much mandatory for dreadnaughts, and then tell me how you're going to fit a proper shield tank with four mid slots. Originally by: James Draekn Your fix to artillary is a welcome sight, might some of these damage increase percentage changes be making their way down the food chain to large, medium, small projectile guns. The problem was that the XL arty was based on the 1200mm arty instead of the 1400mm; i.e. the XL arty was undersized compared to its smaller brethren, rather than the other way around.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 07:16:00 - [417] Originally by: Sexorella hotz I had read your post fully before I posted, but meh. Just because split weapons don't work in their current implementation doesn't mean they don't work. Fix the weapons(and this includes citadels) and leave everything else alone and you have a different sort of dread. Even assuming you fixed the weapons to where they would work, the hull is still subpar. Fitting a sound system and rims to your Ford Pinto doesn't change the fact that it's still a Pinto. Originally by: Sexorella hotz I'm sorry but I don't think it should have the same tank and damage as the other dreads(3 turrets and a big tank, why the hell did I bother training for a nagl when I could've trained for a moros or revelation? Two turrets, and the tank is still the weakest of the four. Originally by: Sexorella hotz I trained a nagl cause I thought it was something different, I thought that maybe, though the training is a lot heavier, and the tank a lot flimsier, you'd get something in return. I thought it would be damage, and it wasn't, you get nothing in return. Honestly, split weapon system will never give you anything in return. It's just not feasible at the capital level. Until it's removed, the Naglfar will continue to be a laughing stock. Originally by: Sexorella hotz I don't want it to be like all the other dreads. I want it to be a nagl, not a moros in a nagl costume. The problems with citadels are fixable, granted the two weapon systems are fundamentally different, if they both worked properly then we could almost certainly find ways to take advantage of their differences If you honestly believe this, please tell us how you would fix Citadels and XL projectiles and how we can utilize their differences to equal the performance of other dreads. Unless you can do this, I'm going to have to say that this idea is a pipe dream at best. Originally by: Sexorella hotz If you push damage up to above a damage mod'd dread of another race, then you remove the requirement to fit damage mods in order to compete damage wise, and can instead fit an armor tank. This takes the argument away about having to fit the double damage mods, because you have the OPTION not to. However, you have the option(minmatar like our options) of going with a weaker shield tank so that we can fit the damage mods. In other words, we can push our damage to an even greater limit for even less tank. Its the hardest dread to train for, in return we need performance and options. Yeah, it only does one thing, but tbh lots of ships really, technically only do one thing. Its about how you wanna do it. I actually agree with this part. The only difference I would like to see is to have a solid shield tank that is weaker than the Phoenix's, and then have the ability to trade damage for sustainability by fiddling with what's fitted in the lowslots. Originally by: Sexorella hotz In response to 2d and 2e...you have already suggested a fix...god forbid they have to do things differently from the basic point and shoot dread? Sniping...fix artilleries, the ship will perform fine, albeit with only 2 weapons but if they make the appropriate changes to the damage of projectiles that i"m suggesting I think their damage would be perfectly in line with the other dreads on the field and would still have the torp launchers should the rules of engagement change mid fight. And every missile user simply has to accept the reality that some missiles don't hit their target, compensate by using them on secondaries in a medium to long range fight, if the fight is short range I'd say the loss is negligible. Boosting arties to the level you envision would make them stupidly overpowered. Additionally, nobody should ever be told that half their weapons are useless under a set of circumstances (even the Caldari don't deserve this).
James Grand Arcana Imperii Ltd. Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.02 07:56:00 - [418] I fully agree with Dian's points as posted by FugginNutz. A split weapon system is almost never viable and especially isn't on a dread. Especially with the size of modern dread fleets, forcing a stationary ship to do instant damage and delayed damage is insane. Let it have all guns, give it the ability to actually tank and maybe it will be workable. -------------------------------------------------- The opinions expressed in my posts are entirely my own.
Destructor1792 Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.02 08:02:00 - [419] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Destructor1792 what i said You have too many low + mid slots. Every other dread has 12, whereas your idea has 13. Additionally, your bonuses are completely overpowered. As an aside, I don't understand why people insist on trying to make dreadnaughts versatile. They have only one purpose and one purpose only. Any attempt to make them versatile detracts from that purpose and is therefore not a desirable trait. All dreads have the same number of slots so learn how to count!! 2 have been taken from the highs and placed in the mid & low... which still adds up to 16 slots! And how's it overpowered??? 2 slots for fitting weapons instead of 4, so double the damage & tracking (plus a bit extra) to bring it up to par with the others. I mean, you are aware that even stationary, projectiles still miss (or do other odd things!!) And I swear blind some of those posting have no clue to Dreads Stop faffing about with EFT and try flying the damn things.. Just because it says it'll do "X" amount of damage of paper doesn't make that so when flying the thing live!! And finally, STOP try to make these things Shield tankers.. Main bulk of Minny T1 ships are Armour based (with the exception of a couple later released ships) and the T2 line are more inclined to Shield it up. Dreads aren't only used for POS crp - they're also used to take out other Caps (which the Nag) fails horribly at! Make it so it's still the worst for POS engagements but a nasty mofo for PVP goodness (although this sort of goes against the tracking bonus I suggested.. meh - whatever ) ______________________________________ Bringing The Fun Back* [gold]I Have No Fear, That's your Problem[/go
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 08:30:00 - [420] Originally by: Destructor1792 All dreads have the same number of slots so learn how to count!! 2 have been taken from the highs and placed in the mid & low... which still adds up to 16 slots! Unfortunately, this is precisely the sort of thinking that ended up gimping the Nag with one missing mid/low. The Nag, which requires five highs to support its split weapons and siege mod, was only given 11 mids and lows. Having an additional high slot which was supposed to bring the Nags damage to parity with the others should not be penalized with the removal of a mid/low. What should have happened, and what needs to happen is the dreads need to be balanced around the numbers of mids and lows they have. If a hypothetical dread (lets say Jove for discussions sake) had seven turrets and a siege mod (eight highs), all of which do a similar amount of damage as the current dreads, should this dread only have eight mids and lows combined? Having more or less high slots is not a bonus; having more mids or lows is. As it currently stands, the Nag is the only dreadnaught with fewer than 12 mids and lows. Any fixes need to take into consideration that the balance should not be aimed at total number of slots; rather, it should be aimed at the number of mids and lows. Every dread ought to have 12, regardless of the number of high slots (assuming equal damage). Originally by: Destructor1792 And how's it overpowered??? 2 slots for fitting weapons instead of 4, so double the damage & tracking (plus a bit extra) to bring it up to par with the others. I mean, you are aware that even stationary, projectiles still miss (or do other odd things!!) It's overpowered because you've added 125% damage at Dreadnaught Level V. That's not a bit extra, that is a huge amount extra. This translates into five effective turrets, which is about 1.25 more than any other dread. Originally by: Destructor1792 And I swear blind some of those posting have no clue to Dreads Stop faffing about with EFT and try flying the damn things.. Just because it says it'll do "X" amount of damage of paper doesn't make that so when flying the thing live!! Apparently you're the one who doesn't understand capitals. The two most common uses of dreads are to a.) shoot POSes and b.) shoot other dreads. In both situations, you'll be in siege, which means you aren't going anywhere. Now POSes don't move on their own (last time I checked), and if you're shooting other dreads, that means they're sieged as well. Which would, of course, mean...there is no transversal, so tracking isn't an issue. Originally by: Destructor1792 And finally, STOP try to make these things Shield tankers.. Main bulk of Minny T1 ships are Armour based (with the exception of a couple later released ships) and the T2 line are more inclined to Shield it up. I disagree with this statement. Allow me to introduce you to the Stabber, Cyclone, Hurricane, Tempest and Mael, all of which have perfectly valid shield tanked fits. This, of course, doesn't include the T2 ships, which you rightly pointed out tend to shield tank. So why was shield tanking bad, then exactly? Originally by: Destructor1792 Dreads aren't only used for POS cr*p - they're also used to take out other Caps (which the Nag) fails horribly at! Make it so it's still the worst for POS engagements but a nasty mofo for PVP goodness (although this sort of goes against the tracking bonus I suggested.. meh - whatever ) Or, we could just make them so they were able to perform all the functions of a dreadnaught. Just sayin'.

Myrkala Minmatar Aurora Acclivitous	Posted - 2009.05.02 09:12:00 - [421] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Good post. I like how you think. Highslots: 3 (2 Turret hardpoints) Midslots: 7 (Sensorbooster + Tank + (Cap Recharge)) Lowslots: 5 (DC2 + Damage Mods + Extra EHP/Cap Recharge) "Ruppie ain't no puppie."
Destructor1792 Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.02 09:31:00 - [422] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Unfortunately, this is precisely the sort of thinking that ended up gimping the Nag with one missing mid/low. The Nag, which requires five highs to support its split weapons and siege mod, was only given 11 mids and lows. Having an additional high slot which was supposed to bring the Nags damage to parity with the others should not be penalized with the removal of a mid/low. What should have happened, and what needs to happen is the dreads need to be balanced around the numbers of mids and lows they have. If a hypothetical dread (lets say Jove for discussions sake) had seven turrets and a siege mod (eight highs), all of which do a similar amount of damage as the current dreads, should this dread only have eight mids and lows combined? Having more or less high slots is not a bonus; having more mids or lows is. As it currently stands, the Nag is the only dreadnaught with fewer than 12 mids and lows. Any fixes need to take into consideration that the balance should not be aimed at total number of slots; rather, it should be aimed at the number of mids and lows. Every dread ought to have 12, regardless of the number of high slots (assuming equal damage). Which is why I suggested removing the Citadel from this ship - and not forgetting the base stats - lowest HP's & lowest cap all all Dreads. Capitals are not like your standard ships & shouldn't be treated as such.. and the Nag requires the extra slots dues to: A: useless stats on the Arties B: Ability to bring their tanks in line with other Dreads. Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz It's overpowered because you've added 125% damage at Dreadnaught Level V. That's not a bit extra, that is a huge amount extra. This translates into five effective turrets, which is about 1.25 more than any other dread. You are aware that it's only got 2 guns fitted and nothing more ?? The damage bonus counters the loss of the citadels (which are a joke as they currently are!) Now instead of screaming Blue murder, a simple "hmm.. 25% damage seems a bit much.. maybe 20% as you lose the launchers" type of reply would have been a better response?? Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Apparently you're the one who doesn't understand capitals. The two most common uses of dreads are to a.) shoot POSes and b.) shoot other dreads. In both situations, you'll be in siege, which means you aren't going anywhere. Now POSes don't move on their own (last time I checked), and if you're shooting other dreads, that means they're sieged as well. Which would, of course, mean...there is no transversal, so tracking isn't an issue. Unfortunately, the minute you are bumped (which happens quite alot), Projectiles miss.. and they miss bad!! And you have also missed out Carriers/ moms / Titans.. these all (shock, horror) move so tracking is more important than you think.. If it wasn't, all Cap guns wouldn't need tracking!! To assume that you're only ever going to fight against other Dreads & POS's is a pretty short sighted view imo. Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz I disagree with this statement. Allow me to introduce you to the Stabber, Cyclone, Hurricane, Tempest and Mael, all of which have perfectly valid shield tanked fits. This, of course, doesn't include the T2 ships, which you rightly pointed out tend to shield tank. So why was shield tanking bad, then exactly? This comment sums up pretty much my orginal thought that alot of comments here are by people that don't fly these ships or PVP.. Shield tanks + PVP = bad!! Enough posts on the forum as to why so no need to repeat. Stabber is the only original ship to shield tank (although i say that very loosely) BC's & mael were later ships introduced to the game.. and the Pest shield tanking?? hehe.. Fleet pest maybe but even then, for PvP most mid slots are used up on other things. That's why ya dont see many shield tank fits (and why caldari pilots are having a good ol' gripe atm!) and i'm out of space!! rofl ______________________________________ Bringing The Fun Back [gold]I Have No Fear, That's your Problem[/go
Admiral Frools The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.02 09:31:00 - [423] Edited by: Admiral Frools on 02/05/2009 09:36:24 Originally by: FugginNutz 2. Split weapons are . a. Extra training time for two separate capital weapon systems. -Using two weapon systems requires nearly double the training time to be effective. Even though many Minnie pilots have decent missile skills because of their sub-capital split weapon ships, requiring pilots who don't to train for missiles to achieve similar performance is inequitable and should be changed. Even though the Moros gets a drone bonus, every capital uses drones (mostly sentries), so there isn't a large disparity among them in this regard. b. Split weapons and damage mods. -Split weapon systems require two different types of damage modules to increase the effectiveness of their weapons. Whereas the Moros, Revelation, and Phoenix can simply use three of their low slots for their homogenous weapon systems, the Naglfar would have to devote the entire low slot rack to damage mods to receive comparable increases in performance. This is further compounded by the missing slot mentioned above. c. Split weapons and tanking. -Because of the issue with split weapons and damage mods, the Naglfar would be forced to shield tank because of the complete use of its low slots. Even were we to not use six damage mods (resulting in a lower damage output than other dreads), we would still only have four primary slots for tanking (after you add a sensor booster in the mids). This results in a lower burst tank than the Phoenix, while still retaining the Naglfar's lack of EHP when compared to other dreads. d. Split weapons and primaries. -Because of the issues Citadel torpedoes have (a separate matter entirely), torpedo users frequently have to shoot separate primaries in order to effectively apply damage before the target dies. With a split weapon system, Naglfars are forced to either a.) double task and shoot two primaries with different weapon systems to effectively apply damage, or b.) write off a large part (up to half of their damage) by shooting the same primary with both weapon systems and run the risk of none of their torpedoes connecting because the target has died before they've arrived. e. Split weapons and tactics. -Again, this is an issue which affects the Phoenix and the Naglfar because it is an issue with Citadel torpedoes. The Naglfar can be setup to snipe; however, it will be the second least effective dread in this role (second only to the Phoenix). This is due to the fact that Citadel torpedoes are for all intents and purposes, short range weapons. While it may be possible to increase the range to a point where sniping is feasible, traveling the 100km to the target would probably take the entire 10m siege cycle. Due to this, the Naglfar only has two effective weapons when attempting this tactic. Quoting the reason why even with these proposed changes the naglrofl will still suck horribly. Just because a ship can fit missiles and guns doesn't mean it should be FORCED to by limiting it to 2 hardpoints / 2 launcher points. Forget about the proposed changes - leave the damage / etc as it is, just give it -1 high, +1 mid or low, 3 turret / launcher hardpoints, BITE THE BULLET AND FIX THE MODEL FOR AN EXTRA TURRET SLOT, and finally give minmatar a dread that doesn't take an eternity to train for and still has the choice to fit whichever weapon system it likes without gimping itself with 6 damage mods.
Nuuskur Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.02 09:55:00 - [424] Whoever designed the Nagflar model must be really damn pleased. Despite it being almost universally regarded as the worst dreadnought by far it's still flown by a lot of pilots solely due to its looks. What other ships in eve can claim that?
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 10:11:00 - [425] Originally by: Destructor1792 Which is why I suggested removing the Citadel from this ship - and not forgetting the base stats - lowest HP's & lowest cap all all Dreads. Capitals are not like your standard ships & shouldn't be treated as such.. and the Nag requires the extra slots dues to: A: useless stats on the Arties B: Ability to bring their tanks in line with other Dreads. You're missing the point. CCP originally tried to justify giving the Nag only 11 mids + lows because it had one more high than the rest of the dreads. You are trying to reverse the logic by saying if we remove two of those highs, we can add two somewhere else. It's not supposed to work like that. The dreads were balanced around having 12, and only 12 mids + lows, which is part of the reason the Nag is currently suffering. By giving the Nag 13 mids + lows, you've moved it from one end of the balance spectrum to the other. Originally by: Destructor1792 You are aware that it's only got 2 guns fitted and nothing more ?? The damage bonus counters the loss of the citadels (which are a joke as they currently are!) Now instead of screaming Blue murder, a simple "hmm.. 25% damage seems a bit much.. maybe 20% as you lose the launchers" type of reply would have been a better response?? Yes, I'm aware you only had two turrets fitted. You seem to have blown up my response to your ideas into a bigger thing than it was. I never cried "blue murder", I simply said your ideas were overpowered. You're the one who has come in here raging at me for disagreeing with you. Originally by: Destructor1792 Unfortunately, the minute you are bumped (which happens quite alot), Projectiles miss.. and they miss bad!! And you have also missed out Carriers/ moms / Titans.. these all (shock, horror) move so tracking is more important than you think.. If it wasn't, all Cap guns wouldn't need tracking!! To assume that you're only ever going to fight against other Dreads & POS's is a pretty short sighted view imo. (Old) Quad 3500mm Arty Base Tracking: 0.005626 Dual 1000mm Railgun Base Tracking: 0.0048125 (New) Quad 3500mm Arty Base Tracking: 0.0045 Moros pilots never seem to have issues tracking caps or POSes in any of the hotdrops that I go on, I'm not sure why you seem to be having such a hard time tracking. While the new changes may make tracking more problematic, I don't think the difference between base rates is enough to warrant being worried at this stage. Originally by: Destructor1792 This comment sums up pretty much my orginal thought that alot of comments here are by people that don't fly these ships or PVP.. Shield tanks + PVP = bad!! Enough posts on the forum as to why so no need to repeat. Stabber is the only original ship to shield tank (although i say that very loosely) BC's & mael were later ships introduced to the game.. and the Pest shield tanking?? hehe.. Fleet pest maybe but even then, for PvP most mid slots are used up on other things. That's why ya dont see many shield tank fits (and why caldari pilots are having a good ol' gripe atm!) You have no idea who my main is. I'm obviously using an alt. For all you know my main could be a 40m SP completely Minmatar specced character. Furthermore, some of the best Minmatar PvP ships shield tank: Rapier, Sabre, Stabber, Vagabond, Sleipnir and Claymore just to name a few. You seem to have an irrational dislike for shield tanks in PvP, all the while ignoring the fact that they can be just as good as armor tanked ships. Stop trying to counter the poster, and counter the arguments instead.
Destructor1792 Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.02 10:30:00 - [426] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Stuff Enough with the quotes.. takes bloody ages to respond!! Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz You have no idea who my main is. I'm obviously using an alt. For all you know my main could be a 40m SP completely Minmatar specced character. Furthermore, some of the best Minmatar PvP ships shield tank: Rapier, Sabre, Stabber, Vagabond, Sleipnir and Claymore just to name a few. You seem to have an irrational dislike for shield tanks in PvP, all the while ignoring the fact that they can be just as good as armor tanked ships. Stop trying to counter the poster, and counter the arguments instead. Hehehe.. THE CS's do indeed shield tank.. Rest use a buffer tank NOT an active tank!!! With That above quote, I see your need to post under an Alt But using an Alt In a thread which is going to have a significant impact on Capital ships?????? But without getting into a Handbag at 10 paces match, No more replies to you, regardless of whether your ideas/arguments are constructive or not!! Either post with your main or not at all.. stop trying to derail threads with stupid alts As to the other Op about 3 Projectile hard points.. Afraid the devs have stated that's not an option so we're either stuck with a split system or a reduction in high slots & boost to the ship bonuses to counter said change. ______________________________________ Bringing The Fun Back [gold]I Have No Fear, That's your Problem[/go
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 10:46:00 - [427] Originally by: Destructor1792 Enough with the quotes.. takes bloody ages to respond!! Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz You have no idea who my main is. I'm obviously using an alt. For all you know my main could be a 40m SP completely Minmatar specced character. Furthermore, some of the best Minmatar PvP ships shield tank: Rapier, Sabre, Stabber, Vagabond, Sleipnir and Claymore just to name a few. You seem to have an irrational dislike for shield tanks in PvP, all the while ignoring the fact that they can be just as good as armor tanked ships. Stop trying to counter the poster, and counter the arguments instead. Hehehe.. THE CS's do indeed shield tank.. Rest use a buffer tank NOT an active tank!!! With That above quote, I see your need to post under an Alt But using an Alt In a thread which is going to have a significant impact on Capital ships?????? But without getting into a Handbag at 10 paces match, No more replies to you, regardless of whether your ideas/arguments are constructive or not!! Either post with your main or not at all.. stop trying to derail threads with stupid alts Or, maybe I can't post with my main because he's banned. Maybe you should focus less on who is posting the ideas and more on the ideas themselves.
Lexa Hellfury Incura	Posted - 2009.05.02 10:55:00 - [428] lol, this thread is pretty entertaining to read based solely on Destructor1792's raging, barely coherent rants
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.02 10:56:00 - [429] He's an alt but I am not. Your idea is terrible. Quote: All dreads have the same number of slots so learn how to count!! 2 have been taken from the highs and placed in the mid & low... which still adds up to 16 slots! And how's it overpowered??? 2 slots for fitting weapons instead of 4, so double the damage & tracking (plus a bit extra) to bring it up to par with the others. I mean, you are aware that even stationary, projectiles still miss (or do other odd things!!) You have to count effective high slots and your proposed bonuses would put it at around four effective gun slots with one extra mid/low than all the other dreads. And that makes it broken. It should have 12 mids + lows like all the others to be balanced rather than the 11 it has now. I support the shield tanked 6/6 or 7/5 nag ideas, it wouldn't have the sustainability of an armor tank but better burst tank with three damage mods balances that out.
Destructor1792 Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.05.02 11:03:00 - [430] Originally by: Lexa Hellfury lol, this thread is pretty entertaining to read based solely on Destructor1792's raging, barely coherent rants Cheers Lack of caffiene & sleep does have that effect on me Will turn the rant mode off for later ______________________________________ Bringing The Fun Back [gold]I Have No Fear, That's your Problem[/go

Ound	Posted - 2009.05.02 11:09:00 - [431] Edited by: Ound on 02/05/2009 11:14:41 Edited by: Ound on 02/05/2009 11:14:29 I really like the idea to make it Marauder like. -2 High Slot , +1 Low Slot and + 1 Med Slot ( Optional due to Marauderish bonus ). Naglfar gets bonus to either Capital Projectile Turret damage or Citadel Torpedo damage 100% so it has 3 high slots , 1 used for Siege Module and other 2 for Torps or Guns and this would be its special ability to change weapon systems and be unique. It would allow new Naglfar pilots to avoid pain in the a** training for both weapon systems and let the current pilots be able to field both weapon types in different situations. As far as I know Citadels are great at POS Bashing and you mainly see Pheonixes dealing good bunch of damage. Boost a little bit Citadels and a lot Capital Projectiles and it should be fine. P.S. Sounds like it could instapop any sub-capital but prenerfed Arty tracking will do the trick tbh.
steave435 Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.02 11:34:00 - [432] Edited by: steave435 on 02/05/2009 11:34:17 One of the main complaints about split weapons seem to be that you have to fit more damage mods to get the same effect, so giving it some extra lows+mids compared to other dreads might actually achieve the versatility that CCP want it to have: It can either use those extra slots to fit a better tank then other dreads can (edit: but with lower dps), or it can use the slots to fit an average tank leaving enough slots to fit the damage mods that it need to match other dreads. Combine that with a boost to citadel torpedo speed and explosion velocity. Thoughts?
Zykor	Posted - 2009.05.02 11:45:00 - [433] No thats not the only complaint about split weapon systems,thats the least of the important one: 1.YOU HAVE TO TRAIN DOUBLE TO EVEN GET THE SAME PERFORMANCE AS SOMEONE WITH A 1 WEAPON SYSTEM SHIP,EVEN THEN YOUR SHIP WILL STILL BE LESS PERFORMANT THEN THE 1 WEAPON SYSTEM ONE. (in caps for outlining the most important) 2.You have to carry 2 different ammos ,thus reducing space and in combat time before needing to reload Those are the most important.
MarKand Wasteland Explorers	Posted - 2009.05.02 12:45:00 - [434] Why cant you just follow your own design ? ? You did design the Nag as a dualweapon form, just add the dual bonuses. It is in ALL of our ships, the dual weapon, but the single bonus. So, protip of the day. Nag gets DMG + RoF for guns AND dmg/exprad/whatever + RoF for missiles. how can it be so hard to follow your own design ? Dual weapons require dual bonuses. Nuff said. /MarKand Please save Matar so we can play at the same level as the others races in BS+ sizes \o/
Erika Strada Minmatar Black Scorpion Navy DEEP SPACE CONSORTIUM.	Posted - 2009.05.02 13:09:00 - [435] Edited by: Erika Strada on 02/05/2009 13:12:28 Actually guys it takes Mim three times as long to train. Cause most of us started out thinking our caps where great in the when we got started (we were such noobs believing CCP knew what was right. And would make our caps Do supreme damage since its kinca hard speed tanking them.). Then the day came after spending all that time training multiple weapons systems, multiple tanking (including comp skills for both), plus support systems. (Boy Wasted SP is fun!) Specially no matter how you much you trained and how expensive your mods are on your Nag The ship design is just crap! to say the most for a dread, And is sub par to any other dread in the game. And what makes Dread flying 3 times Harder to do for us mim pilots. Is Most of us spend another 6 months training to fly another races cap ships. Yay for versitility. Easy way to fix a majority of the Nags problems is to move its high slot to a medium slot, increase turrets to 3, give it at least 220 more cpu. leave the bonuses as they are. bingo problem solved. at least it would be alot better then its current state. Sorry for grammar english is a second language to me.
DigitalCommunist November Corporation	Posted - 2009.05.02 13:38:00 - [436] Originally by: CCP Chronotis It would definitely be good to open a thread in the Features and Ideas forum to discuss longer term and larger scale high level ideas I'm assuming right now most of the 0.0 overhaul is gonna come in this summer's expansion. How long do I have to put down my ideas before everything is locked in, in terms of code freeze? And what is the main focus, just POS, sovereignty? Or is a larger capital overhaul part of that? Not trying to fish info out of you, but I don't want to carpet bomb everything 0.0 related if only a tiny fraction is getting used.
Rakshasa Taisab Caldari Sane Industries Inc. United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.02 14:06:00 - [437] Originally by: Zykor 2.You have to carry 2 different ammos ,thus reducing space and in combat time before needing to reload Those are the most important. Lack of thinking leads to stupid comments. Besides, these changes even _lower_ the ammo space requirement.
Romulus Maximus Reikoku KenZoku	Posted - 2009.05.02 14:10:00 - [438] The Naglfail is a joke. Always has been. It should, in theory, be THE best dread. The fact you must spend so much extra time training for its dual weapons. Surely, this handicap should reap some rewards ? The fact youve gone for the hard choice, taken the extra time, should mean your now in a ship better than the other dreads ? No ? Ok, at least its as good as the other dreads then. Oh, thats the problem, its not. Its damaage is weak, its tank is weak. On the field, its one of 2 things.. Primary, because they die so fast, or ignored, because they do so little damage. As long as it uses dual weapon platform, it will always be sub par. Make it a pure turret platform. One weapon system, like every other dread. Even then, it will have a medicore tank. BUT atleast it wont be as useless as it is now. Pilots could be comforted by the fact it does decent damage. So wouldnt be 'as' worried abouts its down falls. If making an extra turret is too hard, dont, leave it as 2 turrets with Tempest style bonuses. There will no doubt be some whiners, who have trained Citadel Torps for the Nag. But i have a Nag pilot, so i speak from experiance, and i can honestly say, id rather never uses those sp i have in Ctadel Torps again. If it meant the Nag got made useful. Anything other than swapping it to turret based is merely a band aid, something to try and hide the fact its as useless as it is.
Voculus The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.02 16:24:00 - [439] PC Gamer recently interviewd the BLizzard Art Director, Samwise Didier, about their new Starcraft II models. PC Gamer:"How long does it take your team to create one of these new models?" Blizzard Art Director:"We have about two or three guys who work on any one model at any one time. So we'll have a guy model it in a couple days, we'll have the texture guy texture it in a few days, and then we'll have the animator animate it in a day or two. Our animations in this game aren't very detailed - all they have to do is run, shoot, and die. So it takes a little bit over a week and a halm and that's on a simple unit." Well, CCP, there you have it. If it takes you 6-12 MONTHS to tweak a ship model, you're doing it wrong. _________________________________________________________ Give me three turrets on the Naglfar, or give me death!
To mare	Posted - 2009.05.02 16:52:00 - [440] as many already said: 4 high (2 projectile + 2 torp hardpoint and siege) 5 mid 7 low (or 7mid 5low) double bonus to projectile weapons so he can obtain 4 effective turrets at dread lv5 (not gonna happen in most case) and unbonused citadel. will have a comparable tank to the others dread, and if the boost XL arty like OP said will have a dps very close to others dread but a bit under at dread lv4 but a slight advantage at lv5. the idea it give it the same effective turret of others dread but with only 2 weapons, so your damage rely more on your skill than others dread but at lv5 (if someone want to do it) you get the advantage over the others dread of the unbonused citadel. for the people who wonder a unbonused citadel give 500ish dps a fair advantage for who have to train a e new whole weapon system.

Slave 2739FKZ	Posted - 2009.05.02 16:58:00 - [441] Originally by: CCP Whisper 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. Do you want to listen at all? Honestlly? Plenty of suggestions that involve no failgar model rework and this all you come with. The more I read about how CCP works etc. the more I think they ar ein need of some serious competition.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 17:00:00 - [442] Originally by: To mare as many already said: 4 high (2 projectile + 2 torp hardpoint and siege) 5 mid 7 low (or 7mid 5low) double bonus to projectile weapons so he can obtain 4 effective turrets at dread lv5 (not gonna happen in most case) and unbonused citadel. will have a comparable tank to the others dread, and if the boost XL arty like OP said will have a dps very close to others dread but a bit under at dread lv4 but a slight advantage at lv5. the idea it give it the same effective turret of others dread but with only 2 weapons, so your damage rely more on your skill than others dread but at lv5 (if someone want to do it) you get the advantage over the others dread of the unbonused citadel. for the people who wonder a unbonused citadel give 500ish dps a fair advantage for who have to train a e new whole weapon system. If you give it the ability to fit two turrets and a missile launcher, you've just made sure that everyone still has to train for citadels because they'll be expected to fit one in that high slot. Just leave it at three highs, axe the missiles entirely and be done with it.
To mare	Posted - 2009.05.02 17:15:00 - [443] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: To mare as many already said: 4 high (2 projectile + 2 torp hardpoint and siege) 5 mid 7 low (or 7mid 5low) double bonus to projectile weapons so he can obtain 4 effective turrets at dread lv5 (not gonna happen in most case) and unbonused citadel. will have a comparable tank to the others dread, and if the boost XL arty like OP said will have a dps very close to others dread but a bit under at dread lv4 but a slight advantage at lv5. the idea it give it the same effective turret of others dread but with only 2 weapons, so your damage rely more on your skill than others dread but at lv5 (if someone want to do it) you get the advantage over the others dread of the unbonused citadel. for the people who wonder a unbonused citadel give 500ish dps a fair advantage for who have to train a e new whole weapon system. If you give it the ability to fit two turrets and a missile launcher, you've just made sure that everyone still has to train for citadels because they'll be expected to fit one in that high slot. Just leave it at three highs, axe the missiles entirely and be done with it. i think the point of this thread its not to reduce the skillplan for the nag but make those sp worth something. minmatar never been the easy way.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.02 19:48:00 - [444] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: To mare as many already said: 4 high (2 projectile + 2 torp hardpoint and siege) 5 mid 7 low (or 7mid 5low) double bonus to projectile weapons so he can obtain 4 effective turrets at dread lv5 (not gonna happen in most case) and unbonused citadel. will have a comparable tank to the others dread, and if the boost XL arty like OP said will have a dps very close to others dread but a bit under at dread lv4 but a slight advantage at lv5. the idea it give it the same effective turret of others dread but with only 2 weapons, so your damage rely more on your skill than others dread but at lv5 (if someone want to do it) you get the advantage over the others dread of the unbonused citadel. for the people who wonder a unbonused citadel give 500ish dps a fair advantage for who have to train a e new whole weapon system. If you give it the ability to fit two turrets and a missile launcher, you've just made sure that everyone still has to train for citadels because they'll be expected to fit one in that high slot. Just leave it at three highs, axe the missiles entirely and be done with it. The was the point. Minmatar have always needed to train more, but this gives you the option to go more Missiles or more projectiles depending on what you are doing (POS bashing or Cap killing). To offset this advantage you have to train both Torps and Projectiles. This is just like the Huginn and Typhoon. And with the Hound you would have T2 Torps anyways. The big boost will be in the extra low slot to put on a tank comparable to other dreads. I think this would be a 'fair' buff and fits in with how Matar works.
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2009.05.02 19:59:00 - [445] sure... it's an "improvement"... some extra speed/agility and less signature/weight while we're at it? anything short of a tanking bonus will leave you with no other option but to redistribute slots. no sweet-talk about arties can blur the fact of minnie HP, cap, electronics, you-name-it combined with the least amount of slots at either end. - putting the gist back into logistics
Elaron Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.05.02 22:36:00 - [446] Edited by: Elaron on 02/05/2009 22:36:57 Originally by: Voculus PC Gamer recently interviewd the BLizzard Art Director, Samwise Didier, about their new Starcraft II models. The rest is cut as it's a complete failure of the person quoted to understand things. I'm sorry, but you do not comprehend a number of things: 1) Starcraft 2 models are less complex. 2) CCP has a different art pipeline to Blizzard. 3) The Naglfar model is fine as it is. 4) What is being discussed is a quick and dirty fix to try and bring the Naglfar more into line with the other Dreadnoughts. For such a fix; and with a more general reworking of capital mechanics, including more work on all Dreadnoughts, coming in the future; a model change is inappropriate. 5) The artists and graphics programmers that would be involved with a remodel have better things to do. 6) By focussing on the model, you're completely failing to contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion, adding worthless noise to the thread.
Voculus The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.02 22:58:00 - [447] The model is important, because the most effective solution is to strip the launchers and add a 3rd turret. You might try reading some of this thread, and come back after you have a grasp on the discussion going on here. _________________________________________________________ Give me three turrets on the Naglfar, or give me death!
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.02 23:29:00 - [448] Edited by: Marcellus Corteaz on 02/05/2009 23:29:44 Originally by: prefectro The was the point. Minmatar have always needed to train more, but this gives you the option to go more Missiles or more projectiles depending on what you are doing (POS bashing or Cap killing). To offset this advantage you have to train both Torps and Projectiles. This is just like the Huginn and Typhoon. And with the Hound you would have T2 Torps anyways. The big boost will be in the extra low slot to put on a tank comparable to other dreads. I think this would be a 'fair' buff and fits in with how Matar works. Ahh, yes. Having "options", sounds a lot like versatility to me. I could've sworn I've seen something posted about why versatility and dreadnaughts don't work together. Oh well, must've just been me.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.02 23:54:00 - [449] Originally by: Voculus The model is important, because the most effective solution is to strip the launchers and add a 3rd turret. You might try reading some of this thread, and come back after you have a grasp on the discussion going on here. That is not the most effective. Solutions have already been given that would give the same effect to what you want WITHOUT changing the model. And are you not the one that thinks a model can be created (from scratch to production) in a couple weeks? Maybe days? You are the one that needs does not have a grasp on the situation. You think you know more about creating a model then CCP does? Give me a break.
Mestoth Minmatar Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.03 01:09:00 - [450] Originally by: Pallidum Treponema The problems with the Nag is several. 1. It has too little CPU to be an effective shield tanker. If you want to shield tank a Nag, you need a co-proc. 2. It has too few midslots to be an effective shield tanker. With a sensor booster being essential on any fleet dread, this leaves it with a four slot tank. This is not sufficient to bring it in-line with other dreads in terms of EHP. 3. It cannot armor tank without sacrificing its DPS. A four-slot armor tank plus damage control leaves it with a single slot for a damage mod. 4. It has a mixed main armament, meaning that to match other dreads, it needs to fit twice as many damage mods. 5. It's main armament is... pathetic. To emphasise point 5, let me take current numbers: An ArtyNag with max skills does 1149 DPS from its artillery before counting damage mods. This includes a 37.5% RoF bonus, which equals an increase of 57.5% of total DPS (1/0.625 = ~1.575) A BeamNag using Giga Beam lasers does 1235 DPS before counting damage mods. This is WITHOUT any bonuses from the ship. Yes, that's right. Beams on a Naglfar do more DPS without bonuses than arties do WITH bonuses. The proposed changes to bonuses and guns does increase Arty DPS by approximately 22%. This brings us to 1405 DPS with shipbonuses at maximum, finally making the ArtyNag a better option than the BeamNag. HOWEVER, if the Nag's pilot skills are only at lv4 for minmatar dreadnought (this is the skill level most pilots play at), the ArtyNag drops to 1311 DPS for its artillery. It's still more than the unbonused beams, but only 6% more. What we still have is a dreadnought that has to choose between having comparable DPS but less tank (instant primary), or a comparable tank but less DPS than any other dread. We still have a dread that with it's 10% DPS per level bonus for its signature weapon, still only outdamages an UNBONUSED giga beam laser by 6% for most pilots. Yes, the proposed changes do increase the Naglfar's DPS but it still totally misses the main issue. It's a poorly designed shup from the start. Mixed weapon systems don't work. The fitting options don't work. You're stuck with a ship that forces you to pick the lesser evil rather than build a setup that is actually good. Now, what I propose is the following: Drop the Naglfar's highslots to four rather than five and give it 3 turret slots and 3 missile slots. This, coupled with suitable bonuses, allows it to EITHER be a missile boat OR a gunboat. Fix arties to be comparable to other race's guns. I don't want to need 60% of damage bonuses to match a vanilla giga laser. These two changes are all that are needed. I'm sure a lot of Naggy pilots will agree. I'd be more than happy to run a four-slot shieldtank if that means I can drop three gyros or BCUs in my lows for a sweet DPS, rather than having to waste five lowslots worth of damage mods just to keep up. Bottom line is: The naglfar is poorly designed from the start. Swapping bonuses and grid/cpu around won't help it. Fix its weapon systems. That's the big issue with the ship. Follow this guys advice. Its like you tried to make a car that could run on LPG OR petrolium, but instead forced it to use BOTH simultainously, instantly destroying the benefit of using either and making it worse!. At least with this proposal, at least you can run a decent tank AND have a damage mod, unlike currently! And yes, I am a naglfar pilot. and Yes, i DO have High level missile skills now, so i would be ****ed but I would rather have a ship that WORKED as opposed to not. and at the very least the missile skills MOSTLY become useful if i decide to become an empire pubbie and mission grind in a CNR :P

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.03 01:23:00 - [451] The training issue is irrelevant! Because alsmot all minmatar chars already have torps at level 4 because of typhoon and other missile skills because of other ships. So the training time extra is 12 days more.. NOT RELEVANT! Specially when you consider moros also is obligated basically to train drones up to perfection since they are half its DPS. No the problem is NOT training and anyone that says that has no clue at all. The problem is BOTH damage and range mods escalation combined with fact that naglfar already starts with 1 less slot.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.03 01:37:00 - [452] Guys, for the 19th time, you're NOT going to get your 3 turret slots. It involves a model remake (despite all the genuises here who apparently know how to run an MMORPG and can tell CCP how to fix their process), and it would be too long and too complicated. Since we can't get 3 turrets, what we can get is a marauder-like role bonus (or a really high damage bonus per level) to give the same effective damage. Continuing on, another main problem is what kind of tank it fits. At present, due to having too few mids and lows for either a shield or armor tank, the naglfail sucks. This should be rectified by bringing it in-line with all other dreads in terms of total mid and low slots. Personally, I like armor tanking. I think the nag is an extension of a typhoon. Given that Minmatar as a race has 4 ships total which active shield-tank (cyclone, command ships, and maelstrom), it would make sense to me that the Nag should tank armor as that is in line with almost all other ships of the race. For these reasons, I think the nag should armor tank, and as a result IMO it should have 3 highs, 5 mids, 7 lows. This slot layout puts it somewhere between a rev and a moros for tanking ability. Finally, because many pilots have already trained for capital torps and the supports (which only have use on two other minmatar ships - the hound and the typhoon), I think a good solution would be to make the nag have 3 highs with 2 projectile and 2 missile hardpoints. If a significant boost is given to torps to make them viable for dreads (at present, they're only good at hitting completely stationary targets), then I can see Nag pilots really liking that they can have the option of either projectiles or torps, based on a possible strategic situations. For example: Say the torp boost gives them more damage but shorter range (say, 150km). And the artillery boost gives them more alpha, but lesser damage and longer range (say, 225km). A nag pilot would then have the option of two different, but equally viable, strategies to fit in his high slots. Combined with his ability to fit a decent armor tank (7 lows, remember), the nag is suddenly a very worthwhile ship that is also very versatile - people might actually want to fly it again for reasons beyond verticalness. In conclusion, I re-iterate (with minor changes) what I've suggested for the past few pages: Quote: Naglfar: 3 highs, 2 projectile 2 missile 5 mids 7 lows Role bonus: 100% damage to projectile damage, 100% damage to missile damage 10% to projectile falloff per level, 10% explosion radius missiles per level The projectile bonus enhances artillery usefulness (moar range!) and the torp one enhances its short-range damage ability (moar powar!). Boom. Suddenly you have a flexible, viable, armor-tanking dreadnought that gives its pilots options and won't instantly die because it might not be instantly primaried. It won't be the highest dps, but it won't be the worst. It won't be the best tank, but it won't be the worst. It will be a viable alternative dreadnought which holds its own and doesn't suck. There's no reason to make this ship a projectile-only boat. Pilots can easily fly it that way if they choose, but we shouldn't limit them.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.03 01:54:00 - [453] Originally by: Seishi Maru The training issue is irrelevant! Because alsmot all minmatar chars already have torps at level 4 because of typhoon and other missile skills because of other ships. So the training time extra is 12 days more.. NOT RELEVANT! Specially when you consider moros also is obligated basically to train drones up to perfection since they are half its DPS. No the problem is NOT training and anyone that says that has no clue at all. The problem is BOTH damage and range mods escalation combined with fact that naglfar already starts with 1 less slot. Whats the difference between level 4 support skills and level 5? (Hint: it's more than 12 days.)
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.03 02:31:00 - [454] Dear CCP Please introduce the 10000MN MWD and let Bumpfar do what it was meant to. Thanks in advance. ---
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2009.05.03 04:35:00 - [455] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Dear CCP Please introduce the 10000MN MWD and let Bumpfar do what it was meant to. Thanks in advance. 10GN Mwds sound better Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 19Apr09
Medidranda Livoga	Posted - 2009.05.03 05:41:00 - [456] Originally by: isdisco3 long post I prefer 2 high \| 2 turret and 2 missile slots myself with big damage bonus for both weapon systems, if you¦re going to fit for a role then it better be focused role. It¦s still going to be unable to use that missile when long range combat is called for to any effect unless CCP makes torps much faster. Torps should be most damaging capital weapon anyway given their limitations. Phoenix has fine tank but is not really better at killing pos and is terrible at long range fight. If things remain as they are more or less it should outdamage other dreads against poses at least... Maybe it could be given rof bonus instead of kinetic bonus if capital cruises or something aren¦t coming.
LiquidSteele Canadian Imperial Armaments Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.03 06:35:00 - [457] The emotion in this thread is pretty interesting, think you can see how many of us have been the butt of jokes by our corp mates in.. well.. any other dread for so many years. Lots of good suggestions and even though fairly late, good to see CCP listening and taking suggestions about a ship that looks so cool yet sucks so hard.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.03 07:06:00 - [458] Could CCP update the OP with their other ideas or even changes based on the responses from the players, the same way you did with some of the other re-balance posts? Right now you are keeping us in the dark, the same way you did when you would post change ideas via a blog and the blog would never change. You mentioned you liked some of the ideas posted, well share it! Or are you done sharing and will just give us whatever you decide?
Graalum Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.03 07:41:00 - [459] Edited by: Graalum on 03/05/2009 07:42:56 add capital cruise: instaboost to naglfar and pheonix. missiles are the only capital weapon lacking a short range/long range variant, and this should be addressed, rather than trying and failing to have the same weapon system do both. of course more needs to be done, but it would at least make them less irrelevant ideally imo: add capital cruise 10% less damage than current cits's 3750m/s 30sec flight time redo cits 15% (?) more damage (cits should be top dps capital weapon) 1250 m/s 30 second flight time naglfar 4/6/6 3 turret/launcher (real versatility) 5% rof, 5% damage cpu + grid to fit shield tank + guns w/o fitting mods bring arty/ac in line with other guns of course this could massively increase the amount of sp's to fly minmatar capitals
Graalum Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.03 07:47:00 - [460] seriously though there are lots of circumstances where you can make the argument that its better to fit cruise t2 than cits on a dread

Mohenna	Posted - 2009.05.03 07:55:00 - [461] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Dear CCP Please introduce the 10000MN MWD and let Bumpfar do what it was meant to. Thanks in advance. /thread lol
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.03 08:06:00 - [462] Originally by: Graalum Edited by: Graalum on 03/05/2009 07:42:56 add capital cruise: instaboost to naglfar and pheonix. missiles are the only capital weapon lacking a short range/long range variant, and this should be addressed, rather than trying and failing to have the same weapon system do both. of course more needs to be done, but it would at least make them less irrelevant ideally imo: add capital cruise 10% less damage than current cits's 3750m/s 30sec flight time redo cits 15% (?) more damage (cits should be top dps capital weapon) 1250 m/s 30 second flight time naglfar 4/6/6 3 turret/launcher (real versatility) 5% rof, 5% damage cpu + grid to fit shield tank + guns w/o fitting mods bring arty/ac in line with other guns of course this could massively increase the amount of sp's to fly minmatar capitals Congratulations, you've just made a capital-sized Typhoon. Remind me again how often people use Typhoons in fleets that do the types of things dreads do?
Chssmius Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.03 08:17:00 - [463] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Graalum Edited by: Graalum on 03/05/2009 07:42:56 add capital cruise: instaboost to naglfar and pheonix. missiles are the only capital weapon lacking a short range/long range variant, and this should be addressed, rather than trying and failing to have the same weapon system do both. of course more needs to be done, but it would at least make them less irrelevant ideally imo: add capital cruise 10% less damage than current cits's 3750m/s 30sec flight time redo cits 15% (?) more damage (cits should be top dps capital weapon) 1250 m/s 30 second flight time naglfar 4/6/6 3 turret/launcher (real versatility) 5% rof, 5% damage cpu + grid to fit shield tank + guns w/o fitting mods bring arty/ac in line with other guns of course this could massively increase the amount of sp's to fly minmatar capitals Congratulations, you've just made a capital-sized Typhoon. Remind me again how often people use Typhoons in fleets that do the types of things dreads do? ...:raises hand:... In my defense, I only did it because it was my only ship option at the time. Take The EvE Personality Test today!
something somethingdark	Posted - 2009.05.03 08:23:00 - [464] Originally by: Elaron Edited by: Elaron on 02/05/2009 22:36:57 Originally by: Voculus PC Gamer recently interviewd the BLizzard Art Director, Samwise Didier, about their new Starcraft II models. The rest is cut as it's a complete failure of the person quoted to understand things. I'm sorry, but you do not comprehend a number of things: 1) Starcraft 2 models are less complex. 2) CCP has a different art pipeline to Blizzard. 3) The Naglfar model is fine as it is. 4) What is being discussed is a quick and dirty fix to try and bring the Naglfar more into line with the other Dreadnoughts. For such a fix; and with a more general reworking of capital mechanics, including more work on all Dreadnoughts, coming in the future; a model change is inappropriate. 5) The artists and graphics programmers that would be involved with a remodel have better things to do. 6) By focussing on the model, you're completely failing to contribute anything worthwhile to the discussion, adding worthless noise to the thread. 1) yes (about a weeks worth more work) 2) that shouldnt not matter 3) agree in principle 4) why ? 5) like creating awesome new high polygon shirts for ambulation ? 6) perhaps he did way before and that statement from whisper that it would take them up to a year to change the model was so hilarious he just had to post that ?
Bilaz Minmatar Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.05.03 10:01:00 - [465] Naglfar will always be outgunned by other dreads while being dual-based platform, since on other dreads 1 damage mod does same job as two on naglfar. and for some reason nagl have less low slots that other armor tanked dreads wich leaves him with no place for damage mods or no place for tank. second thing - open eft and fit 2 xl beam lasers on it naglfar. guess what? you end up with more dps that with projectiles. level 5 dread bonused xl projectiles are worse than unbonused lasors. awesome. third point - alpha is overrated. your alpha is only important when ganking someone - in more or less long run dps-boats outrun alpha-boats. thats ofc if you are not fighting with active tanking ships - but active tanking dreads are history now. solutions: 1) leave bonuses for both types projectiles and torpedoes, make naglfar with 4 turret and 4 launcher hardpoints - for player to decide what he wants - heavy (armor) tanked torpedo ship, shield tanked ganking boat or something in-between. 2) give naglfar drone damage bonus - for nagl to be hi-damage boat regardles of fitting but at expence of heavy skill load and drones\torpedo setbacks.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.05.03 11:26:00 - [466] Quote: * Swapping the projectile rate of fire bonus for a 10% projectile damage bonus per level. less reloading is good; that's why beams are so good on a naglfail. Quote: * Increasing the citadel launcher rate of fire bonus to 7.5% per level. More dps and frankly the rof on citadels is slow anyway. At least relative to guns. Quote: * Increasing the base CPU to 770 (+70) * Decreasing the base powergrid to 560,000 (-65,000) Still pretty sure this doesnt make it viable to shield tank with a cpu mod. Which kinda blows. Quote: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) I like it. Quote: The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) Meh? Nobody is silly enough to use ac or even short range dread stuff unless it's basically a trap. Hotdrop close range cyno for example. Quote: Citadel Torpedoes We are looking at an increase to missile velocity and a proportional decrease to flight time. * Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 1,250 m/s (from 750) * Citadel Torpedo flight time decreased to 54 secs (from 90) Same operation range. More speed. So it's good. Citadels moreso fail due to the explosion velocity. Summary: Mostly good changed. I'd personally like there to be 1 more low slot. This gives shield tanking viability and/or extra slot for the tank. Which relatively speaking; certainly is lacking in ehp. Which is why I like the shield tanking option better as it has much more burst ehp. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Hurricane Carter 0ccam's Razor Nexus-Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.03 11:37:00 - [467] Personally, what I don't "get" in this thread is people saying: Let us fit our Naglfar's with either a proper tank & less DPS then the other dreads, or fit proper DPS but with a worse tank then the other dreads. Why must the naglfar still be the laughing stock off the dreadnought class then? Just make it up to par with the other dreads. I don't think we are asking THAT much. We just ask to be on a even playing field, no more, no less.
Destructor1792 Minmatar snotty nosed little kids with nerf guns	Posted - 2009.05.03 11:44:00 - [468] Problem we have is that with 4 races, we get 4 options as to type of style we wish to do combat with (albeit somewhat vague & out of whack on certain classes)! This scales fine up to the BS class (sort of) but not so well when you enter The Capital range. Dreads have 2 roles - Either shooting POS's or shooting other Capitals! They don't ECM or Skirmish.. they just warp (or cyno) in, hit siege, engage weapons, engage tank, & go AFK for 10 mins! Each Dread also has a clear role as to the type of tank CCP envisage us to fit by the slot layouts & HP distribution... until you get to the Naglverticus!! Due to the split weapon system, this complicates things further.. Double the training and then even subpar compared to the rest! Load out the lows with damage mods & you're in a glass cannon with laughable DPS, Slap in a SB and you're left with 4 slots to fit a LoL tank!! Or option 2: Forgo the damage mods, Fit out a semi decent tank but sit in shame as your DPS becomes even more laughable!! So, lets have it so 2 Dreads are absolute killers at POS bashing whilst the other 2 are okay(ish)! And the other 2 are vice versa - Capital killers but mediocre at POS bashing. Nag already slots into the Capital Killer roll and with tweaks to boost its guns tracking/DPS output & either a fix to Citadels or remove them from the Nag, this could become quite an interesting ship to fly again. I'd still like to see the 3/6/7 slot layout and getting shot of citadels! Even a new Seige Mod released which compliments the Cap V Cap warfare (no speed reduction / Double damage & tracking boost / 50% repair amount rep'd / 3 minute timer / double the stront use of the standard siege mod .. or something along those lines). Due to the poor distribution of HPs on this ship, you get the choice to either shield or armour tank with the extra slots actually allowing a decent tank to be fitted. \caffeine mode on standby ______________________________________ Bringing The Fun Back [gold]I Have No Fear, That's your Problem[/go
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.03 16:00:00 - [469] Originally by: Cupdeez Why is this difficult? High slots 1 Siege / 3 Guns (No missiles) Med slots Leave the same Low Slots leave the same Change the power gride and CPU to put inline with the other dreads. Change the DPS to put inline with the other dreads (weather it be volley damage or DPS) By doing that the nag will still be worse off than the other dreads because it still lacks a low or med slot compaird to the others 7 + 5 = 12 for Moros 8 + 4 = 12 for rev and 7 + 5 = 12 for the phoenix. while nag has 6 + 5 = 11
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.03 16:11:00 - [470] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Seishi Maru The training issue is irrelevant! Because alsmot all minmatar chars already have torps at level 4 because of typhoon and other missile skills because of other ships. So the training time extra is 12 days more.. NOT RELEVANT! Specially when you consider moros also is obligated basically to train drones up to perfection since they are half its DPS. No the problem is NOT training and anyone that says that has no clue at all. The problem is BOTH damage and range mods escalation combined with fact that naglfar already starts with 1 less slot. Whats the difference between level 4 support skills and level 5? (Hint: it's more than 12 days.) the only thing you need at level 5 that is not already level 5 to any decent minmatar pilot is torps 5. That is 512 K SP. An optimized character can do it in 12 days (rough mind calcualtion here so might be +- 1 or so days, but general concept remains. And even that is not exclusive usage on the naglfar. So stop whining. training is NOT a problem. I have characters trained for naglfar moros and revelation. The time difference on the training is proportionally MINIMAL. The double the time is pure crap that comes from people that cannot even fly dreads. The time to train for the guns is irrelevant when compared to the navigation skills and tactical weapon reconfiguration. Training for a dread takes several months trainign torps to level 5 is irrelevant when compared to that time.

Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.03 16:12:00 - [471] Below is a copy and paste of my opinions and ideas from december and yes i know alot of this has been said by others just want to put my ideas out there Right now in terms of its class it is completely borked for a start its a minmatar ship but you actually do more dps with lasers fitted than capital projectile guns when fitting a ranged setup even with minmatar dread Lv5 and more damage with blasters than autos with dread Lv4, now while some might think this is not really worthy of note and will point out the benifits of projectiles and downsides of lasers/blasters (cap use) it is pretty much typical of the state of the ship and is extreemly flawed design. For a start the split weapons system is a failure it leaves the naglfar unable to really use any damage mods to a decent effect having to fit 2 just to get the same increase in damage any other dread would with one module (damage mods are a 90% certainty on most dread setups). On top of that the split weapons system is the reason why beam lasers are more effective than artillery and even autocannons suffer when shooting a POS as you need to take into account the fact that the autocannons will be firing in faloff no matter what ammo used even when right on the edge of shields (not the case with pulse lasers). This is due to only a single bonus to projectile turrets which really require 2 to be effective. So ideally the naglfar should be changed to a pure projectile boat with 4 highslots and 3 turret hardpoints with 2 projectile bonuses (one dmage one RoF) alternatively the 5 highslots could be kept but again switching it to 2 turret bonuses with 3 turret hardpoints and 1 launcher (unbonused and therefore damage is pretty poor). If no changes are going to happen to the highslots of the naglfar then at the very least it needs an increase in CPU as it is the naglfar uses 80 more CPU than the moros in its high slots (long range guns vs long range and short vs short fittings 80 CPU both times) while it does have one less low slot than the moros (something i will come to later) the ammount of CPU that one low slot would use maximum would be 40 CPU (and thats generous). Therefore in theory the naglfar should have atleast 40 more CPU than the Moros with skills and probably base however as it is the naglfar has _50_ CPU less base which is just plain wrong and completely out of whack. That ammount of CPU more correctly fits the profile of a 3 turret projectile only ship not a ship using 2 launchers (150 Cpu each) and 2 guns (55 or 70 CPU each).+70 CPU is good but not enough Next as i mentioned earlier the naglfar has 1 less mid slot than the moros infact it has 11 mid/lows total while every other dread has 12 while this was obviously done because the naglfar had an extra highslot it completely missed the point of why that highslot was there. The reason the naglfar had an extra highslot was to compensate (which it does not actually do very well anyway) for the split weapons system and seperated bonuses so that the naglfar would be effectively (but not in actual reality) able to do about the same as the other dreads could do with their 3 gun (moros/rev) or 3 launcher (phoenix) slots. So as such should have been completely ignored when the naglfar was designed. So in my opinion the naglfar should be given its missing slot and since the minmatar capitals were intially designed to be shield tankers (or thats the veiw i hold) it is my belief the naglfar should be given 1 extra midslot. Finally a tiny in my veiw incorrect trait is the drone bay generally minmatar ships have the second largest drone bay the most obvious example of this is that the minmatar carrier and mothership both have second largest bays after the gallente ones therefore it is my belief the naglfar should have a large dronebay than the revelation (250m3) somewhere in the region of 280 m3. However that is a much minor issue and many will see it as a change which is not really needed while atleast some of the others ar
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.03 16:51:00 - [472] Originally by: Seishi Maru the only thing you need at level 5 that is not already level 5 to any decent minmatar pilot is torps 5. That is 512 K SP. An optimized character can do it in 12 days (rough mind calcualtion here so might be +- 1 or so days, but general concept remains. And even that is not exclusive usage on the naglfar. So stop whining. training is NOT a problem. I have characters trained for naglfar moros and revelation. The time difference on the training is proportionally MINIMAL. The double the time is pure crap that comes from people that cannot even fly dreads. The time to train for the guns is irrelevant when compared to the navigation skills and tactical weapon reconfiguration. Training for a dread takes several months trainign torps to level 5 is irrelevant when compared to that time. I can count on one hand the number of Minmatar pilots I know who took the time to completely max out their missile support skills before training for the Nag. (I don't even need the whole hand, either.)
Dakisha Mining Bytes Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.03 17:03:00 - [473] ttl;dnr All this fuss over turrets/models.. Simple solution. Drop the launchers, give a +100% bonus to cap auto/arty damage - strip away the extra slots, reduce grid/cpu appropriately. Tweak as needed. Problem solved.
Altair Mogwa Amok.	Posted - 2009.05.03 17:57:00 - [474] Seishi Maru, using optimized character arguments for specific skill training fails because it doesn't account for the rest of the year in time lost on other areas. The logic in saying training cits and projectiles is equal to other dreads is silly. We all know that nav, AWU/support, and spaceship command skills are all equal for piloting each dread. Amarr: large e.turret V -> capital e.turret IV Gall: large hybrid V -> capital hybrid IV Cal: Torps V -> Cits IV Mintar: Large proj V -> Capital proj IV and Torps 5 -> cits IV So how is that equal? Imagine the phoenix using turrets, when you can fly pretty much every ship in the fleet without training hybrids? If you avoid the phoon, you can be skilled mintar without anything over heavies, The split is so low your couple slots left are all for utility (nuet, RR, cyno, cloak, whatever you pvp with.) Just because people trained the split system because its been imbalanced for so long is not the players fault. It's also not a valid argument to keep it imbalanced. or to try and punish future dread pilots. I doubt CCP wants every cap pilots in a rev, because if the moros wasn't good as well, that's all you'd see.
Elaron Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.05.03 18:47:00 - [475] Originally by: Altair Mogwa So how is that equal? It isn't, but the limited information we have on CCP's balance methodology indicates that training time is not a factor.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.03 21:51:00 - [476] Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 03/05/2009 21:55:06 Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 03/05/2009 21:53:13 Just a thought, since we're so opposed to split weapon systems, but there are a ton of naglfar pilots who have committed valuable training time to it. As a possible change to weapons, I like the 2 high slot marauder idea, but perhaps either you can fit 2 cit's or 2 projectiles, depending on what you're doing. Make it such that citadels would be the ideal pos shooting platform, since they're bad at shooting caps, autocannons for high damage short range hot drops, and artilleries for sniping(and if you're dumb you can do one of each). In other words, reduce the total highs to 3, but still have two turret and 2 missile hardpoints. Citadels should out damage arties(shorter "effective" range), autocannons obviously highest damage makes them better for hot drop situations, and artilleries be the weakest damage of the 3, but with good range. It remains to have some versatility in tanking, shield tank for pos shoot and hot-dropping, freeing lows for damage, and an armor tank for sniping(using meds for range and generally having to take less damage in a sniping situation). You still have your options but they're at the fitting window. Also if we bring their damage in line with the other caps at this point, their tank still needs review, and to be brought up to par with the other dreads. They should probably have the same number of low/med fittings as other dreads, cause their hull based damage increases should create the illusion of 3 weapons.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.03 22:16:00 - [477] Originally by: Sexorella hotz Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 03/05/2009 22:02:17 Just a thought, since we're so opposed to split weapon systems, but there are a ton of naglfar pilots who have committed valuable training time to it. As a possible change to weapons, I like the 2 high slot marauder idea, but perhaps either you can fit 2 cit's or 2 projectiles, depending on what you're doing. Make it such that citadels would be the ideal pos shooting platform, since they're bad at shooting caps, autocannons for high damage short range hot drops, and artilleries for sniping(and if you're dumb you can do one of each). In other words, reduce the total highs to 3, but still have two turret and 2 missile hardpoints. Citadels should out damage arties(shorter "effective" range), autocannons obviously highest damage makes them better for hot drop situations, and artilleries be the weakest damage of the 3, but with good range. It remains to have some versatility in tanking, shield tank for pos shoot and hot-dropping, freeing lows for damage, and an armor tank for sniping(using meds for range and generally having to take less damage in a sniping situation). You still have your options but they're at the fitting window. Also if we bring their damage in line with the other caps at this point, their tank still needs review, and to be brought up to par with the other dreads. They should probably have the same number of low/med fittings as other dreads, cause their hull based damage increases should create the illusion of 3 weapons. Finally, future nagl owners can get into the ship faster, they only need to train projectiles to fully function, since they can use it in capital battles(auto's or arti's for sniping) and pos shooting(arties), and can make the choice to increase their pos damage by training into citadels. Also this does not negate the need for fixing citadels, but that then stops being a problem worth discussing with the nagl, it becomes its own problem. The only issue I have with this is that trying to make it so the Nag can either shield tank or armor tank is going to result in less-than-stellar performance. None of the other dreads need bonuses to tanking because they have slot layouts they clearly reflect their racial preference for tanking. If you try to do some sort of hybrid tanking scheme with the Nag, you'd need to add a tanking bonus to get it somewhere in the vicinity of the other dreads. There are some problems with this, though. First, none of the other dreads need a tanking bonus to have a proper tank, so we're now wasting one of the Nags bonuses to try and correct for poor slot layouts. Second, unless you add bonuses for both shield boost amount and armor repair amount, you're going to make it so one option is almost always better than the other. Once you've done that, why even bother trying to pretend like it's going to do the other. Honestly, the best way to do this is for CCP to just pick one, shield or armor, doesn't really matter at this point. Give it a slot layout reflecting that choice (either 7/5 or 5/7) and the fitting to go with it.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.03 22:29:00 - [478] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Sexorella hotz Stuff I said The only issue I have with this is that trying to make it so the Nag can either shield tank or armor tank is going to result in less-than-stellar performance. None of the other dreads need bonuses to tanking because they have slot layouts they clearly reflect their racial preference for tanking. If you try to do some sort of hybrid tanking scheme with the Nag, you'd need to add a tanking bonus to get it somewhere in the vicinity of the other dreads. There are some problems with this, though. First, none of the other dreads need a tanking bonus to have a proper tank, so we're now wasting one of the Nags bonuses to try and correct for poor slot layouts. Second, unless you add bonuses for both shield boost amount and armor repair amount, you're going to make it so one option is almost always better than the other. Once you've done that, why even bother trying to pretend like it's going to do the other. Honestly, the best way to do this is for CCP to just pick one, shield or armor, doesn't really matter at this point. Give it a slot layout reflecting that choice (either 7/5 or 5/7) and the fitting to go with it. I agree with this out of practicality, I would still be very happy with the nagl as I stated. Perhaps(as you've seen me state before), in return for this somewhat unfocused tank(though tbh it only is missing one slot in either tank direction), crank its damage up a bit higher. Trade offs and such. I think a 7/5 or 5/7 nagl and a 6/6 nagl are all acceptable in their own rights. If you go 7/5, you focus its slots on shield tanking, how can it then snipe without giving so much of that up(moros and rev don't have this problem as their tank's in the lows, pheonix should just frown to this part of the discussion). If you go 5/7, its basically a moros without a drone bonus? 6/6 adds flavor and flexibility with this in mind.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.03 23:18:00 - [479] Originally by: Sexorella hotz Post. Sniping with a 7/5 isn't a problem. You don't need as large of a tank as you would for a close range fit, as you're not receiving nearly the amount of damage. That means you can free up a slot for a sensor booster (you only need two, and you should already be fitting one), and locus rigs take care of the optimal problem. Honestly, I just can't agree with a 6/6 slot layout. That introduces the problem (that CCP doesn't factor in) of having to train two tanking systems, and leaves you with a subpar tank regardless.
SickSeven The Undead Righteous Knights	Posted - 2009.05.03 23:29:00 - [480] You just can't ask players to train longer to be inferior. So, either leave training time the same and find a way to make it damn worth our while, or change the ship and training time to balance with the rest. That's all I'll say. There are a lot of good ideas in this thread and I hope CCP Chronotis is reading.

Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.05.04 00:22:00 - [481] Originally by: Sexorella hotz Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 03/05/2009 22:10:08 Just a thought, since we're so opposed to split weapon systems, but there are a ton of naglfar pilots who have committed valuable training time to it. As a possible change to weapons, I like the 2 high slot marauder idea, but perhaps either you can fit 2 cit's or 2 projectiles, depending on what you're doing. Make it such that citadels would be the ideal pos shooting platform, since they're bad at shooting caps, autocannons for high damage short range hot drops, and artilleries for sniping(and if you're dumb you can do one of each). In other words, reduce the total highs to 3, but still have two turret and 2 missile hardpoints. Citadels should out damage arties(shorter "effective" range), autocannons obviously highest damage makes them better for hot drop situations, and artilleries be the weakest damage of the 3, but with good range. It remains to have some versatility in tanking, shield tank for pos shoot and hot-dropping, freeing lows for damage, and an armor tank for sniping(using meds for range and generally having to take less damage in a sniping situation). You still have your options but they're at the fitting window. Also if we bring their damage in line with the other caps at this point, their tank still needs review, and to be brought up to par with the other dreads. They should probably have the same number of low/med fittings as other dreads, cause their hull based damage increases should create the illusion of 3 weapons. So I'd say 3/6/6 . Finally, future nagl owners can get into the ship faster, they only need to train projectiles to fully function, since they can use it in capital battles(auto's or arti's for sniping) and pos shooting(arties), and can make the choice to increase their pos damage by training into citadels. Also this does not negate the need for fixing citadels, but that then stops being a problem worth discussing with the nagl, it becomes its own problem. Summary: 3 highs, 2 turret, 2 missile 6 meds 6 lows Damage to bring 2 weapons in line with 3, including the damage boosts inherent in other dreads, damage bonus has to apply to both weapon systems. Technically it has more bonus's than other dreads, but they would not all be relevant at all times Benefits: No model redevelopment No split weapons(lots of inherent benefits here) Retains options to shield/armor tank Essentially, double training the weapons still stands to retain benefits by allowing choices at time of fitting /signed this would make it still feel minmatar give it some options (imaginary flexibility) and make it competitive. ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
Gragnor The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.04 00:26:00 - [482] Edited by: Gragnor on 04/05/2009 00:27:43 It is very frustrating reading these forums with a raft of opinion that split weapon systems are terrible. The CCP response is simple; it is not going to change in the short term. So please,no more posts asking for what we won't get no matter how logical or appropriate it is. It is frustrating but that's CCP's fault for some of the stupid inconsistent nerfs. What do I want? - The Naglfar has 4 damage high slots, 1 more than every other dread. Therefore, dps should be 1/3 GREATER than every other dread. Yes, that's right a full one third greater. That's called equality and it will make CCP think a bit more about slots in the future. - Citadel torpedoes should be given a speed boost and not a rate of fire boost to ensure they hit the target. - Adjust Artillery damage modifier upwards. Make it a damage boost. That's the minnie way. - Adjust siege autocannon's optimal to represent some kind of reality; say 40km. - Slot layout - take a low slot and give it a mid slot. - Tank - Naglfar needs to be a shield tank; so adjust shield hitpoints upwards by 25% and lower armor hit points by 25% - Give it the power and CPU to fit a decent shield tank. It is not that hard. CCP; if you want us to design it for you; give us the parameters and we will tell you what we think is about right.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.04 02:31:00 - [483] Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 04/05/2009 02:44:39 Edited by: Sexorella hotz on 04/05/2009 02:32:39 Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Sexorella hotz Post. Sniping with a 7/5 isn't a problem. You don't need as large of a tank as you would for a close range fit, as you're not receiving nearly the amount of damage. That means you can free up a slot for a sensor booster (you only need two, and you should already be fitting one), and locus rigs take care of the optimal problem. Honestly, I just can't agree with a 6/6 slot layout. That introduces the problem (that CCP doesn't factor in) of having to train two tanking systems, and leaves you with a subpar tank regardless. Agreed, and it would be the converse of the moros which likewise makes sense. I had suggested using a weak armor tank as a sniper for the same reason, so I have to agree:P It probably would have an adequate shield tank just partially fitted. The fact that its weapons are capless also compensate for the cap heaviness of a shield tank. With the arti range boost I'm expecting perhaps one tracking comp, a tracking enhancer, 3 damage mods and a damage control plus shield tank would work nicely enough for sniping, and I assume a sensor booster somewhere in there. Leaves 5 slots for tank. Not gonna open EFT to see if that's enough to make it a sniper however:P
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 02:54:00 - [484] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 02:56:24 It can't be 6/6 for low and mids. All that does is guarantee that, while the nag's tank is flexible, it will always be completely inferior to any other dread's. It needs to be 5/7 either mid / low or vice versa; I vote for 7 lows 5 mids for the reasons I posted about already in this thread. I think its stupid to make the nag shield-tank when only 4 ships in the entire minmatar lineup active-tank shield. Furthermore, the typhoon (presumably the bs "equivalent" of the nag, since it splits damage types) is a heavily armor-tanked ship.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.04 03:00:00 - [485] I actually like the Nag as a shield tanker...mostly cause the niddy tanks better with shield than armor. As does the Hel...
Killerhound Caldari Stardust Heavy Industries Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.05.04 06:31:00 - [486] Was just curious to see which 4 you meant... - Claymore - Sleipnir - Maelstrom - maybe the nidhogur .. question of taste but there are muchmore passif shield tanker ...
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 07:20:00 - [487] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 07:23:01 Originally by: Killerhound Was just curious to see which 4 you meant... - Claymore - Sleipnir - Maelstrom - maybe the nidhogur .. question of taste those 3 and the cyclone, the t1 variant of the claymore and sleip. so its really just 2 ship hulls, total. Yet, given this massive breadth of minmatar ship tanking, people want to make the dread tank shields? No minmatar ships are purely passive tank except the broadsword. Many fit extenders because they're nano, but they're by no means "tanked", just buffered. But I dont want to get into a semantics debate.
Kenpachi Viktor Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2009.05.04 08:46:00 - [488] Now, for something completely different. Change the tracking and the alpha of cap projectiles for shooting at webed BSs, at the cost of DPS Reduce the total mass by %15 Increase Jump range by 2 ly Reduce cap needed to jump to %50 Increase scan resolution to 95mm Add 1 mid and 1 low for extra versatility Reduce the cost of production by %15 GIVE IT BUBBLE IMMUNITY I now present, king of the hot-drop gank. (not a serious post ) ===============
Shadow Devourer	Posted - 2009.05.04 09:57:00 - [489] Everything worth saying already has. Now we need to see some dev comments.
IsoMetricanTaliac 2 Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.05.04 10:12:00 - [490] Let the naglfar have it's own racial weapons just like all the other dreads & fix the slots so it can tank like the other dreads cause it is a sad fact that less & less of these are being used in fleet battles because they are pre gimped. Don't make changes to the split weapons system, get rid of it all together drop one of the hi slots and configure the Mid/Lows accordingly so that a pilot in one of these is more than just a number on the field. It's like minmatar are just being left to waste away to nothing while the other races ships are forever getting overhauls of one type or another. Anyway here's hoping the changes are the right ones & not just changes for the hell of saying we are trying at least... In a Time When Many Will Seek Death, There Will Always Be Those Like Me Who Won't Mind Helping Them Along Their Way!?!

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.04 11:05:00 - [491] Edited by: Seishi Maru on 04/05/2009 11:05:54 Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 07:23:01 Originally by: Killerhound Was just curious to see which 4 you meant... - Claymore - Sleipnir - Maelstrom - maybe the nidhogur .. question of taste those 3 and the cyclone, the t1 variant of the claymore and sleip. so its really just 2 ship hulls, total. Yet, given this massive breadth of minmatar ship tanking, people want to make the dread tank shields? No minmatar ships are purely passive tank except the broadsword. Many fit extenders because they're nano, but they're by no means "tanked", just buffered. But I dont want to get into a semantics debate. Add: Vagabond Rapier, Huggin, Scimitar (hint look at the type of bonus it has) broadsword and to hell with "they are not tanked jsut buffered". The word tank implies jsut where their defense is. REal life TANKS also do not active regenerate their armor as well.. so the tanks do not tank?
Shadow Devourer	Posted - 2009.05.04 11:16:00 - [492] Then there's the mom and titan. Minmatar are half and half. You can argue for an armor tank because you like it better for whatever reason no need to try to pass it off as being because minmatar are armor tankers.
Amy Wang	Posted - 2009.05.04 13:46:00 - [493] lets take this from another perspective: I have both Minmatar and Amarr Dread to lvl 4, all involved XL weapons at lvl 4 as well in fact I have Amarr Dread lvl 5 to 15% done already, but I stopped when they announced the Naglfar buff to see how it plays out so would anyone advise me to: a) continue training Amarr dread 5 now as the Naglfar will be worse then Revelation/Moros even if they buff it more as suggested so far b) train for Minmatar Dread 5 as it will be sweet with the changes so far suggested c) hold on training any Dread 5 for now to see if they buff the Naglfar more as suggested so far and if they do consider training Minmatar Dread 5 instead of another
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.04 14:17:00 - [494] Edited by: prefectro on 04/05/2009 14:18:12 Originally by: Shadow Devourer Everything worth saying already has. Now we need to see some dev comments. QFT 100 million isk Chronotis is not even reading this anymore (I doubt he read past the 3rd page). Enough with the chit chat, I want to see what CCP thinks (based on the responses)
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.04 14:34:00 - [495] Originally by: prefectro Edited by: prefectro on 04/05/2009 14:18:12 Originally by: Shadow Devourer Everything worth saying already has. Now we need to see some dev comments. QFT 100 million isk Chronotis is not even reading this anymore (I doubt he read past the 3rd page). Enough with the chit chat, I want to see what CCP thinks (based on the responses) I think YOU shoudl shut up. Since obviously YOU had not read it past page 3 sicne CCP Shronotis has posted far later than page 3 and answering direct questions made far later than that. So obviously you are the one that is failing here.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.04 14:57:00 - [496] If they make it an armor tank its basically a moros(4/5/7). There's plenty of minmatar ships that shield tank, including their capitals, therefore there is no argument that it should not be a shield tank. Furthermore, its already quite inclined to be a shield tank(except for its slot layout) as with its lower hitpoints(same overall, fewer focused into any one system), a burst tank is more essential, also its weapons are capless, supporting the high capacitor needs of a shield tank. Caldari shouldn't be the only race that has to train tactical shield manipulation, an admittedly broken and long training skill(FIX IT DAMNET!).
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 17:36:00 - [497] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 17:41:07 Originally by: Seishi Maru Add: Vagabond Rapier, Huggin, Scimitar (hint look at the type of bonus it has) broadsword and to hell with "they are not tanked jsut buffered". The word tank implies jsut where their defense is. REal life TANKS also do not active regenerate their armor as well.. so the tanks do not tank? I said I wasn't going to get into a semantics debate. But to clarify, most people do not consider battleship setups which rely on armor plates and resists to be armor "tanks." They call them "buffer tanks," because they are not actively repaired by the pilot flying the ship. The same thing applies to the ships you mentioned above. None of them actually fit things to their ship which is designed to permanently tank any amount of dps (except broadsword). They (and I, and my 40m of minmatar spec) fit LSE's to give them enough EHP buffer to shoot things or GTFO if said things start shooting me more than I want. I could not even tell you what the "tank" caused by natural shield regen on my vaga is (probably something pitiful like 30 dps), but I can tell you that my broadsword should be able to tank 200ish dps. Hope that explains what I'm calling the difference between "buffer" and "active" tank. Minmatar ships do not active-tank shields, except for 2 ship hulls. Many of them fit a buffer, or actively tank armor (typhoon can (but usually fits buffer), tempest, rupture, munin, hurricane). Minmatar is not by any stretch of the imagination half and half. If you want to claim they're shield-based, then give the nidh 20% more shield per level or something laughable like that, and invent a capital shield extender. That would more accurately reflect the type of buffer tank Minmatar uses as a whole.
Shadow Devourer	Posted - 2009.05.04 18:24:00 - [498] By your definition drakes don't shield tank because they fit extenders and megathrons aren't armor tankers. Hell most of the caldari race doesn't shield tank and only one of them (golem) is an active tanker. It would be simpler for everyone if you accepted standard nomenclature.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:08:00 - [499] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 19:11:40 great, a successful complete derail based on semantics. the difference between buffer and active tanking is crystal clear and obvious to anyone who'se spent more than an hour looking at ship fittings. drakes, the broadsword, and other ships which rely on passive shield regen for tank (as opposed to pure EHP, like the vaga does), are called "passive." now i realize this is complicated for some of you, so i'll re-summarize: armor: - buffer (plate-based) - active (repper-based) shield: - buffer (LSE/PDU based) - active (repper-based) - passive (SPR / LSE / PDU / invul-based) But i'm done arguing semantics here, as its pointless and doesn't help the issue at hand. my point stands that minmatar does not commonly active-tank shields. it buffer-tanks them. as such, pointing to these buffer-based setups as proof that the nag should active-tank shields is a bad argument.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:14:00 - [500] A quick update: We are currently looking at the following changes or amendments to the original proposals. The capital projectile changes remain the same. Naglfar Bonuses: * 7.5% Capital Projectile Damage per level * 7.5% Capital Projectile Rate of fire per level Naglfar Attributes * +1 med slot * +150 cpu (850 base) * -65,000 powergrid (560,000 base) * the model has been fixed and rotated on its axis 90 degrees so is horizontal now. Citadel Torpedoes * velocity increased to 2,750 m/s * flight time decreased to 25 secs Regarding Split Weapons Many of you have made good arguments against split weapons primarily focused around damage mods. We certainly do not disagree with those points that split weapon systems need adequate bonuses to factor in modules, rig or implant choices and the ease of using single weapon systems. Our current objective is to recognise the unique nature of the naglfar and retain its dual weapon system but focus the bonuses on the matari projectile side of the weapons with the missiles retaining a secondary role. The Naglfar in its new horizontal role The dual projectile bonus in addition to its unbonused citadel torps gives it an edge outside drone range within its missile range, then its damage is comparable to the moros and revelation at the longer ranges. The addition of the med slot and cpu allows for more viable shield or armour tanks and with the high bonuses allows for a roughly equivalent performance with only one damage mod. Combine this with much faster torpedoes, then the delayed damage factor is reduced and using the torpedoes becomes a much better option within its effective ranges. We believe this package of changes puts the naglfar at equal height (lol pun) with the other dreadnoughts and allows it to be a more viable choice out on the field. Feedback is welcome and the usual disclaimer applies, things may change before patch day. The original post will be updated shortly with these changes! Crystal Ball Time - The Future of Dreadnoughts, Capital ships and 0.0 Warfare We mentioned that what we are trying to achieve here was an effective band aid, a simple set of quick changes requiring minimal resources from our side to fix the Naglfar and give a little buff to the Phoenix as a short term solution. Some of you (Hi DigitalCommunist!), looked at the bigger picture straight away and wide ranging ideas for changes to increase the scenarios and possibilities of the ships role and use. We have not kept it secret that we are not happy with the capital ships, their place in the universe and 0.0 warfare as a whole. It is a constant topic of heated discussion internally, with the CSM and here on the forums amongst the rest of you. Currently, we are looking very hard at possible wide ranging changes to 0.0 warfare at its core and the heart of our high level game play which defines eve. The possible changes will entail a reworking of capital ships to some lesser of greater degree along the way and the mechanics and strategies surrounding them. This is by no means something which has even a soon attached to it for now. It's a very deep and in-depth look at our core gameplay, at 0.0 itself and everything that goes on there which is why we are not spending too much effort on short term solutions. It would definitely be interesting for us to harvest your grey matter on 0.0 and our core gameplay, capital ship warfare, 0.0 life and combat and by all means, lets hear your thoughts on this with conceptual changes as you see fit for now. A sticky thread will be forthcoming on this in the features and ideas forum since there is much interest in the wider topics around dreadnoughts themselves and we need to keep all the ideas in one place so we don't spend the day reading the last 3 pages of F&I like usual with our morning coffee :). -Ave ps. was joking about making the naglfar horizontal!


Shadow Devourer	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:18:00 - [501] The majority of PvP drakes don't regen tank, they buffer tank. I thought that was obvious. Anyhow the titan and mom are shield tankers, the carrier was a shield tanker until it got changed. Making the nag a shield tanker doesn't go against CCPs design for the race.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:20:00 - [502] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 19:22:29 lol, pwned. i fell for the horizontal thing :D
Chris Sandstorm Minmatar	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:24:00 - [503] Seriously, drop the citadels please
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:34:00 - [504] Originally by: Seishi Maru Edited by: Seishi Maru on 04/05/2009 15:01:18 Originally by: prefectro Edited by: prefectro on 04/05/2009 14:18:12 Originally by: Shadow Devourer Everything worth saying already has. Now we need to see some dev comments. QFT 100 million isk Chronotis is not even reading this anymore (I doubt he read past the 3rd page). Enough with the chit chat, I want to see what CCP thinks (based on the responses) I think YOU shoudl shut up. Since obviously YOU had not read it past page 3 sicne CCP Shronotis has posted far later than page 3 and answering direct questions made far later than that. So obviously you are the one that is failing here. Btw you can send the isk for this char... You need to chill the hell out noob. You are goin to start popping zits soon. And finally the response I was looking for from CCP, a vast improvement over the OG OP.
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.04 19:46:00 - [505] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel Torpedoes * velocity increased to 2,750 m/s * flight time decreased to 25 secs While the velocity increase is welcome you still haven't taken care of the main issue with citadels: explosion velocity. You said in you opening post dreads had other capital ships as intended targets but with 50% damage reduction to a carrier moving at 20 m/s they citadels fail at this role. Log on the test server, fire some cits at a moving capital then do the same with guns and the problem will be obvious.
Amy Wang	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:01:00 - [506] Edited by: Amy Wang on 04/05/2009 20:04:57 interesting, the double damage bonus means citadel torps are just an added but minor part of the dps so you can concentrate on turrets both training and damage mod wise, that is good on the other hand with +1med (instead of +1 low which is the obvious alternative) the grid and cpu changes you seem to want to make it a shield tanker which is not so cool as it brings back the additional training requirement in form of tactical shield manipulation, so yea, still not convinced give it 7 lows instead of 5 meds plus switch some shield hp to armor and we are talking took you a while to realize that the Nid wasn't working as a shield tanker, don't got that path with the Naglfar
Arramis Minmatar ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:08:00 - [507] Now i have to train for shield tanking , anyway, better than having an usless ship:)) Manelele`s expresia clara a prostiei si inculturii romanesti.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:12:00 - [508] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 20:13:03 6 mids means it will have a less effective shield tank than the phoenix. 6 lows means it will have less effective armor tank than the moros or rev. its still going to be insta-primary in every fleet fight, and its still going to die horribly. please, give it 5 mids and 7 lows.
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:17:00 - [509] It makes sense for it to have less tank than the Phoenix because it has more gank. Look at it this way: with 6 mids it has a better burst tank than a moros fitting one damage mod or a rev fitting two. At the same time it can fit for full damage at the cost of sustainability. Looks good to me.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:23:00 - [510] Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 20:23:43 yeah, i agree actually. we'll have to test it out. according to my maths, the cpu boost means it should be able to fit: - all weapons + siege in highs - a full tank (booster, 2 invuls, 2 amps) + sensor booster in mids - 2 weapon modifiers (gyros), 4 cap modules in lows obviously this isn't how people will fit them in pvp, but as a theory-fit to test how well the fittings work, i think its worthwhile. overall, its much better than the OP, and might even prove feasible :)

Arramis Minmatar ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:23:00 - [511] Originally by: Incantare It makes sense for it to have less tank than the Phoenix because it has more gank. Look at it this way: with 6 mids it has a better burst tank than a moros fitting one damage mod or a rev fitting two. At the same time it can fit for full damage at the cost of sustainability. Looks good to me. NOT ENOUGH CPU TO FIT FULL DAMAGE M8 Manelele`s expresia clara a prostiei si inculturii romanesti.
Ragel Tropxe The Older Gamers Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:26:00 - [512] looks good to me too. Able to fit a capital shield OR armour tank. Ref "less tank than a Phoenix" - most Phoenixes have a cap recharger II in the last mid slot. All this does is trf that spare cap mod into a low slot (another PDS II or something). The tank will not be quite as strong as a dedicated 7 slot tanker - but to make up for that it gains 1 more slot than other Dreads..seems reasonable I think the CPU still looks very tight for shield tank, but all in all a very promising step forward.
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:27:00 - [513] that's a sweet ass troll Chronotis
Linas IV	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:28:00 - [514] In my Eyes this "Fix" look Awesome! A little tweak to CitadelTorp. Explo-Vel. and its Perfect! When can we expect it to hit TQ? ^^
Areo Hotah Paxton Industries Paxton Federation	Posted - 2009.05.04 20:41:00 - [515] I do not want a capital shield tank. Having to train dual weapons and the more skill intensive shield tank is not acceptable.
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:02:00 - [516] CCP Chronotis since we are messing around with citadel torps can we finally change them so they can hit pos mods correctly? The explosion radius is 1000m and pos modules are 400m or smaller so you are atmost doing 40% damage to a large gun/ecm battery/cyno jammer etc. And this really needs to change. The explosion velocity is a bit of an issue while in siege because you can't hit moving carriers/motherships/titans at all maybe 5-10% damage at best.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:25:00 - [517] Edited by: VoiceInTheDesert on 04/05/2009 21:24:57 Can we please get a dev response regarding citadel torps? Do you guys actually think that the current explosion velocity is ok? I disagree completely, but I'm curious why you haven't even at least mentioned it yet....
BCE 3AHRTO GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:35:00 - [518] because of the explosion radius (well and lock time) i never bother shooting pos modules in a phoenix(shhh, don't tell brennah), please fix this!
Ound	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:42:00 - [519] Edited by: Ound on 04/05/2009 21:43:49 Wow, cool now I just have to train Tactical Shield Manipulation V , Shield Compensation , Shield Compensation Resists.. cool stuff. thanks. So you can just throw out Citadel torps and Capital armor rep skills.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:45:00 - [520] Very good proposal on my eyes.

Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:46:00 - [521] Originally by: prefectro Originally by: Seishi Maru Edited by: Seishi Maru on 04/05/2009 15:01:18 Originally by: prefectro Edited by: prefectro on 04/05/2009 14:18:12 Originally by: Shadow Devourer Everything worth saying already has. Now we need to see some dev comments. QFT 100 million isk Chronotis is not even reading this anymore (I doubt he read past the 3rd page). Enough with the chit chat, I want to see what CCP thinks (based on the responses) I think YOU shoudl shut up. Since obviously YOU had not read it past page 3 sicne CCP Shronotis has posted far later than page 3 and answering direct questions made far later than that. So obviously you are the one that is failing here. Btw you can send the isk for this char... You need to chill the hell out noob. You are goin to start popping zits soon. And finally the response I was looking for from CCP, a vast improvement over the OG OP. youa re the one too noob on basic human communication that was unable to read whole thread then accuse CCP of doing what in fact You have done! You failed! You got owned in all levels.. so you are the noob.
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:47:00 - [522] CCP Chronotis, I approve. Might still be a tad short on CPU with the extra slot, but I bet I can make it fit somehow. And to all you naysayers, Minmatar caps were meant to be shield tanked to begin with - they were just crippled with terrible CPU and slot layouts. I would much prefer to see more shield tanking ships, quit moaning for moar armor. A bit of an increase to torp exp velocity would be icing on the cake, but I for one am content.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.04 21:52:00 - [523] The best part is the 6/6 slot layout still allows you to armor tank with 1 repairer as people used to do. So now we have a really flexible dread. I think its nearly perfect. Not too good like the revelation but certainly a GOOD ship
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.04 22:02:00 - [524] Edited by: Ecky X on 04/05/2009 22:05:16 Just have to say, Chronotis, you've made my day, and you're now on my list for christmas cards. EDIT: So how about those shield transporters?
To mare	Posted - 2009.05.04 22:13:00 - [525] seems good on the paper (even if its not what most of us wanted) need to try it now. powergrid its fine even for the new arties + 1 armor repairer it a bit lacking on che CPU side so while you are at it a +170 instead of a +150 would be perfect just to avoid future whinage on its cpu.
To mare	Posted - 2009.05.04 22:16:00 - [526] oh another question: the rework on arties doesent mean we gonna get our clip size halved right?
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.04 22:31:00 - [527] Originally by: To mare it a bit lacking on che CPU side so while you are at it a +170 instead of a +150 would be perfect just to avoid future whinage on its cpu. Sounds right. Using faction boost amps and a named damage control, I'm still 165 CPU short. To fit T2 boost amps you need a 5% CPU implant. [Naglfar, New Setup 1] Internal Force Field Array I Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I Capital Shield Booster I Domination Shield Boost Amplifier Domination Shield Boost Amplifier Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.	Posted - 2009.05.04 22:40:00 - [528] Originally by: CCP Chronotis * the model has been fixed and rotated on its axis 90 degrees so is horizontal now. u bastards. ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
1600 RT	Posted - 2009.05.04 23:10:00 - [529] Originally by: Ecky X Originally by: To mare it a bit lacking on che CPU side so while you are at it a +170 instead of a +150 would be perfect just to avoid future whinage on its cpu. Sounds right. Using faction boost amps and a named damage control, I'm still 165 CPU short. To fit T2 boost amps you need a 5% CPU implant. [Naglfar, New Setup 1] Internal Force Field Array I Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I Capital Shield Booster I Domination Shield Boost Amplifier Domination Shield Boost Amplifier Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] 2 ballistic control system on unbonused torp sound wrong to me this is what i came up with a fast eft warrioring session: Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Capacitor Power Relay II Capacitor Power Relay II Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Sensor Booster II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I this fit require 1070 CPU new nag will have 1062.5, could replace a boost amp for another hardener and make everything fit. its ok just a bit tight +20 base CPU would make it perfect allowing to replace those 2 CPR with 2 PDS for less cap stability but more ehp and burst tank.
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.04 23:21:00 - [530] Originally by: 1600 RT Originally by: Ecky X Originally by: To mare it a bit lacking on che CPU side so while you are at it a +170 instead of a +150 would be perfect just to avoid future whinage on its cpu. Sounds right. Using faction boost amps and a named damage control, I'm still 165 CPU short. To fit T2 boost amps you need a 5% CPU implant. [Naglfar, New Setup 1] Internal Force Field Array I Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I Capital Shield Booster I Domination Shield Boost Amplifier Domination Shield Boost Amplifier Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] 2 ballistic control system on unbonused torp sound wrong to me this is what i came up with a fast eft warrioring session: Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Capacitor Power Relay II Capacitor Power Relay II Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Sensor Booster II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I,EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I,Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I this fit require 1070 CPU new nag will have 1062.5, could replace a boost amp for another hardener and make everything fit. its ok just a bit tight +20 base CPU would make it perfect allowing to replace those 2 CPR with 2 PDS for less cap stability but more ehp and burst tank. Both of these fits are terrible please dont pollute the CCP Devs with this crap.

Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.05 00:04:00 - [531] Hows about this: [Naglfar, sniggnaught] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Damage Control II Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I Sensor Booster II Sensor Booster II Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Tracking Computer II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Siege Module I Projectile Locus Coordinator II Projectile Locus Coordinator II Core Defence Field Extender I Shield-variant of the standard-issue Sniggnaught,doesn't fit now but should fit nicely post-patch.
maya ibuki2 THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.05 00:23:00 - [532] nice one on the second suggestion replacing and augmenting the first chronitis. this is, to my mind, gonna make the naglfar far more viable as a ship in general. obviously, as you said yourself, its a quickfix to plug a hole, but itll do untill this almost mythical cap review ^.^ maya ibuki2-currently thorn alliance pvper, proud member of the 54th knights templar and genral shooty type
Graalum Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.05 00:40:00 - [533] Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 04/05/2009 20:13:03 its still going to be insta-primary in every fleet fight, and its still going to die horribly. if your fc is primarying naglfars in a cap fight you've already lost
Liang Nuren No Salvation	Posted - 2009.05.05 00:49:00 - [534] Originally by: Graalum if your fc is primarying naglfars in a cap fight you've already lost Not sure why you'd say that - I hear (from very competent and skilled capital FCs) that it's much faster to take a Nag down from full shields than a Phoenix from half, and similarly for Niddy/Chimera. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Thercon Jair Minmatar Nex Exercitus Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.05.05 02:00:00 - [535] That's a nice change. I really do believe minmatar capitals should be shieldtanked (or at least possible to do it well). It will give a nice 50/50 split between capital armor and shield tanks, adding diversity. That is, if they also decide to change the Nidhoggur back to its previous layout, and then add some CPU. Real men do it the hard way: fly Minmatar!
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.05 02:10:00 - [536] Edited by: prefectro on 05/05/2009 02:13:50 Well, an extra 19 days to fit the Capital Shield Booster. 27 days to be at a proper level. I guess I am used to that. I am Minmatar. It is worth it though compared to what we have now and it warms my heart to see that CCP finally did something for the sexiest dread in the game.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.05 02:37:00 - [537] I'm glad to see you guys aren't clinging to the whole "versatile" shtick like it's some sort of security blanket.........ahahaha, who am I kidding? 27 1/2 days to a Rev. Enjoy having what is still the worst dread.
Sexorella hotz Pyre of Gods	Posted - 2009.05.05 02:45:00 - [538] Quick question with all these people throwing CPR IIs around on the fits. Is that actually viable considering each one reduces your shield boost amount?
Aston Vette	Posted - 2009.05.05 02:52:00 - [539] Ok, so I know this is going to be a slight bit off topic, but you asked for feedback and you brought up the "long term" stuff so here is my suggestion: Citadel Cruise Launchers. Then the Caldari and (to a lesser extent) Minmatar dreads would have a) more fitting variation possible, b) long and short range weapons and the trade-offs that go with them.
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.05 03:28:00 - [540] You're probably not going to find a better option than this that satisfies most people, very nicely done. It definetely feels very right with the projectile biased bonuses. I'm a little concerned that the +1 med slot shield tank turns out verging on overpowered, and therefore pretty much forces armour tankers to reskill (although granted they're not losing anything over today's Nag if they do stick with armour). Here's a rough look at potential fits: I'm comparing: [Naglfar, Armor 1 Dmg 1 Range] Capital Armor Repairer I Damage Control II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II * 2 Energized Regenerative Membrane II Gyrostabilizer II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Cap Recharger II * 3 Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL * 2 Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I * 2 Siege Module I Trimark Armor Pump I * 3 2.14mil effective HP (by EFT's method) +112 cap/sec (almost comparable with normal Rev/Moros fits) [Naglfar, Shield 3 Dmg] Damage Control II Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I * 2 Gyrostabilizer II * 3 Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II * 2 Photon Scattering Field II Heat Dissipation Field II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL * 2 Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I * 2 Siege Module I Core Defence Field Extender I * 3 2.31mil effective HP (by EFT's method) +100 cap/sec (lowish but acceptable) 2 Dmg Mod Shield tanker (PDU2s): 2.46mil effective HP (by EFT's method) +100 cap/sec (lowish but acceptable) That's some pretty awesome shield tanking, the 6th slot makes a big, big difference. Maybe the CPU should be toned down just slightly to give it issues shield tanking well. Then again if it is overpowered I struggle to see which other race has anything really to complain about now. They all have their sweetspots. With those ultra-fast torps a Phoenix can use 2 damage mods and still have a nearly 2.7mil effective HP (+ burst) tank, as long as it's prepared to accept the cut off. The Rev is still the Rev, most dependable damage dealer on the field. Moros still has it's imba-drones. Most of all there's no obvious primary now (regardless of whether you thought it was Nags or Revs before) and is it still smart to leave the Phoenixes til last? I guess mostly I'm saying if any Nag pilot is still complaining about the split weapon system they need their head checked Proof it can work, and the Nag still has flavah. (There's something kinky about packing ten plus different ammo types into the hold that I might have missed if it became yet-another-boring-three-turret dread.) Those without shield skills will come off worst, but in truth capital shield tanking is not very skill intensive and armour does still work just about. And, hey you can drop a torp launcher for a cyno mod, or even a shield transporter etc.. Flexibility like that is worth all this extra skilling and is what I feel many Minmatar ships are about. So on balance big thumbs up (I'm still perplexed where the hordes of Matari shield tanking advocates came from!). _

Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.05 04:02:00 - [541] Originally by: Blazde You're probably not going to find a better option than this that satisfies most people, very nicely done. It definetely feels very right with the projectile biased bonuses. I'm a little concerned that the +1 med slot shield tank turns out verging on overpowered, and therefore pretty much forces armour tankers to reskill (although granted they're not losing anything over today's Nag if they do stick with armour). Here's a rough look at potential fits: I'm comparing: [Naglfar, Armor 1 Dmg 1 Range] Capital Armor Repairer I Damage Control II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II * 2 Energized Regenerative Membrane II Gyrostabilizer II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Cap Recharger II * 3 Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL * 2 Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I * 2 Siege Module I Trimark Armor Pump I * 3 2.14mil effective HP (by EFT's method) +112 cap/sec (almost comparable with normal Rev/Moros fits) [Naglfar, Shield 3 Dmg] Damage Control II Beta Reactor Control: Capacitor Power Relay I * 2 Gyrostabilizer II * 3 Capital Shield Booster I Invulnerability Field II * 2 Photon Scattering Field II Heat Dissipation Field II Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL * 2 Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I * 2 Siege Module I Core Defence Field Extender I * 3 2.31mil effective HP (by EFT's method) +100 cap/sec (lowish but acceptable) 2 Dmg Mod Shield tanker (PDU2s): 2.46mil effective HP (by EFT's method) +100 cap/sec (lowish but acceptable) That's some pretty awesome shield tanking, the 6th slot makes a big, big difference. Maybe the CPU should be toned down just slightly to give it issues shield tanking well. Then again if it is overpowered I struggle to see which other race has anything really to complain about now. They all have their sweetspots. With those ultra-fast torps a Phoenix can use 2 damage mods and still have a nearly 2.7mil effective HP (+ burst) tank, as long as it's prepared to accept the cut off. The Rev is still the Rev, most dependable damage dealer on the field. Moros still has it's imba-drones. Most of all there's no obvious primary now (regardless of whether you thought it was Nags or Revs before) and is it still smart to leave the Phoenixes til last? I guess mostly I'm saying if any Nag pilot is still complaining about the split weapon system they need their head checked Proof it can work, and the Nag still has flavah. (There's something kinky about packing ten plus different ammo types into the hold that I might have missed if it became yet-another-boring-three-turret dread.) Those without shield skills will come off worst, but in truth capital shield tanking is not very skill intensive and armour does still work just about. And, hey you can drop a torp launcher for a cyno mod, or even a shield transporter etc.. Flexibility like that is worth all this extra skilling and is what I feel many Minmatar ships are about. So on balance big thumbs up (I'm still perplexed where the hordes of Matari shield tanking advocates came from!). Haha, this is a p. good troll, because there's no way you think that a split weapon system is actually a good idea.
Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.05 05:56:00 - [542] Edited by: Yorda on 05/05/2009 06:05:03 Originally by: CCP Chronotis If you would buff the Projectile bonus to 10% per level I'd be really happy with the nag. Right now lasers on a nag do more than projectiles, please just buff up projectiles a bit and the nag would be fine. EDIT: Jesus **** these fits: [Naglfar] 3x Gyros 2x BCU's 1x Damage control unit 2 1x Cap shield booster 2x Invul 1x Photon 1x Heat dissipation 1x Sensor booster 2x Cit torp launchers 2x Quad 3500mm Siege art 1x Siege mod 3x CDFE's Support Fixing the Naglfar!
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.05 06:12:00 - [543] This ain't my dream naglfar but it's one I think I can live with. Thanks for the update.
Rakshasa Taisab Caldari Sane Industries Inc. United Freemen Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.05 06:23:00 - [544] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Graalum if your fc is primarying naglfars in a cap fight you've already lost Not sure why you'd say that - I hear (from very competent and skilled capital FCs) that it's much faster to take a Nag down from full shields than a Phoenix from half, and similarly for Niddy/Chimera. ... What's the _last_ dread to be primaried?
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.05 06:47:00 - [545] Nice update, the suggested Naglfar seems like it's there with the other dreads. Now the only thing bugging me are the skill requirements; Minmatar capital pilots have to train both shield and armor tank and capital torpedos and capital turrets. To train for a Naglfar from a Nidhoggur takes almost as long as crosstraining into a Revelation; the difference is about 14 days.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.05 07:19:00 - [546] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Nice update, the suggested Naglfar seems like it's there with the other dreads. Now the only thing bugging me are the skill requirements; Minmatar capital pilots have to train both shield and armor tank and capital torpedos and capital turrets. To train for a Naglfar from a Nidhoggur takes almost as long as crosstraining into a Revelation; the difference is about 14 days. You don't "have" to train cap armor for a niddy. It shield tanks just fine. You can armor tank it if you want, but it works just as well shield tanked (higher personal tank, but weaker cap).
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.05 07:40:00 - [547] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert You don't "have" to train cap armor for a niddy. It shield tanks just fine. You can armor tank it if you want, but it works just as well shield tanked (higher personal tank, but weaker cap). The personal tank is higher only if you don't fit a sensor booster (which is a must). The ship is an armor tanker, has been since CCP decided to move a midslot to low instead of increasing it's CPU.
Cpt Hook	Posted - 2009.05.05 08:39:00 - [548] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Gloria Lewis Nice update, the suggested Naglfar seems like it's there with the other dreads. Now the only thing bugging me are the skill requirements; Minmatar capital pilots have to train both shield and armor tank and capital torpedos and capital turrets. To train for a Naglfar from a Nidhoggur takes almost as long as crosstraining into a Revelation; the difference is about 14 days. You don't "have" to train cap armor for a niddy. It shield tanks just fine. You can armor tank it if you want, but it works just as well shield tanked (higher personal tank, but weaker cap). if you get your head out of the sand box, and actually start flying a niddy in fleets you will find out that carriers are actually big "logistic" ships, ships that are actually using "spider" tanks(also remote repping pos shields anyone?); and now, for that tank to work you will need cap in the first place, and a sensor booster in the second place: your "personal" fit it's as worst as a shield tanked thanatos, so pls keep your fail fitting for yourself.
Zhull Amarr Patagonia Holdings	Posted - 2009.05.05 09:19:00 - [549] Edited by: Zhull on 05/05/2009 09:23:52 Originally by: CCP Chronotis The dual projectile bonus in addition to its unbonused citadel torps gives it an edge outside drone range within its missile range, then its damage is comparable to the moros and revelation at the longer ranges. Check your math, with 3xdamage mods the Naglfar does more damage than the moros outside and inside drone control range. DPS with long range ammo (guns only, 3xgyro,HS,MFS) Revelation 1.799 Naglfar: 1.479 -18% <- Has less range since and will be shooting in falloff past 129km Moros: 1.376 -23,5% DPS with short range ammo and drones (3xgyro,HS,MFSa and Bouncer II) Revelation: 4.579 Naglfar: 4.409 -3,7% Moros: 4.221 -7,8% Also you probably know that due to current bumping mechanics it is very difficult to use T2 sentry drones in a dread as in most cases you are forced to leave your drones in the field.
Chavu Minmatar Stimulus Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.05.05 09:56:00 - [550] Great changes (second round). Not perfect, but at least it isn't a naglmao anymore. Would like another 10 or so cpu but whatever. Some of the posted fits are dumb, CPRs on an active shield tank? BCUs on unbonused missile launchers? Gtfo with that noob crap. 1x IFF DCU, 2x PDS, 3x Gyro, 2x invuln, 1x heat, 1x em, 1x cap shield booster, 1x sebo fits. DCU is named but rest easily T2. Oh yeah, fix the explosion velocity/radius on citadel torps and we'll have a nice little boost patch going on here. -------- Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.

Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.05 10:24:00 - [551] Originally by: Chavu Great changes (second round). Not perfect, but at least it isn't a naglmao anymore. Would like another 10 or so cpu but whatever. Some of the posted fits are dumb, CPRs on an active shield tank? BCUs on unbonused missile launchers? Gtfo with that noob crap. 1x IFF DCU, 2x PDS, 3x Gyro, 2x invuln, 1x heat, 1x em, 1x cap shield booster, 1x sebo fits. DCU is named but rest easily T2. Yeah whats up with not giving the ship enough cpu, it's not like the Revelation or Moros have to fit named modules
Slave 2739FKZ	Posted - 2009.05.05 10:36:00 - [552] Now fix citadels ridicolous explosion velociy issues and the problem with lack of long range citadels (hi Phoenix, looking at you) and we may have a deal.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.05 11:10:00 - [553] Naglfar changes are good. It would be able to do around 3700dps with 2 arty 2 citadels and 3 dmg mods + nearly the same tank as the phoenix which is fine too. Hmm citadel torp speed looks fine ,but it should be able fly up to 220km ,so 35sec flight time would be much better. As turret dreads have at least 160km optimal+44km falloff without any tracking mods. And still citadel torps explosion velocity should be increased especially in siege mode. It currently has 3.26m/s explo velocity with max skills,it realy cripples phoenix ability to dmg anything moving. Compared to the revelation's giga beams 0.00072rad/s, the beam hit a ship(1000m sig) with 3.26m/s velocoty orbiting at 4500m without tracking problems. So i think explo velocity should be increased by 10 times to 35m/s in siege mode, then at 45km the two weapon system would have the same efficiency at hitting orbiting targets.
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.05 11:11:00 - [554] another thumbs up for the updated changes
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.05 11:16:00 - [555] Originally by: Zhull Edited by: Zhull on 05/05/2009 10:31:40 Check your math, with the proposed stats it does more damage than the Moros both inside and outside drone range (4.279 dps with 3 gyro and Bouncer II vs 4.221 for the Moros with simmilar fit and 4.579 for the Revelation). The Nag can switch damage types so it should do less damage than the Moros, not more. With bouncer I the Nag would outdamage the Moros by a lot (most pilots use T1 drones after being forced to leave hundreds of drones in the field). Giving dreads the ability to scoop drones at longer ranges would be a great addition. According to my calculation naglfar will do 3700dps with turrets+torps useing 3 dmg mods.Moros 3300dps with 3 rails+3dmg mods(4200with 5xbouncert2s). So the problem is not with the naglfar but with the railguns in general they do too little dmg compared to other guns while still have the negatives like cap use,reload time, fix dmg types, tracking etc.. ---> boost rails/blasters in general
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.05 11:18:00 - [556] Originally by: Zhull Edited by: Zhull on 05/05/2009 10:31:40 Check your math, with the proposed stats it does more damage than the Moros both inside and outside drone range (4.279 dps with 3 gyro and Bouncer II vs 4.221 for the Moros with simmilar fit and 4.579 for the Revelation). The Nag can switch damage types so it should do less damage than the Moros, not more. With bouncer I the Nag would outdamage the Moros by a lot (most pilots use T1 drones after being forced to leave hundreds of drones in the field). Giving dreads the ability to scoop drones at longer ranges would be a great addition. nope. Because the moros can tank better and a lot of dps from the citatels is near zero against carriers. So its very well ballanced.
Perry Amarr The X-Trading Company RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.05 11:19:00 - [557] Originally by: Naomi Knight Hmm citadel torp speed looks fine ,but it should be able fly up to 220km ,so 35sec flight time would be much better. As turret dreads have at least 160km optimal+44km falloff without any tracking mods. If there would be a max damage ammunition with +60% Range then you would be correct. But there isnt. So Citadel Rage is fine.
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.05 11:26:00 - [558] Originally by: Yorda Edited by: Yorda on 05/05/2009 06:05:03 Originally by: CCP Chronotis If you would buff the Projectile bonus to 10% per level I'd be really happy with the nag. Right now lasers on a nag do more than projectiles, please just buff up projectiles a bit and the nag would be fine. EDIT: Jesus **** these fits: [Naglfar] 3x Gyros 2x BCU's 1x Damage control unit 2 1x Cap shield booster 2x Invul 1x Photon 1x Heat dissipation 1x Sensor booster 2x Cit torp launchers 2x Quad 3500mm Siege art 1x Siege mod 3x CDFE's Yorda if you have a quick read it will have 2 projectile bonuses so the lasers will no longer out damage projectiles when fitted on nag
Juliette DuBois	Posted - 2009.05.05 12:06:00 - [559] Somebody make EFT file of the second new naglmao?
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.05 12:46:00 - [560] Originally by: Chavu Would like another 10 or so cpu but whatever. Some of the posted fits are dumb, CPRs on an active shield tank? For what it's worth, people fit CPRs (instead of PDUs) on shield boosting caps for at least three sound reasons: 1) They're very light on CPU 2) You want high cap recharge to jump, not cap capacity 3) It's not really an active shield tank, so the penalty is not a big deal. In the case of dreads you want static hp, the booster is just to top up and tank light damage and it's already twice as good at that as a single armour rep. In the case of (fleet) carriers your tank is mostly remote. _

Gespenst Jager Pumpkin Scissors Bright Side of Death	Posted - 2009.05.05 13:11:00 - [561] If developers boost explosion velocity, caldari will get unfair opportunity to kill ships in pvp - and this is absolutely unacceptable. As secondary weapon for Nagl (get some additional DPS in POS-war for example) cits is fine now.
Cur Minmatar Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.05.05 16:07:00 - [562] So in addition to training two weapon types we need to skill up a capital shield tank for a ship that will merely be somewhat decent after the proposed changes. The Marauder-like projectile bonus still seemed like the better option. I really wish you had a faster balance team CCP as it was quite obvious to many how crippled this ship was long ago.
General Xenophon Caldari Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.05 16:23:00 - [563] Edited by: General Xenophon on 05/05/2009 16:24:21 Why horizontal? Why does that even matter? Can we work on things that actually matter? Like maybe, not letting the Naglafar suck balls with half assessed stat changes? So much for the fond memories of Homeworld 1 and 2 when we look at the Nag. /emo mode off. Oh, and what happened to nerfing everything? I thought that was how you guys 'fixed' things in Eve. Like the failcon (formerly known as the Falcon). Oopsie! Now /emo mode off! Thanks for letting me rant :p And, sigh, thanks for 'trying' to fix stuff in Eve. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men." - Boondock Saints
Siindri Vendo Gallente Solarflare Heavy Industries Doctrine.	Posted - 2009.05.05 16:34:00 - [564] Originally by: General Xenophon Edited by: General Xenophon on 05/05/2009 16:24:21 Why horizontal? Why does that even matter? Can we work on things that actually matter? Like maybe, not letting the Naglafar suck balls with half assessed stat changes? So much for the fond memories of Homeworld 1 and 2 when we look at the Nag. /emo mode off. Oh, and what happened to nerfing everything? I thought that was how you guys 'fixed' things in Eve. Like the failcon (formerly known as the Falcon). Oopsie! Now /emo mode off! Thanks for letting me rant :p And, sigh, thanks for 'trying' to fix stuff in Eve. I would have to assume that the horizontal thing is a joke, since everyone knows that a model change would take a good 6 months to a year to implement.
General Xenophon Caldari Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.05 16:36:00 - [565] Originally by: Siindri Vendo Originally by: General Xenophon Edited by: General Xenophon on 05/05/2009 16:24:21 Why horizontal? Why does that even matter? Can we work on things that actually matter? Like maybe, not letting the Naglafar suck balls with half assessed stat changes? So much for the fond memories of Homeworld 1 and 2 when we look at the Nag. /emo mode off. Oh, and what happened to nerfing everything? I thought that was how you guys 'fixed' things in Eve. Like the failcon (formerly known as the Falcon). Oopsie! Now /emo mode off! Thanks for letting me rant :p And, sigh, thanks for 'trying' to fix stuff in Eve. I would have to assume that the horizontal thing is a joke, since everyone knows that a model change would take a good 6 months to a year to implement. Sadly, I'm not sure which changes I should laugh at or cry tbh. Most I've seen seem pretty ridiculous. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men." - Boondock Saints
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2009.05.05 16:41:00 - [566] Originally by: General Xenophon Why horizontal? Why does that even matter? Can we work on things that actually matter? Like maybe, not letting the Naglafar suck balls with half assessed stat changes? Oh and now it's horizontal instead of vertical. Whoopty-Fecking-doo! Clearly a joke as indicated by the "PS" at the bottom of the update. Here's your sign.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.05 17:13:00 - [567] Originally by: General Xenophon Originally by: Siindri Vendo Originally by: General Xenophon Edited by: General Xenophon on 05/05/2009 16:24:21 Why horizontal? Why does that even matter? Can we work on things that actually matter? Like maybe, not letting the Naglafar suck balls with half assessed stat changes? So much for the fond memories of Homeworld 1 and 2 when we look at the Nag. /emo mode off. Oh, and what happened to nerfing everything? I thought that was how you guys 'fixed' things in Eve. Like the failcon (formerly known as the Falcon). Oopsie! Now /emo mode off! Thanks for letting me rant :p And, sigh, thanks for 'trying' to fix stuff in Eve. I would have to assume that the horizontal thing is a joke, since everyone knows that a model change would take a good 6 months to a year to implement. Sadly, I'm not sure which changes I should laugh at or cry tbh. Most I've seen seem pretty ridiculous. the changes proposed are AWESOME. Almsot perfect. No room to complain from anyone reasonable.
Nova Satar Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.05.05 17:21:00 - [568] i do like this idea, its not over the top, but it does finally put them inline with others. I think focusing the bonuses up heavily on projectiles is a top idea, even though its only two guns, if the bonuses are right it works well. Two citadel torps as "secondary backup" Guess ill train capital shield boosters now too!
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.05 17:58:00 - [569] For all those who are complaining about the extra med rather than low you dont _have_ to train shield tanking. Adding an extra low slot wont excessively boost the armor tanking varient of the nag but adding an extra med does significantly boost the shield tanking ability (which some of us want to use). plus tbh if you make it 5/7 its just like the moros making everything a bit more boring one of the things thats not so nice about the nid is its just a thanatos with a differnt bonus give or take. Plus the indication with minmatar caps is intially the were supposed to be mainly shield tank (tho flexable).
muxacb07 Eye of God Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.05.05 19:04:00 - [570] For the love of God don't make it a shield tank that just means more skill training on an already long intensive skill train. Secondly just get rid of the split weapons the bonus's would be great if it wasn't split weapons. In all the idea should be projectiles only add a low slot and vol-la its on par with the revelation and moros almost.

fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2009.05.05 19:48:00 - [571] 850base CPU on Naglfar oO? Ph÷nix has 875 CPU and needs to fit some more CPU intense modules...
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.05.05 20:37:00 - [572] Originally by: fuxinos 850base CPU on Naglfar oO? Ph÷nix has 875 CPU and needs to fit some more CPU intense modules... Maybe when all the dreads are looked at along with Citadel torps and POS warfare as a whole you can argue your point. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Slave 2739FKZ	Posted - 2009.05.05 20:54:00 - [573] Yay for shield tanking, this will help to even armor/shield tnaking odds in capital fleets.
Baron Primus	Posted - 2009.05.06 04:41:00 - [574] Originally by: Imhothar Xarodit Edited by: Imhothar Xarodit on 29/04/2009 18:39:07 It's a start but won't solve the problem of the huge additional time sink it takes a Minmatar pilot to use the ship in combat. Make it projectile only. Make it three turrets and add a third turret slot to the ship model. I'm sure that is no problem for the great artists you have. It is the only dread with a spilt weapon system, making it a punishment to train for any Minmatar pilot. It would require some real benefit compared to the other dreads considering the additional training time involved. My sig sucks.
Talia Windheart Minmatar Kouncel	Posted - 2009.05.06 05:30:00 - [575] completly unhelpful rant to follow leave my damn Dread alone.. if your going ot make any changes give it 7 lows and make the bonus's projectile based but for the love of god do NOT make it a shield tanker. and leave the PG alone damn it KNC4LIFE
Captain N8Hellyea	Posted - 2009.05.06 05:48:00 - [576] Well ppl have good points here.. It takes longer to train to fly a Nag,just to get everything up to respectible levels,Just to find yurself being called primary right off the bat in cap fights. kinda makes ya angry how the extra time involved equals you having a ship not up to par with others, good start CCP, but please dont rush this, think it thru and help the Naglfar. We need damage, We need tank
Slayton Ford STK Scientific The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.05.06 05:52:00 - [577] Originally by: Talia Windheart completly unhelpful rant to follow leave my damn Dread alone.. if your going ot make any changes give it 7 lows and make the bonus's projectile based but for the love of god do NOT make it a shield tanker. and leave the PG alone damn it What are you *****ing at. Your getting an extra mid so you can still have a sub dps armor tanking ship. The fact is, Mini are both shiled and armor tankers, in almost every line of ships. Cyclone/Cane. Phoon/Maelstorm. Jag/Wolf. etc. Additionally both the Hel and Rag are shield tankers. It makes little sense that the Min caps are armor tankers yet the super caps are shield tankers. Finally, since removing the split weapons WAS NOT A OPTION, then even add one low would still let you have a sub DPS cap compared to all else. With the new Nag, you can run a all gank fit w/ faction (3 gyro/3bcu) and be able to do 20% more DPS then the next dread while still haveing a short burst tank. (Rev w/ 3x AN HS and lvl 5 skills is 4700 dps; new Nag w/ 3x RF Gyro, 3x CN BCU and lvl 5 is 5600+ dps). --------------- This sig has been censored in fear of recieving the ban hammer...
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:05:00 - [578] Originally by: Slayton Ford Finally, since removing the split weapons WAS NOT A OPTION Actually, it was. Plenty of solutions were offered which didn't require remaking the model. CCP just decided not to listen.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:19:00 - [579] Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Slayton Ford Finally, since removing the split weapons WAS NOT A OPTION Actually, it was. Plenty of solutions were offered which didn't require remaking the model. CCP just decided not to listen. Current changes are good enough , whats your problem with it,other than you need to learn out shield tanking?
pocnitoarea	Posted - 2009.05.06 07:53:00 - [580] so let me see if i get it straight: artys: first you are decreasing the artys rof, and after that you give the ship a rof bonus? what the point of adding 2 modifications that bassically, are nullifying each other(at least to a point); also what about the clip size? tank:adding a med slot it's nice but he will still have the worst tank ever; he will be unable to do a proper armor tank(hello powergrid, armor hp), he will be unable to do a proper shield tank(hello shield hp, cpu,cap); in the end he will be able to do shield and armor tank, but none well; hello versatility! how about capital shield training req? how about matar being the only race who need to train capital projectile, capital torp(fail weapons sistems), capital armor repairer(thany) and capital shield booster(nag)=@60 days of training more then the rest of cap pilots, just to be able to fly the mini dread and carrier; and after all that you will be better to fit 2 cruise missile launchers instead of your capital torps if you are going to jump in a long range cap fight/not sieged dreads/carriers. just decide if this ship will be a shield tanker or an armor tanker and make the req modifications: shield/armor hp, cpu, cap,powergid, 5/7 or 7/5 slots; also before giving the ship stupid bonuses, maybe trying to fix the projectile ammo/arty and torp dmg will be a nice ideea.

Zhull Amarr Patagonia Holdings	Posted - 2009.05.06 08:00:00 - [581] Edited by: Zhull on 06/05/2009 08:00:13 With the proposed changes it outdamages all dreads but the Revelation when properly fit and it can choose its damage type. The nag can switch from EMP to PP and it only looses 9% of its gun damage. The Phoenix can also choose its damage type but looses the 25% damage bonus when using anything other than kinetic torpedoes. The other two dreads have fixed damage types from their main weapons (moros can change drones that represent 1/4 of its damage but at the expense of loosing 7% or 14% of its drone damage when switching to curators or wardens respectively). The ability to swithch damage types with little to no penalty gives the Nag more effective DPS when performing its primary role (shooting towers) because it can choose to shoot at the lowest resistance (provided that it is not one of those Caldari towers full of hardeners). The Nag damage should be balanced taking this ability into account.
Medidranda Livoga	Posted - 2009.05.06 08:06:00 - [582] Not really, it takes so much more extra training that if it¦s bit better for something than pwnlation then that¦s fine. If anything Phoenix should be best pos killing dread followed by Nagl since it¦s still going to be fairly sucky for long range battle. Sentry drone scooping issues affect every dread, I guess latest scoop range increase didn¦t help.
ollobrains Caldari State Inc. People for Organised Peace	Posted - 2009.05.06 09:12:00 - [583] bring it mid level with the other dreads and caps i think
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:03:00 - [584] Originally by: Zhull Edited by: Zhull on 06/05/2009 08:00:13 With the proposed changes it outdamages all dreads but the Revelation when properly fit and it can choose its damage type. Being just under the Rev in terms of damage is about where it should be, considering all the extra training that goes into it. Minmatar being able to choose their damage type is only half right, you can only choose different mixes and 80% of those mixes are exp/kin with a couple points of something else. No matter what you choose a portion of your damage will be hardened against by the tower, not to mention after PP you start losing so much raw damage that it doesn't make sense to use anything lower unless you need the range bonus. So really, it can choose between em/kin/exp or therm/kin. Typically between 33-50% of its damage will be hardened against no matter what ammo you use, unless you happen to be shooting a tower with no exp/kin resistance (which is the same as say a Rev shooting a tower with no em/therm resistance).
Jack Sparroxx Honour Bound Sc0rched Earth	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:14:00 - [585] I dont know much abouy Nag's But what I do know it that they get primaried on POS's and in for the most part in cap fights too. And it is a ***** to train up for. split tank and split weapons. Keep it a shield tanker to keep it in line with the minie carrier and the main bulk of the sub caps. Perhaps reduce the turret slots to 3. and make it versatile so it can either use citadel torps, gun or a mix there of. So to reduce training time for nag's, stop the split traing thats needed. But funny enough moros have abit of the same problem with split training. If you dont have excellet drone skills and T2 sentries, a good portion of you potential DPS is simply not there.
Marcellus Corteaz Alt Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:24:00 - [586] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Marcellus Corteaz Originally by: Slayton Ford Finally, since removing the split weapons WAS NOT A OPTION Actually, it was. Plenty of solutions were offered which didn't require remaking the model. CCP just decided not to listen. Current changes are good enough , whats your problem with it,other than you need to learn out shield tanking? "good enough" hth~
Medidranda Livoga	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:26:00 - [587] Originally by: Jack Sparroxx But what I do know it that they get primaried on POS's and in for the most part in cap fights too. And it is a ***** to train up for. split tank and split weapons. Keep it a shield tanker to keep it in line with the minie carrier and the main bulk of the sub caps. Perhaps reduce the turret slots to 3. and make it versatile so it can either use citadel torps, gun or a mix there of. So to reduce training time for nag's, stop the split traing thats needed. But funny enough moros have abit of the same problem with split training. If you dont have excellet drone skills and T2 sentries, a good portion of you potential DPS is simply not there. Well CCP already said it¦s unlikely they¦ll add or remove hardpoints since they have to redo the artwork. 2 x turret with 100% damage bonus and suitable gun bonuses on would be best IMO. Current suggestion is big improvement but it¦s still messy. Nidhoggur is actually more of a armor tanker now than shield tanker after they switched it from 6/5 to 5/6 slots (and my personal preference is that it stays as a armor tanker, shield nids without resistance bonus would be even more of a primary in carrier group). So in essence if you want to fly minnie caps you need to train cap shields, cap armor, cap missiles and cap projectiles and maybe T2 sentries. It¦s just a little bit excessive if you aren¦t getting some extra performance for your SP. Versatility is just a joke in capital sized ships for most part. Moros is actually most versatile dread since it can kill subcaps.
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.06 10:44:00 - [588] Originally by: fuxinos 850base CPU on Naglfar oO? Ph÷nix has 875 CPU and needs to fit some more CPU intense modules... If both are shield tanked that ammount of CPU is about right the diffrence in CPU usage from low and mid slot modules that get used on average (ignoring capital boosters) is about 10-15 CPU the diffrence in highslots for phoenix/nag is about 10 CPU so its about correct
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 11:15:00 - [589] Originally by: Random Womble Originally by: fuxinos 850base CPU on Naglfar oO? Ph÷nix has 875 CPU and needs to fit some more CPU intense modules... If both are shield tanked that ammount of CPU is about right the diffrence in CPU usage from low and mid slot modules that get used on average (ignoring capital boosters) is about 10-15 CPU the diffrence in highslots for phoenix/nag is about 10 CPU so its about correct Also the naglfar needs to fit 1 more gun than the phoenix. That brings back the available CPU to simmilar levels. And to people that LOl think it will be overpowered.. LO> Its still the only dread that has so few slots to tank. So its ok that it does have a bit more damage because that is its role. A frickign vertical suicidal capital ship!!! STOP TRYINg TO MAKE EVERYTHING EQUAL! We don need another moros. We need flavor and THIS is a VERY flavored work from CCP. CONGRATULATIONS CCP! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 11:22:00 - [590] Originally by: Xelios Originally by: Zhull Edited by: Zhull on 06/05/2009 08:00:13 With the proposed changes it outdamages all dreads but the Revelation when properly fit and it can choose its damage type. Being just under the Rev in terms of damage is about where it should be, considering all the extra training that goes into it. Minmatar being able to choose their damage type is only half right, you can only choose different mixes and 80% of those mixes are exp/kin with a couple points of something else. No matter what you choose a portion of your damage will be hardened against by the tower, not to mention after PP you start losing so much raw damage that it doesn't make sense to use anything lower unless you need the range bonus. So really, it can choose between em/kin/exp or therm/kin. Typically between 33-50% of its damage will be hardened against no matter what ammo you use, unless you happen to be shooting a tower with no exp/kin resistance (which is the same as say a Rev shooting a tower with no em/therm resistance). No it should NOT! Naglfar NEEDS to have MORE damage because its hitpoint buffer is a JOKE when compared to revelation. The naglfar is VERY fine now. Keep also in mind revelation still have other advantages.. INFINITELY more easy logistics due to ammo. When fit for extended range it is stil by FAR the best dread due to only having to bonus 1 weapon system to extend range and not depending on missiles (improved but still far worse than turrets). Also citatels are very bad against carriers. As of these new changes the dreads all ahve their places and flavor. Moros is the supreme machine when getting rid of the enemy support harassing him. Naglfar is the top damage dealer with inferior tank on medium ranges. REvelation is the "I don have any flaws" machine with insane HP buffer, insane damage and logistcs. The phoenix Its the most damaging dread at long range, still needs help on the explosion velocity to engage carriers. So helpign a tiny bit the phoenix and we have a GOOD balance. With FLAVOR! ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough

RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.05.06 13:08:00 - [591] So, where is the benefit over other dreads that justifies the massive SP requirements and investment of time required? Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.06 13:13:00 - [592] Quote: So, where is the benefit over other dreads that justifies the massive SP requirements and investment of time required? It's vertical? Sorry, I got nothing better. While the new naglfar is an ok ship, there still is no edge whatsoever that would make the insane training reqs worth it.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 13:32:00 - [593] Originally by: RedSplat So, where is the benefit over other dreads that justifies the massive SP requirements and investment of time required? there is no MASSIVE sp difference. its a SLIGHT SP difference. Almost every minmatar character when reachign dreadnaught level already has quite some missile skills. So its another 2 or so weeks of extra training. Not really a SERIOUS PROBLEM. People must keep in mind that at most 1 in every 100 dread pilots train their capital weapons to level 5 and read skill to level 5 as well. And even if that was common you can do pretty well with citatels at level 4 only now that they represent less from the ship damage. On the shiled/armor issue. ALL decent minmatar pilots can both armor and shield tank. Then you need only 1 more skill the capital shield skill itself. Again NOTHING HUGELY problematic. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Charles Kuralt Caldari Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.06 14:13:00 - [594] So no solution for motherships being able to speed tank citadels? Ah well, here's to Phoenix being the new fail-dread.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.05.06 14:17:00 - [595] Edited by: RedSplat on 06/05/2009 14:17:13 Originally by: Kagura Nikon there is no MASSIVE sp difference. its a SLIGHT SP difference. I don't consider training two capital weapon systems, along with the associated support gunnery and missile skills to 4 to be a slight difference between the training plan any other Dread pilot will have to shoulder. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar M. Corp	Posted - 2009.05.06 15:14:00 - [596] Compare the total time you need to train for a dreadnaught. THat includes advanced weaposn upgrade 5, tactical reconfi level 4, the jump skills, dread skill BS V.... all taht is a LOT of months... Now add the extra time you need to get torpedoes 5 (the missile support skills you already have if you are a half decent minmatar pilot). The projectiles don count because other dread also train for 1 weapon system... Its a 5-7% difference at most. Not the DOUBLE TRAINING most people say. Its IRRELEVANT. That comming from someone that is a trained naglfar pilot. Its almost irrelevant on the grand scheme of things. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.06 15:40:00 - [597] Edited by: isdisco3 on 06/05/2009 15:46:25 Originally by: Kagura Nikon Compare the total time you need to train for a dreadnaught. THat includes advanced weaposn upgrade 5, tactical reconfi level 4, the jump skills, dread skill BS V.... all taht is a LOT of months... Now add the extra time you need to get torpedoes 5 (the missile support skills you already have if you are a half decent minmatar pilot). The projectiles don count because other dread also train for 1 weapon system... Its a 5-7% difference at most. Not the DOUBLE TRAINING most people say. Its IRRELEVANT. That comming from someone that is a trained naglfar pilot. Its almost irrelevant on the grand scheme of things. If it gets the slot layout proposed (6/6), you'll want to shield tank it. That means that, versus a normal dread pilot (who has trained only one type of tanking, because their race isn't ******ed and doesn't use both types), you'll need to train additionally: torps 5 + citadels 4 (3 weeks) missile supports (1-2 weeks) - (not all of us trained missiles) tactical shield manipulation 5 + capital shield op (3 weeks) given that you can now roll a dread pilot from scratch in about 10 months (more or less), an additional 2 months training time is quite significant. and its for no worthwhile result, you'll be throwing in the additional time simply to fly a dread which will be middle of the pack in terms of performance and lowish in terms of tank.
maya ibuki2 THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.06 15:55:00 - [598] Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 06/05/2009 15:46:25 If it gets the slot layout proposed (6/6), you'll want to shield tank it. That means that, versus a normal dread pilot (who has trained only one type of tanking, because their race isn't ******ed and doesn't use both types), you'll need to train additionally: torps 5 + citadels 4 (3 weeks) missile supports (1-2 weeks) - (not all of us trained missiles) tactical shield manipulation 5 + capital shield op (3 weeks) given that you can now roll a dread pilot from scratch in about 10 months (more or less), an additional 2 months training time is quite significant. and its for no worthwhile result, you'll be throwing in the additional time simply to fly a dread which will be middle of the pack in terms of performance and lowish in terms of tank. that is only applicable if your training the toon specifically to fly dreads. the amount of people who do that and dont intend to sell the char are minimal at best, come think of it, the amount of people whod skill specifically for the naglfar to sell the char is minimal too. anyway, your point is irrelevant. every minmatar pilot who wants to maximise the stregnth of his ships will have missiles and guns, and shield and armour skills, and all the relevant support skills, trained pretty damn high anyway. most minmatar pilots i know all have their relevant (by class size) missile and proj skills at 5, about half of them never intend to fly a capital of any kind at all (yarrr). you would be the one different pilot. maya ibuki2-currently thorn alliance pvper, proud member of the 54th knights templar and genral shooty type
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.06 16:14:00 - [599] Edited by: Ecky X on 06/05/2009 16:15:05 I consider Citadel Torps an equal tradeoff for sentry II's. Both the Nag and the Moros have extra training, but both have a wider variety of workable fits than the Phoenix and Rev.
superlolzz	Posted - 2009.05.06 16:39:00 - [600] Edited by: superlolzz on 06/05/2009 16:42:09 Originally by: Ecky X Edited by: Ecky X on 06/05/2009 16:15:05 I consider Citadel Torps an equal tradeoff for sentry II's. Both the Nag and the Moros have extra training, but both have a wider variety of workable fits than the Phoenix and Rev. not really, cause sentry drones are quite useful for a large amount of things (ishtar, domi) while citadel torps is capital ship only. And really no minnie ships fight missiles anyway (cept the phoon, which fits cruise, and isn't that good anyway :\|) the latest proposed change is a definite step up, but as stated still leaves the nag behind the other dreads in every category, along with the slap in the face dual training. And no most minnie specific pilots don't have awesome missile skills (why would we, what ship uses missiles? :P) And while we may have basic shield tanking skills NO ONE gets tactical shield manipulation 5 unless you want capital shield booster.

isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.06 16:46:00 - [601] Originally by: maya ibuki2 that is only applicable if your training the toon specifically to fly dreads. the amount of people who do that and dont intend to sell the char are minimal at best, come think of it, the amount of people whod skill specifically for the naglfar to sell the char is minimal too. Yes, obviously. But the point remains. Originally by: maya ibuki2 anyway, your point is irrelevant. every minmatar pilot who wants to maximise the stregnth of his ships will have missiles and guns, and shield and armour skills, and all the relevant support skills, trained pretty damn high anyway. most minmatar pilots i know all have their relevant (by class size) missile and proj skills at 5, about half of them never intend to fly a capital of any kind at all (yarrr). you would be the one different pilot. Its not irrelevant. I'm 40m sp of minmatar spec, and I don't have missile supports to 5 because I never fly ships that use them, the sole exceptions being hugin and typhoon. I certainly don't have tactical shield manip 5, and I only trained for t2 torps in the expectation of a pimphoon and the nag. I also don't have shield boosting supports very high, because I hate cyclones and don't fly command ships. It has, undeniably, a significantly higher skill requirement to fly the ship well. And the end result is a dreadnought in the middle of the pack in terms of damage and low in the pack in terms of tank. There's no reason, if I weren't minmatar, that I'd want to train for the nag.
ArmyOfMe The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.05.06 16:49:00 - [602] Originally by: Slayton Ford It makes little sense that the Min caps are armor tankers yet the super caps are shield tankers. since when did anything relating to minmatar make sense?
darkmancer	Posted - 2009.05.06 16:52:00 - [603] I still think the Pheonix are getting the ****ty end of the stick. The velocity boost is appreciated but there's still nothing to recommend the Pheonix for, I know a few Pheonix pilots who spent isk and several months skilling to be able to fly another dread. Could you look into giving the pheonix and/or torps a bit more shine?? The ridiculous explosion velocity on torps? Increased drones bay space? Change in bonus's (5% rof 5%ken -> 10 % damage, 5% shield resist/7.5% boost amount, less dps but easier not to lose volleys of missiles + tough tank)? --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.06 18:48:00 - [604] Originally by: darkmancer I still think the Pheonix are getting the ****ty end of the stick. The velocity boost is appreciated but there's still nothing to recommend the Pheonix for, I know a few Pheonix pilots who spent isk and several months skilling to be able to fly another dread. Could you look into giving the pheonix and/or torps a bit more shine?? The ridiculous explosion velocity on torps? Increased drones bay space? Change in bonus's (5% rof 5%ken -> 10 % damage, 5% shield resist/7.5% boost amount, less dps but easier not to lose volleys of missiles + tough tank)? think no one disagrees that phoenix now needs some tunning. Maybe just increasing the xplosion elocity woudl be enough for a fast work...
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.06 18:50:00 - [605] Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 06/05/2009 15:46:25 Originally by: Kagura Nikon Compare the total time you need to train for a dreadnaught. THat includes advanced weaposn upgrade 5, tactical reconfi level 4, the jump skills, dread skill BS V.... all taht is a LOT of months... Now add the extra time you need to get torpedoes 5 (the missile support skills you already have if you are a half decent minmatar pilot). The projectiles don count because other dread also train for 1 weapon system... Its a 5-7% difference at most. Not the DOUBLE TRAINING most people say. Its IRRELEVANT. That comming from someone that is a trained naglfar pilot. Its almost irrelevant on the grand scheme of things. If it gets the slot layout proposed (6/6), you'll want to shield tank it. That means that, versus a normal dread pilot (who has trained only one type of tanking, because their race isn't ******ed and doesn't use both types), you'll need to train additionally: torps 5 + citadels 4 (3 weeks) missile supports (1-2 weeks) - (not all of us trained missiles) tactical shield manipulation 5 + capital shield op (3 weeks) given that you can now roll a dread pilot from scratch in about 10 months (more or less), an additional 2 months training time is quite significant. and its for no worthwhile result, you'll be throwing in the additional time simply to fly a dread which will be middle of the pack in terms of performance and lowish in terms of tank. funny I just checked how long takes to brign my char to use capital shield tank is a few days only. Because every decent minmatar pilot has shield tank skills. Same for missiles. Not ccp fault that you do not skill up the stuff from your race. Its the same thign with caldari complainign they had to train rail when rokh was released.. just lol. Just because you failed at planing into your char all the weapons fromyour race, do not blame others on it.
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.06 18:53:00 - [606] Originally by: isdisco3 Originally by: maya ibuki2 that is only applicable if your training the toon specifically to fly dreads. the amount of people who do that and dont intend to sell the char are minimal at best, come think of it, the amount of people whod skill specifically for the naglfar to sell the char is minimal too. Yes, obviously. But the point remains. Originally by: maya ibuki2 anyway, your point is irrelevant. every minmatar pilot who wants to maximise the stregnth of his ships will have missiles and guns, and shield and armour skills, and all the relevant support skills, trained pretty damn high anyway. most minmatar pilots i know all have their relevant (by class size) missile and proj skills at 5, about half of them never intend to fly a capital of any kind at all (yarrr). you would be the one different pilot. Its not irrelevant. I'm 40m sp of minmatar spec, and I don't have missile supports to 5 because I never fly ships that use them, the sole exceptions being hugin and typhoon. I certainly don't have tactical shield manip 5, and I only trained for t2 torps in the expectation of a pimphoon and the nag. I also don't have shield boosting supports very high, because I hate cyclones and don't fly command ships. It has, undeniably, a significantly higher skill requirement to fly the ship well. And the end result is a dreadnought in the middle of the pack in terms of damage and low in the pack in terms of tank. There's no reason, if I weren't minmatar, that I'd want to train for the nag. By your logic then rokh shoudl loose its trails.because not every caldari pilot trained rails. By your logic the curse shoudl loose drone bonus sicne nto every ammar pilot flies a ship that has a drone bay....
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.06 19:50:00 - [607] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Dear CCP Please introduce the 10000MN MWD and let Bumpfar do what it was meant to. Thanks in advance. Anything on this yet ---
Altair Mogwa Amok.	Posted - 2009.05.06 20:08:00 - [608] changes fail to deliver. I still plan to train for a rev. For those that want to show off how much SP they have invested to fly the nag, so be it. The point remains that you can't fly diverse mintar without armor tanking, but you can however do it without good shield tanking skills. You can fly skillfully everything other than active tank commands, maelstrom, and the hel. (cyclone is lawl, doesn't count). Saying it should be one way or the other because you should be skill balanced is just lawl. It's irrelevant in balancing it with other capitals. Also CCP has stated well enough before the design of EVE allows new players to mix with old, and be capable pilots in a moderate amount of time. Just because you joined eve earlier and have had longer to go back and skill extra items because nothing was left to do, bears no relevance on future dread balancing. Amarr - Carrier: armor, Dread: armor, Mom: Armor Cal - Carrier: shield, Dread: Shield, Mom: Shield Gal - Carrier: Armor, Dread: Armor, Mom: Armor Min - Carrier: Armor, Dread: (to be shield, was fail at either or) Mom: Shield (what kinda fail is this train?) The same fail thinking by ccp is seen in the split weapon system. we all know each race has some ships that vary outside their main weapon focus (rokh, sac, ect) but none carry over to a split DREAD! With my 38M almost all mintar, i can skillfully fly the niddy. In eve mon it takes me 15 day longer to spec into a rev [amarr bs 5 (at 4 now), large E turret 5, (at 4 now), cap E turrets 4] than it does to train capital proj 4, torps to 5, cits to 4, and then cap shield op 4 (tac shield at 5 already) So why would any mintar pilot with skilled armor tanking not just spend an extra two weeks before investing into a 2B isk ship after fittings and fly a vastly superior dread.
trustzoe Caldari Haven Front	Posted - 2009.05.06 20:40:00 - [609] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: RedSplat So, where is the benefit over other dreads that justifies the massive SP requirements and investment of time required? there is no MASSIVE sp difference. its a SLIGHT SP difference. Almost every minmatar character when reachign dreadnaught level already has quite some missile skills. So its another 2 or so weeks of extra training. Not really a SERIOUS PROBLEM. It is a massive difference if you have a Capital Alt where all you fly are caps. A properly trained non Matar cap pilot will require significantly less SP. In saying that, I am happy with the changes. A HUGE improvement to the joke it was before.
Lucias Trask The White Aces	Posted - 2009.05.06 20:57:00 - [610] Naglfar is very simple to make work. 3 turret slots, 2 bonuses to turrets, remove one high and one low, put in two mids, +200 to cpu. It will allow the Naglfar to actually shield tank, bring the training time for minnie pilots inline with the rest of the races, and allow it to act as a dread. It cant be that hard to not overthink this. [PANIC]

isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.06 21:47:00 - [611] Originally by: Seishi Maru funny I just checked how long takes to brign my char to use capital shield tank is a few days only. Because every decent minmatar pilot has shield tank skills. Same for missiles. Not ccp fault that you do not skill up the stuff from your race. Its the same thign with caldari complainign they had to train rail when rokh was released.. just lol. Just because you failed at planing into your char all the weapons fromyour race, do not blame others on it. It is not just a few days, you are exaggerating. Tactical shield manip 5 is a 2 week skill (more on many characters), and capital shield op should be 6-7 days min. And don't lecture me on how to fly minmatar. If you had actually read my post, instead of being a sh*thead, you would have noticed that there are only 3 pvp ships for minmatar that rely on missiles as more than a "well, i have this high slot, and i have the pg, so i guess i might as well put a missile in it" - hugin, phoon, and cyclone. and since nobody flies cyclones for pvp, that makes 2 ships. and you're trying to actually argue that a minmatar pilot should have all missile supports to 5 because of two freaking ships? furthermore, you're claiming 'all decent minmatar pilots have shield tank.' uh, lol? do you even fly minmatar? do you know anything about the race? there's 4 ships, TOTAL, which use active shield tank for minmatar in pvp (cyclone, command ships, maelstrom). nobody flies cyclones, and maelstroms are certainly not the most common minmatar BS seen in fights. and you're telling me that because of those 4 ships (2-3 of which are actually used), every minmatar pilot should be expected to have great shield-tanking capabilities? that's like claiming that because the curse uses drones, all amarr pilots should have 8 mil SP in drones. its just a bad argument. go learn something about the race before you start telling other people how to fly it.
cuculet	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:08:00 - [612] Originally by: Seishi Maru funny I just checked how long takes to brign my char to use capital shield tank is a few days only. Because every decent minmatar pilot has shield tank skills. Same for missiles. Not ccp fault that you do not skill up the stuff from your race. Its the same thign with caldari complainign they had to train rail when rokh was released.. just lol. Just because you failed at planing into your char all the weapons fromyour race, do not blame others on it. ok man we all understand how uber your char is, stop telling us about it, it's not a contest "who have the best mini char"; i already fly a nag, i can use cap projectile, cap torp and capital armor repairer; but now to train even more for capital shield it's a f***g pain in the a! and no,unlike you i'm not a "decent" minmatar pilot, i faill becose i don't have uber shield tank skills. yea' i can fly matar hacs, recons, matar carrier and dread, but i'm not a "decent" minmatar pilot, very funny, don't you think? oh and stop with "is a few days only" crap, last time i cheked the tactical shield manipulation was a 20+ days skill; add the rest of the shield skills at lvl V, make the math and stop telling us "is a few days only"; 30+ days of extra training it's not "just a few days only"; and this extra training it's just adding to the misille extra trainig; and you end up with exactly what ppl sayd:months of extra traing. and also lol at the matar/caldari comparation: caldari need to train(but they are not conditioned) raills becose they have a dedicated raill platform aka the rokh;even so a caldari pilot can fly a caldari dread just fine with no skill in hybrid turets. pls remember me what minmatar ship can be "a torpedo platform"? maibe the new stealth bomber?
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:21:00 - [613] STOP WHINING
cuculet	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:28:00 - [614] Originally by: Seishi Maru By your logic then rokh should loose its rails.because not every caldari pilot trained rails. By your logic the curse should loose drone bonus since nto every ammar pilot flies a ship that has a drone bay.... and by your logic every pilot in eve will need to have 10 mil sp in drones, 10 mil sp in gunnery, 10 mil sp in missile launcher, super uber skills in shield an armor tanking so he can fly properly a f******g fregate... p.s. and yea, don't forget about electronic, eng and navigation skills, those are very important skills also...lol
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.07 02:00:00 - [615] Originally by: isdisco3 Originally by: Seishi Maru funny I just checked how long takes to brign my char to use capital shield tank is a few days only. Because every decent minmatar pilot has shield tank skills. Same for missiles. Not ccp fault that you do not skill up the stuff from your race. Its the same thign with caldari complainign they had to train rail when rokh was released.. just lol. Just because you failed at planing into your char all the weapons fromyour race, do not blame others on it. It is not just a few days, you are exaggerating. Tactical shield manip 5 is a 2 week skill (more on many characters), and capital shield op should be 6-7 days min. And don't lecture me on how to fly minmatar. If you had actually read my post, instead of being a sh*thead, you would have noticed that there are only 3 pvp ships for minmatar that rely on missiles as more than a "well, i have this high slot, and i have the pg, so i guess i might as well put a missile in it" - hugin, phoon, and cyclone. and since nobody flies cyclones for pvp, that makes 2 ships. and you're trying to actually argue that a minmatar pilot should have all missile supports to 5 because of two freaking ships? furthermore, you're claiming 'all decent minmatar pilots have shield tank.' uh, lol? do you even fly minmatar? do you know anything about the race? there's 4 ships, TOTAL, which use active shield tank for minmatar in pvp (cyclone, command ships, maelstrom). nobody flies cyclones, and maelstroms are certainly not the most common minmatar BS seen in fights. and you're telling me that because of those 4 ships (2-3 of which are actually used), every minmatar pilot should be expected to have great shield-tanking capabilities? that's like claiming that because the curse uses drones, all amarr pilots should have 8 mil SP in drones. its just a bad argument. go learn something about the race before you start telling other people how to fly it. Just ignore Seishi Maru as he is a tool and a noob. I have over 1000 kills with Minmatar ships and Active Shield tanking is NOT the norm for an experienced Minmatar PVP pilot. The change does require at least 15 more days of training, but the extra training is worth the vast improvement. This will also give us the ability to put on 3 damage mods which I like.
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.07 04:49:00 - [616] Updated first post says nothing about the added midslot. Is that still planned?
JfG D00MSAYER Caldari Black Mesa LEGION.	Posted - 2009.05.07 06:48:00 - [617] Is there a plan on boosting explosion velocity on citadel torpedoes? Im training for capitals atm but i heard from some guys citadels kinda suck. And looking at the base stats its kinda obvious. Base explosion velocity of citadel torpedoes is 29 meters per second (divide by 1000 and multiply with 3600) --> 104,4 kilometers per hour So u ask where is this guy goin? Well this means i could speedtank a citadeltorpedo with my 90horsepower toyota corolla on the highway. WITH EASE and i didnt even break the speedlimit here in Austria (130km/h). Theres probably a big crater behind me but i couldnt care less after surviving this kind of an attack. Yes i know, reallife physics and computergames dont work together well. Just wanted to point that out.
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.07 07:16:00 - [618] You think that's bad? Explosion velocity in siege is 3.26 m/s . It badly needs fixing. For both the Phoenix and the Nag.
Xthril Ranger hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:12:00 - [619] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Originally by: Nuts Nougat Dear CCP Please introduce the 10000MN MWD and let Bumpfar do what it was meant to. Thanks in advance. Anything on this yet I think the 8 bumbing nanonaglfars where replaced by dictors and hics. . you'll never jump alone
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:26:00 - [620] Originally by: Xthril Ranger Originally by: Nuts Nougat Originally by: Nuts Nougat Dear CCP Please introduce the 10000MN MWD and let Bumpfar do what it was meant to. Thanks in advance. Anything on this yet I think the 8 bumbing nanonaglfars where replaced by dictors and hics. How do i bump caps now with crappy new bumping mechanics? Surely the Bumpfar is the answer ---

white kight Galaxy Punks Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:56:00 - [621] I would say, only cut the range of the torp, AS LONG AS there is a capital cruise missile. This is because you can have long range naglfar, revalation and moros, but not a long range Phoenix. Hmmm yeah that seems like a good plan. Stealth nerf the Phoenix. Originally by: CCP Greyscale :facepalm:
Ecky X SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.07 11:58:00 - [622] Originally by: white kight I would say, only cut the range of the torp, AS LONG AS there is a capital cruise missile. This is because you can have long range naglfar, revalation and moros, but not a long range Phoenix. Hmmm yeah that seems like a good plan. Stealth nerf the Phoenix. " Citadel Torpedoes We are looking at an increase to missile velocity and a proportional decrease to flight time. * Citadel Torpedo velocity increased to 2,750 m/s (from 750) * Citadel Torpedo flight time decreased to 25 secs (from 90) " Maths work out to torps getting a small bit of extra range, not less.
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.07 14:32:00 - [623] Originally by: isdisco3 Originally by: Seishi Maru funny I just checked how long takes to brign my char to use capital shield tank is a few days only. Because every decent minmatar pilot has shield tank skills. Same for missiles. Not ccp fault that you do not skill up the stuff from your race. Its the same thign with caldari complainign they had to train rail when rokh was released.. just lol. Just because you failed at planing into your char all the weapons fromyour race, do not blame others on it. It is not just a few days, you are exaggerating. Tactical shield manip 5 is a 2 week skill (more on many characters), and capital shield op should be 6-7 days min. furthermore, you're claiming 'all decent minmatar pilots have shield tank.' uh, lol? do you even fly minmatar? do you know anything about the race? there's 4 ships, TOTAL, which use active shield tank for minmatar in pvp (cyclone, command ships, maelstrom). nobody flies cyclones, and maelstroms are certainly not the most common minmatar BS seen in fights. and you're telling me that because of those 4 ships (2-3 of which are actually used), every minmatar pilot should be expected to have great shield-tanking capabilities? that's like claiming that because the curse uses drones, all amarr pilots should have 8 mil SP in drones. its just a bad argument. go learn something about the race before you start telling other people how to fly it. You clear know alot about minmatar obviously people would never shield tank a vagabond, broadsword, fleet stabber, jag, you can shield tanka tempest then theres the vargur, Hel, Rag, I even shield tank a Niddy most of the time, Rapier, Huggin (passive shield tanks/buffers count as shield tanks as much as any other since you need the same skills to make them effective), scimitar, hurricane (less common post nano nerf) theres probably a couple of others. Plus if you know what the capital shield operation skill does you would realise most of the time actually having it at Lv1 makes no diffrence as it only reduces cap usage unlike capital repair systems which reduces cycle time (which ironically increases cap/s usage) making training it up far more important. so having capital shield op 1 is perfectly viable so your training time is as much an exageration as the origional posters was an underestimate
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.07 15:52:00 - [624] Originally by: Random Womble bad post His point was active-tanking which requires more skills than passive tanking, so I think you missed it by a mile Also for the person saying the difference was slight, here, have some numbers (and words) It takes 635 days for a new player to train a Revelation. It takes 756 for a new player to train a Naglfar. (=121 days or 4 months of difference) The Revelation pilot can also jump straight into an Archon and tank away like nobodys business The Naglfar pilot has to train up armor tanking if he wishes to fly a Nidhoggur, adding some 40 days more to the difference in training times. (No your unique-snowflake-shieldtank-nidhoggur doesn't count) tl;dr a Naglfar takes 4 months longer to train and has nothing to show for it. Except, ofcourse, the vertical aspect
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.07 16:46:00 - [625] Edited by: Naomi Knight on 07/05/2009 16:45:54 Actually Random Womble's post is very valid. And shield tanked nighoggur is as good as the armor tanked one.
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.07 16:57:00 - [626] Originally by: Naomi Knight Edited by: Naomi Knight on 07/05/2009 16:45:54 Actually Random Womble's post is very valid. And shield tanked nighoggur is as good as the armor tanked one. This was brought up on page 19; its good if you don't use it for logistics or fleet work or tanking
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.07 18:49:00 - [627] My point was with regard to active-shield tanking. If you want to claim that minmatar shield tanks commonly and the nag should reflect this, then CCP needs to invent a capital shield extender module and give the nag a bonus per level to shield HP. Because that's how most minmatar ships 'tank' shield. Anyway. The post a few above mine is great. 4 months more training in order to get into a dread which is only middle-of-the-pack in terms of performance. If I weren't minmatar, I wouldn't even think about training for this new nag. There's nothing it does that other dreads don't do, better.
Tyby Viper Squad Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:04:00 - [628] Originally by: Naomi Knight Edited by: Naomi Knight on 07/05/2009 16:45:54 Actually Random Womble's post is very valid. And shield tanked nighoggur is as good as the armor tanked one. yea a shield tanked nidhoggur is as good as a shield tanked thanatos! and lol about shield tanked minmatar ships: just adding a plate to a falcon doesn't make the falcon an armor tanking ship;
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:51:00 - [629] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Random Womble bad post His point was active-tanking which requires more skills than passive tanking, so I think you missed it by a mile Also for the person saying the difference was slight, here, have some numbers (and words) It takes 635 days for a new player to train a Revelation. It takes 756 for a new player to train a Naglfar. (=121 days or 4 months of difference) The Revelation pilot can also jump straight into an Archon and tank away like nobodys business The Naglfar pilot has to train up armor tanking if he wishes to fly a Nidhoggur, adding some 40 days more to the difference in training times. (No your unique-snowflake-shieldtank-nidhoggur doesn't count) tl;dr a Naglfar takes 4 months longer to train and has nothing to show for it. Except, ofcourse, the vertical aspect but most of the skills are passive shield tanks one. The ammount if skill for ACTIVE tanking you need extra to reach capital level is NOT huge. And EVERY decent pilot will have it at least partially trained... face it train it or admit you are not a decent minmatar pilot. Minmatar has always been like that if you can reach 40M P and Not have understood taht.. than maybe eve is too complicated for you?
Seishi Maru M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.05.07 21:58:00 - [630] Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Random Womble bad post His point was active-tanking which requires more skills than passive tanking, so I think you missed it by a mile Also for the person saying the difference was slight, here, have some numbers (and words) It takes 635 days for a new player to train a Revelation. It takes 756 for a new player to train a Naglfar. (=121 days or 4 months of difference) The Revelation pilot can also jump straight into an Archon and tank away like nobodys business The Naglfar pilot has to train up armor tanking if he wishes to fly a Nidhoggur, adding some 40 days more to the difference in training times. (No your unique-snowflake-shieldtank-nidhoggur doesn't count) tl;dr a Naglfar takes 4 months longer to train and has nothing to show for it. Except, ofcourse, the vertical aspect If you want to waste your time doing character sonly for capital ships than its not my problem. If you started a character just for capital ships FOCUSING on Minmatar you are really not smart at all. Not because of training time but simply because their ships were completely inferior. Any NORMAL minmatar pilot will have very little extra to train to get to a naglfar when compared to a normal a ammar pilot have to get to a revelation. That is what matters. This game was not and should never be balanced around idea of people that make characters only for capital ships to then resale them... And even your numbers prove my point. its a LIE that naglfar needs 2 time s more skill points. Its a 15% difference! That is a SMALL difference. Smaller than the difference of what a gallente character needs to train for his battleships and a minmatar character needs to train for his battleships.

Orb Lati Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.07 23:31:00 - [631] *****ing about the skill requirements / training times is a non issue, and a waste of this thread. I (and i dear say many minmatar pilots) don't care about having to train longer, its a characteristic of the race we are playing. What matters is that at the end of the training we end up with equipment thats worth all that effort. "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.08 01:46:00 - [632] Originally by: Seishi Maru If you started a character just for capital ships FOCUSING on Minmatar you are really not smart at all. Not because of training time but simply because their ships were completely inferior. lol. so your argument is, essentially: "yes, the nag sucks. it has always sucked. but people who have the misfortune of being minmatar might like it now, slightly. nobody else will, but that's ok. that's how the game should be." you're an awful troll lol. go back to flying drakes.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.08 08:00:00 - [633] I'm just gonna keep pointing out that the Niddy tanks better with shields (meaning all minny caps use shields) and see if anyone notices.
Juliette DuBois	Posted - 2009.05.08 08:05:00 - [634] Sure, if you are looking at personal tank only. But in a group on mainly armor tanking and RRing carriers? No way.
aevistyne Caldari Solarflare Heavy Industries Doctrine.	Posted - 2009.05.08 10:00:00 - [635] not to mention the cap instability you'd have using the mids for a shield tank rather than cap recharge when it comes to running remote reps on the nid. Saying its a shield tanker is the same as saying the thanatos is a shield tanker. ------- EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER
Tom Hanks Raype Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.08 10:36:00 - [636] Boost Citadel explosion velocity so they can actually do damage against a mother ship for the love of all that is holy. A capital speed tanking a torpedo the size of a football field is utterly stupid. Do they pack citadels with low explosives instead of high explosives or something? The kind of damage they do I think the warhead is filled with gasoline or firecrackers. Caldari Racial Purity
Seishomaru	Posted - 2009.05.08 12:11:00 - [637] Originally by: isdisco3 Originally by: Seishi Maru If you started a character just for capital ships FOCUSING on Minmatar you are really not smart at all. Not because of training time but simply because their ships were completely inferior. lol. so your argument is, essentially: "yes, the nag sucks. it has always sucked. but people who have the misfortune of being minmatar might like it now, slightly. nobody else will, but that's ok. that's how the game should be." you're an awful troll lol. go back to flying drakes. nope.. just pointing that you are complaining about a problem taht doe s not exist! IF you have a normal minmatar character you already has missile and shield skills (or you are fail). This woudl only affect people training from zero direclty towards capitals.. and this does nto EXIST with minmatar characters. At most 1 in 20 of the characters made direclty to capitals are minmatar. So the problem you complain doe snto exist at all!
RookieEG Sun Lin Tong Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.08 12:25:00 - [638] as every1 like to say here - i'm a descent minni pilot, i have trained armor and shield tanking, both projectiles, drones and missiles. BUT - i don't ***ken what to train torpedoes to 5lvl and waste 20+ days on tactical shield manipulation. this skills are mostly needed for raven pilots. minni ship doesn't needs them at all.
Gloria Lewis Caldari lolpatrol B-D	Posted - 2009.05.08 14:51:00 - [639] Originally by: Seishi Maru If you want to waste your time doing character sonly for capital ships than its not my problem. If you started a character just for capital ships FOCUSING on Minmatar you are really not smart at all. Not because of training time but simply because their ships were completely inferior. Any NORMAL minmatar pilot will have very little extra to train to get to a naglfar when compared to a normal a ammar pilot have to get to a revelation. That is what matters. This game was not and should never be balanced around idea of people that make characters only for capital ships to then resale them... And even your numbers prove my point. its a LIE that naglfar needs 2 time s more skill points. Its a 15% difference! That is a SMALL difference. Smaller than the difference of what a gallente character needs to train for his battleships and a minmatar character needs to train for his battleships. Notice when I said "a new character"? When you remove all the shared skills (jump drive calibrations, capacitor skills, everything in spaceship command and so on) the difference is still going to be 121 days. It's still going to be 4 months. But it's no longer 15%, it's something much more (it takes too much effort to figure the exact number out) Also your troll-fu is very weak; work on it or quit it
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.08 18:31:00 - [640] Edited by: Incantare on 08/05/2009 18:36:17 From another thread: Originally by: Vitrael So I trained a Phoenix a few months ago. The moment it was ready I hopped on Sisi and started pew pewing and realized that the missiles go about 1km/s and can't hit anything that moves for any damage at all. The ship is so laughably bad that I sold the character. Citadel torps need a big boost for both the Phoenix and Naglfar's sake. It's really pretty sad how awful those dreads are compared to the others. It's great that you're finally boosting the Nag. It's also good that citadels are getting a velocity boost. But until explosion velocity on citadels gets massively increased the Nag and Phoenix will remain subpar in capital fights. Aknowledging this issue is the least you could do.

darkmancer	Posted - 2009.05.08 19:05:00 - [641] Originally by: RookieEG as every1 like to say here - i'm a descent minni pilot, i have trained armor and shield tanking, both projectiles, drones and missiles. BUT - i don't ***ken what to train torpedoes to 5lvl and waste 20+ days on tactical shield manipulation. this skills are mostly needed for raven pilots. minni ship doesn't needs them at all. Tactical Shield Manipulation 5 is of no use to Caldari pilots either. Indeed itÆs actually a bad skill to train as a low amount of shield bleed is beneficial as it maintains shields longer and allows for more shield regen to kick in (mainly theoretical, in practice I suspect it wouldnÆt make much difference in 99% of cases). The whole shield bleed systems is vestigial which serves little except to create a more complex calculations for the server . TSM 5 is just a road block skill for capitals, although why itÆs required I donÆt know as capital armour reps have no skill requirements you wouldnÆt have out normal ôeverydayö armour tanking pvp. The Capital Shield booster requirements should be shield operation 5 and shield management 5 imo. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Orb Lati Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.08 21:19:00 - [642] Originally by: RookieEG BUT - i don't ***ken what to train torpedoes to 5lvl ..... minni ship doesn't needs them at all. How can you say that...Get your typhoon throwing RAGE at your hapless prey then come back and retract that statement. "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
prathe Minmatar Omega Enterprises Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.05.09 01:29:00 - [643] Edited by: prathe on 09/05/2009 01:29:30 Originally by: Midjutetur Originally by: Jelmer So, my suggestion would be - remove the missile slots and make this ship pure projectile. Thank you. PLEASE oh yes this would be aweesome but it has to be four turrets signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link to the image URL) - Jacques([email protected]) why dont you just tell me ?
Mrsticks Minmatar RNCGM Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.09 08:05:00 - [644] Prohaps a Change in Dir... Howabout a change to XL Projectile ammo. Make them do a small Debuff to Resistances. This Debuff Would Grow over time but like shield recharge would Recharge faster as it went taward zero. The Torps Would be there to Deal extra Damage. Also We need Assult Cruise missle Launchers Long Live TEXAS! Texans join the Texas channel in game plz.
Hawk Firestorm	Posted - 2009.05.09 10:02:00 - [645] I can understand why people say why the Nag shouldn't have 2 wep types. No other dread has such a requirement, there's a few things that could be done to change this by either making all dreads be able to use either all gus or all missiles or a combo dependant on the users preference, but it shouldn't be forced on them.
pocnitoarea	Posted - 2009.05.09 11:15:00 - [646] Edited by: pocnitoarea on 09/05/2009 11:16:06 Originally by: Gloria Lewis Originally by: Random Womble bad post Also for the person saying the difference was slight, here, have some numbers (and words) It takes 635 days for a new player to train a Revelation. It takes 756 for a new player to train a Naglfar. (=121 days or 4 months of difference) The Revelation pilot can also jump straight into an Archon and tank away like nobodys business The Naglfar pilot has to train up armor tanking if he wishes to fly a Nidhoggur, adding some 40 days more to the difference in training times. (No your unique-snowflake-shieldtank-nidhoggur doesn't count) tl;dr a Naglfar takes 4 months longer to train and has nothing to show for it. Except, ofcourse, the vertical aspect this tbh; the good part in all this training is that a mini pilot will need only caldari bs lvl V to be ready to fly a pheonix, and when phoenixes get a boost... who knows, lol it's maibe a nice ideea to have some versatile ships, but when it comes to capital ships, training req become just insane compared to other dreads; and at the end you'll get a middle class dread(more like the low middle), with some dmg and worst tank available on the market; at least make him 4/7/7, that will be a nice reward after all that training 4/7/7 and everyone will be happy!
Vlip Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.09 16:37:00 - [647] Quote: at least make him 4/7/7, that will be a nice reward after all that training 4/7/7 and everyone will be happy! This! If we have to go through all that trouble to fly it, at least make it worth it.
Cain m Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2009.05.09 20:20:00 - [648] All it needs is a 20% bonus to BCU and Gyrostab effectiveness per level of Matari Dread and some extra CPU. Fit 2 arty, 2 city torps, a siege mod, a T2 invul, one T2 hardener of each type, a DCU, 1 faction BCU, 1 faction Gryo, 3 T2 reinforced bulkheads. This will give it a very nice buffer as well as decent DPS. Granted you don't always want a buffer. Maybe a 50% reduction in siege module duration and fuel consumption? Maybe give the siege mod a script that decreases siege mod duration and bonuses from it, while having the nag not be effected by it. Maybe significantly lower jump fuel cost?
Foot M FM Corp Dead Mans Hand	Posted - 2009.05.09 20:59:00 - [649] Edited by: Foot M on 09/05/2009 20:59:09 Originally by: CCP Chronotis The Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I will have some changes to base it of the 1400mm artillery: * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) Hi, Could you clarify the above from the first post in this thread please. I assmue a typo, to decrease a ROF you need to have a lower ROF post change and this shows that its actually an increase in ROF. if the ROF is increased my simple calculations takes the base damage of the nag from 1299.799 dps to 1446.753 dps (11.3% increase) if the ROF is decreased "kept the same" my simple calculations takes the base damage of the nag from 1299.799 dps to 1659.22 dps (27.6% increase) calcs based on 3500mm siege with emp. I would very much like to see the ROF on the turrets stay at the lower figure but it would be nice to have some clarity. Either way thanks for giving us more dps on the nag =) Foot M -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day...
Bobbechk The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.09 21:59:00 - [650] Edited by: Bobbechk on 09/05/2009 22:01:24 Edited by: Bobbechk on 09/05/2009 21:59:57 Originally by: darkmancer Change in bonus's (5% rof 5%ken -> 10 % damage, 5% shield resist/7.5% boost amount, less dps but easier not to lose volleys of missiles + tough tank)? so you want to take the best tanking dread and make it tank 50% better? while you take the highest alpha dread and add 25% moore alpha? and at the same time miss every aspect of what you said was wrong about the ship (explosion velocity bonus anyone?)

prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.10 03:00:00 - [651] Originally by: Seishomaru Originally by: isdisco3 Originally by: Seishi Maru If you started a character just for capital ships FOCUSING on Minmatar you are really not smart at all. Not because of training time but simply because their ships were completely inferior. lol. so your argument is, essentially: "yes, the nag sucks. it has always sucked. but people who have the misfortune of being minmatar might like it now, slightly. nobody else will, but that's ok. that's how the game should be." you're an awful troll lol. go back to flying drakes. nope.. just pointing that you are complaining about a problem taht doe s not exist! IF you have a normal minmatar character you already has missile and shield skills (or you are fail). This woudl only affect people training from zero direclty towards capitals.. and this does nto EXIST with minmatar characters. At most 1 in 20 of the characters made directly to capitals are minmatar. So the problem you complain doe snto exist at all! You are missing what people are saying completely so let me try to help you. A normal Minmatar PVP character will not have Tactical Shield Manipulation V trained (needed for the Capital Shield Booster) which is a 20 day skill. An average Minmatar pilot would be a ****** to have this trained up as it has zero use as no sub cap Matar ships requires this skill. And OF COURSE people do not create Minmatar Capital alts, one of the reasons is because the EXTRA TRAINING IS SO DAMN LONG coupled with the fact that the Matar caps are the worst. And even though the Matar dread is being buffed, people still will not train them on an Alt because of all the extra training time. What people are trying to get through your head is that they want the training time to be the same as it is for other races so that maybe people will train Matar capital alts also. Hope this helps to clarify things for you. You are welcome.
aldarrin	Posted - 2009.05.10 04:48:00 - [652] If I can't using tracking disruptors against sieged Revelations / Moros / Naglfars, then people should be able to smartbomb my Phoenix's torps. I don't particularly care how to explain it RP wise. It isn't balanced if 3/4 of Dread weapons are impervious to outside interference but my torps are. -- Flame on.
Uedel Minmatar Lyonesse. KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.10 09:59:00 - [653] Remove Torps please and make it turret only so we can finaly be on par with dmg mods etc
General Paul Atomic Heroes Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2009.05.10 11:45:00 - [654] to the guy whineing about tactical shield manipulation 5, its hardly any use on a caldari char either, if your at 10% shields ur going down in a ****storm. Changeing the skill requirements as someone said already would be a grave insult to people who spent 20 days training for that 5% extra bleedthrough damage rubbish. I agree that the naglefar is poor because one of its weapontypes is the horrendous torpedoe, the phoenix is forced to use these as its main weapon type though =/ A none speed fitted Thanatos can speed tank a sieged phoenix's torps to the point where they do no effective damage, this is plain silly. One of the torps is described as nothing less than a baby nuclear warhead, how exactly do you outrun a nuke at < 100m/sec

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.10 20:14:00 - [655] Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example.

Batolemaeus Caldari Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.05.10 20:34:00 - [656] Originally by: CCP Chronotis but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. Considering that i never got Survey V reinbursed when salvaging requirements got changed, i don't see the problem. At least vets have something to brag about. ("Back in the days, when capital shieldbooster required....we also had to order every single turret to shoot through a command line interpreter, and sometimes the AOE would...") ---------------------------------------------- Originally by: CCP Prism X In New Eden, EVE wins you.
Ragel Tropxe The Older Gamers Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.10 20:43:00 - [657] this is getting rather off topic, and as someone who has both TSM 5 and Shield Management 5 the proposed change to the requirement of cap shield boosters doesnt affect me. If youre going to change the requirements, why not make TSM a valuable skill (to reward thoe of us that have trained it) - otherwise itll just be another pointless skill to train - in fact there is an argument that it hurts your shield tank!. How about TSM giving a shield resist bonus? or a shield capacity bonus?
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2009.05.10 21:04:00 - [658] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. I made a spreadsheet about missile damage so I could understand the way missiles work now and the resulting graph I got is on eve-files, what it shows is damage from a citadel torp from a sieged naglfar(all lvl 5's). Assuming the formula found by the community is correct, it would appear that damage from missiles falls away rapidly and then slows down instead of falling away slowly similar to how turret falloff functions. This rapid drop in effect is noticeable on every missile type, other missiles that are affected by this seem to be for instance rockets, which have great trouble hitting frigates for good damage. A few m/s difference in velocity can mean a big difference in damage. Of course this is assuming the formula reverse engineered from ingame data is accurate, I don't have a reason to believe it is not though, some form of confirmation would be nice pwetty please . ( formula: Damage = Base_Damage * MIN(MIN(sig/Er,1) , (Ev/Er * sig/vel)^(ln(drf)/ln(oaeDRS))), with oaeDRS being 5.5 ) Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. ooh ooh, something that could make this skill "usefull" is for shields to start leaking earlier, say at 75% they can start leaking and this skill reduces that to 0% at lvl 5 -- stuff --
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.10 22:46:00 - [659] Edited by: Blane Xero on 10/05/2009 22:48:36 Make TSM increase the peak recharge zone (which is currently about 35-25%?) go all the way from 0%-35% at level 5. (20%-35% at one, 15%-35% at two, 10%-35% at three, 5%-35% at four, 0%-35% at five) This effectively means a Passive shield tanked ship can regenerate just as well at 0% as an active tanked ship could, instead of the current "Past 30% all is lost" And then you can rebalance Passive shield tanked ships while you're at it so that they tank on-par (or a little more/less as you see fit) with active tanked ships. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.11 00:17:00 - [660] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. \o/ That said I do have one comment: those solutions aren't mutally exclusive. Ideally you should both fix citadels against moving caps and introduce capital cruise as a long range option.

Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2009.05.11 01:35:00 - [661] Edited by: Sidus Isaacs on 11/05/2009 01:40:19 Good news on the citadel torps, makes me want to train for a Phoneix after all, since i am currently very much Caldari specced and concidering going into capital ships. But imo the explison velocity fix is more importent then addind Capital cruises, that would just make it more cumbersom to tweak and balance. Right now the Phoneix got good range, and can deliver its dps across that range decently. Thats the main advantage a missile boat got over the instant damage turret boats, dot take that away by forcing Caldari players to use low damage cruises (then we might as well use tops?). Take a look at Raven for fleet PvP, Cruise Raven is a no go there. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
TimMc Gallente Brutal Deliverance Blackguard Coalition	Posted - 2009.05.11 06:40:00 - [662] Originally by: Incantare Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. \o/ That said I do have one comment: those solutions aren't mutally exclusive. Ideally you should both fix citadels against moving caps and introduce capital cruise as a long range option. Citadel torps already have 150km range 0_o. Cruise wouldn't be that helpful.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.05.11 07:09:00 - [663] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. Man, I can't troll this post, it's impossible. Wtf am I supposed to do all day if the Devs start making competent posts and listen to player feedback? Oh yeah and I suggest you just make TSM (tactical shield manipulation) a rank 2 skill and be done with it. You've fiddled with skill ranks and pre-reqs before so why stop now. Originally by: CCP Whisper So you're going to have to do some actual thinking with regards to hull components and their capabilities instead of copying some cookie-cutter setup. Cry some more.
Muschiu	Posted - 2009.05.11 07:13:00 - [664] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. lol it's not about emo, it's about comon sense: i'm a nag pilot and i really trained allot for this ship already, but another 30 days of training for capital shield booster... meh, i'll just choose to go for revelation, train 60 days and jump in the best dread available, and have some very nice bs also like a bonus, not that crap called minmatar bs
Xelios Minmatar Broski Enterprises Avarice.	Posted - 2009.05.11 08:25:00 - [665] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. Shield Management 5 would make more sense as a pre-req, but I'd also be ok with TSM being redone to give a different more useful bonus. Or maybe both? That way people who've spent the time training it to 5 still get some advantage, and people who haven't trained it yet don't have to add another 20 days to an already loonnnngggg skill plan for a Nag. I like the idea of TSM moving the peak shield recharge area up a bit, or maybe making the peak wider.
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.11 09:14:00 - [666] Edited by: Incantare on 11/05/2009 09:22:33 Originally by: TimMc Citadel torps already have 150km range 0_o. Cruise wouldn't be that helpful. It's not the range as much as the missile velocity. That and the lack of a choice between short range/high damage and long range/low damage that every other weapon system has.
Muschiu	Posted - 2009.05.11 12:27:00 - [667] Edited by: ****u on 11/05/2009 12:29:15 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. increasing expl velocity it could be a bit tricky becose the risc of siege dreads killing bs and smaller; that's becose now carriers and bs/bcs have @same speed or close(yea 'lo good made nano nerf). another solution can be increassing torpedo dmg/rofx2, so the pheonixes can become best dmg dealler when it come to poses; also having an insane dmg at close/very close range will allow them to be hotdroped at point blank range on a hostile snipping sieged dread gang for example and wipe the floor with them.
Dibsi Dei Salamyhkaisten kilta	Posted - 2009.05.11 13:55:00 - [668] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. But don't capital armor guys need to train armor compensations to V? So time spent is pretty much equal with the shields as they don't.
Juliette DuBois	Posted - 2009.05.11 14:01:00 - [669] Originally by: Dibsi Dei But don't capital armor guys need to train armor compensations to V? So time spent is pretty much equal with the shields as they don't. Not really, I bet there are many cap pilots that have those at level 4 yet. Active hardeners are also used more often in caps than in small ships and comps do nothing for that. Not to mention that these skills are actually useful unlike TSM V.
prefectro Minmatar Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.05.11 16:53:00 - [670] Originally by: Dibsi Dei Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. But don't capital armor guys need to train armor compensations to V? So time spent is pretty much equal with the shields as they don't. The Nidhoggur (Matar Carrier) is an armor tanker. By making the Dread a shield tanker you now have to train both.

Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.11 17:36:00 - [671] Originally by: Dibsi Dei Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. But don't capital armor guys need to train armor compensations to V? So time spent is pretty much equal with the shields as they don't. We dont need to. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Frodo Teabaggins Minmatar 101st Space Marine Force	Posted - 2009.05.11 17:41:00 - [672] as for the split weapons... make it 3 missiles and 3 guns. you decide which you use. increase the durability of citadel torpedoes because a smartbomb kills them. thats bull just say GG to caldari already CCP i think you got em... theyre nerfed most everywhere as it is. Dont forget T2 capital mods. ______________________________ How big is ur pvpness?
Khefron GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.11 17:47:00 - [673] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. Allow me to make a different suggestion. Citadel torps are also largely ineffective against pos modules. Perhaps the thing to do would be to leave the explosion velocity unchanged, but instead reduce the explosion radius from 1000 meters to 800 meters. This would have the torps do half damage against large guns and large pos mods, but with the current velocity numbers, not appreciably improve damage against Battleship and smaller sized targets. Also, due to how sig radius is a multiplier for velocity, it would also improve citadel torpedo performance against moving capital ships.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.11 20:07:00 - [674] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. You would make many Minny and Gallente cap ship pilots happy by doing this. Minny because they already require both kinds of capital tanking, Gallente because they can potentially use either kind on the Thanny and, to a lesser extent, Moros. Originally by: TimMc Citadel torps already have 150km range 0_o. Cruise wouldn't be that helpful. Citadel torps were introduced in the days when battleship torps had base ranges that were much higher than currently. If CCP went the route of introducing Capital Cruise Missiles, they'd likely tweak the stats on Citadel torps to make them shorter range weapons. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
JonnyKay Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.11 23:33:00 - [675] I am an up and coming minny Cap pilot myself and am happy that the nag is getting some lovin ;D Although it's still kind of ridiculous how Minmatar cap pilots need to train Shields, Armor, Projectiles, Missiles and Drones. I have 7 days remaining on my tactical shield manipulation level 5 skill, so if they decide to change the requirements ill be annoyed. Also, with the idea of making Capital Cruise missiles... there seems to be no need at all, its just yet another skill to train up, and with the state of normal cruise missiles, the capital cruise missiles will be crap! The explosion velocity and possibly explosion radius on the citadel torps should be altered to balance them
Orb Lati Minmatar ANZAC ALLIANCE Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.11 23:44:00 - [676] I would prefer that TSM actually be boosted to a useful skill rather than switching CSO prerequisite to SM5. Mainly because those who already have TSM trained to lvl5 shouldn't be penalized for training, what in effect becomes a useless 20+ day lvl5 skill, because others think its to much effort for them to train. Even is you do switch CSO prereq to SM, you still need to address TSM (make effect the optimal passive/active recharge zone like suggested earlier) "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
Mistmare Heavy Influence Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.11 23:50:00 - [677] /signed and I'm really looking forward to the changes stated by CCP Chronotis as I'm a naglfar pilot and I feel like they really need something changed :)
Rakshasa Taisab Caldari Sane Industries Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.12 06:29:00 - [678] Originally by: ******u increasing expl velocity it could be a bit tricky becose the risc of siege dreads killing bs and smaller; that's becose now carriers and bs/bcs have @same speed or close(yea 'lo good made nano nerf). another solution can be increassing torpedo dmg/rofx2, so the pheonixes can become best dmg dealler when it come to poses; also having an insane dmg at close/very close range will allow them to be hotdroped at point blank range on a hostile snipping sieged dread gang for example and wipe the floor with them. The solution IMO would be to make the larger sig radius of the cap ships be more effective at negating speed tanking for citadel torps. Though I'm actually more of a supporter of making the phoenix a real pos-basher, with better DPS than the other dreads when shooting at stationary targets. It would give it an unique role that would be in-line with it's current state (as a dread only useful for pos bashing).
SeerinDarkness Minmatar An Tir Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.05.12 06:35:00 - [679] I personally think te whole concept of changing this ship is useless and time wasteing of course it required more skills just like the typhoon BS requires more skills to make it work properly as for citadel torps i see a lot of griping aboput those being useles for whatever reason but the calderi dread is based entierly on them and there are plenty of those around. Tanking enuff said choos to tankt it however u trained for..do Not be screwing over half of the matari pilots that specced in training tanking the other way...armor or shield or do you people care at all u may be jacking people on 4-5 months training time by making the naglfar tank type specific? Seer
Zanquis Caldari Universal Exports Cult of War	Posted - 2009.05.12 08:14:00 - [680] Edited by: Zanquis on 12/05/2009 08:16:37 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. Citidel Torps I am not sure how much good adding another type of longer range/lower damage missile launchers will do for capital class weapons. I think your better off tweaking the explosion velocity/radius penalties associated with using the Siege modules and putting your energy into the capital ship revamp which is coming since I would assume dreads will change considerably along with the changes in sovereignty. Right now citidel torps just seem to do less damage, can be killed by smartbomb shields, and have trouble against smaller targets such as POS modules. You need to make citidel torps better at something then gunnery even if it carries some of these weakness. Right now its just a second class weapon system, and even Nag pilots hated the fact hey had to use the things. Part of the reason they are so happy their ships will have more dps loaded to their turrets. Tactical Shield Manipulation Skill This skill definitely needs to be changed, and here are a few ideas... 5% EM Shield EM resistances per level (Increases base 0 EM resistance to 25% at rank V) 3% Reduction in CPU requirements of Shield modules per level (could be restricted to shield boost amplifiers and shield transfers) 5% Reduction in Signature Radius penalties associated with shield modules per level (Useful for Passive tanks using shield extenders) 10% Bonus to activation costs of shield hardeners per level (Pretty minor bonus, but helps with smaller ships using Invulnerably Fields) ---------------------------------------------- EvE Personality Test

Savasta	Posted - 2009.05.12 09:08:00 - [681] Originally by: Zanquis Edited by: Zanquis on 12/05/2009 08:16:37 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Citadel torps vs moving cap ships We acknowledge that citadel torps do not perform as well as turrets against cap ships which can move. We are looking at possible changes that could help in this area, many of which you have already mentioned such as a boost to explosion velocity or introduction of citadel cruise missiles to cite another common idea to reducing the explosion velocity penalty whilst in siege. Nothing is changing presently in this area but it is being looked at. Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. Citidel Torps I am not sure how much good adding another type of longer range/lower damage missile launchers will do for capital class weapons. I think your better off tweaking the explosion velocity/radius penalties associated with using the Siege modules and putting your energy into the capital ship revamp which is coming since I would assume dreads will change considerably along with the changes in sovereignty. Right now citidel torps just seem to do less damage, can be killed by smartbomb shields, and have trouble against smaller targets such as POS modules. You need to make citidel torps better at something then gunnery even if it carries some of these weakness. Right now its just a second class weapon system, and even Nag pilots hated the fact hey had to use the things. Part of the reason they are so happy their ships will have more dps loaded to their turrets. Tactical Shield Manipulation Skill This skill definitely needs to be changed, and here are a few ideas... 5% EM Shield EM resistances per level (Increases base 0 EM resistance to 25% at rank V) 3% Reduction in CPU requirements of Shield modules per level (could be restricted to shield boost amplifiers and shield transfers) 5% Reduction in Signature Radius penalties associated with shield modules per level (Useful for Passive tanks using shield extenders) 10% Bonus to activation costs of shield hardeners per level (Pretty minor bonus, but helps with smaller ships using Invulnerably Fields) 1. I like this, but it might be too strong for some ships. Something like 3% per level or 2% to all resistances per level might be more balanced. 2. Also good. 3. Not so useful if it only applies to shield modules, very useful if it applies to all ships. 4. Not really all that useful for smaller ships, since active shield hardeners take a lot of CPU to fit, and don't use a significant amount of cap in the first place.
Verlokiraptor All Around Research Inc Onslaught.	Posted - 2009.05.12 09:13:00 - [682] Originally by: Blane Xero Edited by: Blane Xero on 10/05/2009 22:48:36 Make TSM increase the peak recharge zone (which is currently about 35-25%?) go all the way from 0%-35% at level 5. (20%-35% at one, 15%-35% at two, 10%-35% at three, 5%-35% at four, 0%-35% at five) This effectively means a Passive shield tanked ship can regenerate just as well at 0% as an active tanked ship could, instead of the current "Past 30% all is lost" And then you can rebalance Passive shield tanked ships while you're at it so that they tank on-par (or a little more/less as you see fit) with active tanked ships. While I will admit I haven't flown passive shield tanked ships, I would suggest a variation of this idea: at level 1, peak recharge = 20-30% shields level 2, 15-25% shields level 3, 10-20% shields level 4, 5-15% shields level 5, 0-10% shields The problem with Blane's suggestion is that then you have to chew through 35% of their shields at max recharge as opposed to 10% now! This solution avoids that problem, although it does somewhat the time you'll take to die after shields are down. Presumably either the old effect would be maintained or bleedthrough would be removed altogether. If so, it would be a very desirable level 5 skill for passive tanking.
Relyen Foundation Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.05.12 13:53:00 - [683] Originally by: Verlokiraptor While I will admit I haven't flown passive shield tanked ships, I would suggest a variation of this idea: at level 1, peak recharge = 20-30% shields level 2, 15-25% shields level 3, 10-20% shields level 4, 5-15% shields level 5, 0-10% shields The problem with Blane's suggestion is that then you have to chew through 35% of their shields at max recharge as opposed to 10% now! This solution avoids that problem, although it does somewhat the time you'll take to die after shields are down. Presumably either the old effect would be maintained or bleedthrough would be removed altogether. If so, it would be a very desirable level 5 skill for passive tanking. Why would any shield tanking pilot want to move their peak shield recharge closer to the point of failure? Thats worse then it's current form :P ________________________________ I am own.
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.12 14:21:00 - [684] Originally by: Verlokiraptor Originally by: Blane Xero Edited by: Blane Xero on 10/05/2009 22:48:36 Make TSM increase the peak recharge zone (which is currently about 35-25%?) go all the way from 0%-35% at level 5. (20%-35% at one, 15%-35% at two, 10%-35% at three, 5%-35% at four, 0%-35% at five) This effectively means a Passive shield tanked ship can regenerate just as well at 0% as an active tanked ship could, instead of the current "Past 30% all is lost" And then you can rebalance Passive shield tanked ships while you're at it so that they tank on-par (or a little more/less as you see fit) with active tanked ships. While I will admit I haven't flown passive shield tanked ships, I would suggest a variation of this idea: at level 1, peak recharge = 20-30% shields level 2, 15-25% shields level 3, 10-20% shields level 4, 5-15% shields level 5, 0-10% shields The problem with Blane's suggestion is that then you have to chew through 35% of their shields at max recharge as opposed to 10% now! This solution avoids that problem, although it does somewhat the time you'll take to die after shields are down. Presumably either the old effect would be maintained or bleedthrough would be removed altogether. If so, it would be a very desirable level 5 skill for passive tanking. Like i said. Overhaul the passive shield tanking ships is a bit of a "to do" as it is. more random figures; Level I Peak recharge = 35-23% Level II Peak Recharge = 35% - 21% Level III Peak Recharge = 35% - 19% Level IV Peak Recharge = 35% - 17% Level V Peak Recharge = 35% - 15%. Or for a different spin; Level I - Increased peak recharge amount by 20% (or 10-15%) Level II - Increased peak recharge amount by 40% (or 20-30%) Level III - Increased peak recharge amount by 60% (or 30-45%) Level IV - Increased Peak Recharge amount by 80% (or 40-60%) Level V - Increased Peak Recharge Amount by 100% (or 50-75%) Again, balancing passive shield tanked ships would be vital. But this would also mean that passive regen is somewhat more of a playing factor in active tanking -aswell- as full blown passive tanking. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Verlokiraptor All Around Research Inc Onslaught.	Posted - 2009.05.12 15:30:00 - [685] Edited by: Verlokiraptor on 12/05/2009 15:31:42 Originally by: Relyen Originally by: Verlokiraptor While I will admit I haven't flown passive shield tanked ships, I would suggest a variation of this idea: at level 1, peak recharge = 20-30% shields level 2, 15-25% shields level 3, 10-20% shields level 4, 5-15% shields level 5, 0-10% shields The problem with Blane's suggestion is that then you have to chew through 35% of their shields at max recharge as opposed to 10% now! This solution avoids that problem, although it does somewhat the time you'll take to die after shields are down. Presumably either the old effect would be maintained or bleedthrough would be removed altogether. If so, it would be a very desirable level 5 skill for passive tanking. Why would any shield tanking pilot want to move their peak shield recharge closer to the point of failure? Thats worse then it's current form :P Well, obviously balance it so that the average recharge stays the same. Basically the advantage is that once it does fail, it will recharge much faster than it currently does. Like I said, I don't have first hand experience of passive tanked ships, but it certaintly seems like it would be an advantage. Admittedly, your shields will get low faster and you might panic a little, but you won't actually explode any sooner
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.05.12 15:50:00 - [686] TSM: 2%/level to shield resist of your racial enemy's damage type. All races get an armour resist bonus that reflects their racial enemy's damage type: e.g., Gallente get 35% kinetic armour resist, rather than base 25%. This is a nice bit of flavour... but it's a bit worthless for shield tankers because it only applies to armour. So with TSM V, the Maelstrom would find its base EM shield resist at 10%, rather than 0%. A shield-buffer neutron gank Brutix would have a 50% kinetic shield resist, rather than current 40%.
1600 RT	Posted - 2009.05.12 16:49:00 - [687] seeing the deacrease of replies in this thread i assume most of the forum ppl are fine with thew naglfar. next issue CCP gogo!
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.12 17:18:00 - [688] Edited by: isdisco3 on 12/05/2009 17:20:07 6 mids is not enough to adequately tank shields. 6 lows is not enough to adequately tank armor. what we're going to end up with is a dread with middle to 2nd-best dps, the worst tank, and still the default insta-primary in any fleet engagement. there's still absolutely no reason anyone who'se not already minmatar would train for this ship. it does nothing that other ships don't do, better. allow me to list the niches: 1. moros - drones, great against bs 2. rev - insane tracking, great dps 3. phoenix - great tank, good range 4. 'new' nag - ???
Liang Nuren No Salvation Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.05.12 17:47:00 - [689] Originally by: Verlokiraptor Well, obviously balance it so that the average recharge stays the same. Basically the advantage is that once it does fail, it will recharge much faster than it currently does. Like I said, I don't have first hand experience of passive tanked ships, but it certaintly seems like it would be an advantage. Admittedly, your shields will get low faster and you might panic a little, but you won't actually explode any sooner That, I think, is your problem. You don't have experience in PST ships, and the ship would explode faster if it went down to 10% before shield recharge really kicked in. This would be a huge nerf to PST ships, and I would probably pod myself in hopes that the skill would untrain from level 5. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.12 18:04:00 - [690] Originally by: isdisco3 Edited by: isdisco3 on 12/05/2009 17:20:07 6 mids is not enough to adequately tank shields. 6 lows is not enough to adequately tank armor. what we're going to end up with is a dread with middle to 2nd-best dps, the worst tank, and still the default insta-primary in any fleet engagement. there's still absolutely no reason anyone who'se not already minmatar would train for this ship. it does nothing that other ships don't do, better. allow me to list the niches: 1. moros - drones, great against bs 2. rev - insane tracking, great dps 3. phoenix - great tank, good range 4. 'new' nag - ??? Wrong. Many Phoenix fits use a cap recharger in their mids, which leaves them with 6 mids for tank/sensor boosters/whatever. The Naglfar has the same 6 midslots along with an extra low so it can fit another CPR. (If you don't understand why you should use CPRs on active shield tanks, just stop reading) This means that the new Naglfar will potentially tank better than the Phoenix (at least on CPR active fits, not buffer fits) because it'll have nearly the same tank (a tiny bit less shield boost from that 5th CPR) but it'll be able to run it longer because its cap recharge will be higher. What the new Naglfar provides pilots with is the strongest active shield-tanked Dread while the Phoenix remains king of the shield buffer tank. Which is exactly how it should be when you compare other Minny and Caldari ships. And did you miss the part where the new Naglfar does the most damage from the edge of drone control range out to the edge of citadel torp range? So, it's got a great active tank and great damage potential. What else do you want in a dread? -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

Nova Soldier Caldari ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.05.12 19:31:00 - [691] Edited by: Nova Soldier on 12/05/2009 19:32:16 Originally by: isdisco3 1. moros - drones, great against bs 2. rev - insane tracking, great dps 3. phoenix - great tank, good range 4. 'new' nag - ??? 'new' nag - Vertical, it has 4 guns(4 that don't match the 3 guns of the outher dreads)
S8nt Minmatar Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:02:00 - [692] Edited by: S8nt on 12/05/2009 20:03:38 Last time I read this there was only 11 pages. Not sure if it has been suggested before but if you look at most missile boats they have the option to go Cruise Missile or Torpedoes. Capital Hybrid weapons have: - Blasters / Railguns * Here we have small, medium and Large with both of the above Capital Energy weapons have: - Pulse / Beam * Here we have small, medium and Large with both of the above Capital Missile weapons have: - Torps * Here we have (rockets, Standard Missiles, Heavy Missiles, Cruise Missiles and Torpedoes) Capital Projectile weapons have: - Autocannons / Arties * Here we have small, medium and Large with both of the above On sub-capital all the sets are complete except for missiles. Maybe look at adding Citadel Cruise missiles? This might just solve the tracking, ship-to-ship combat. my 5c
muxacb07 Eye of God Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:31:00 - [693] Edited by: muxacb07 on 12/05/2009 20:40:32 Well if ccp want to make this a shield tank as apposed to a armor tank i propose that we should be able to choose if we want the split group as in.... 4 gun hard points and 4 missile hard points that way the whole entire ship is a split option come on ccp if your doing it with the tank why not the weapons as well???? After reading what i posted i believe next the idea of how much it would cost to build would come into play instead of making it cost more then the other dreads or vise versa just reduce the amount of gun and missile parts that would be needed to build it so that the full ship can fit a role that i believe you want to be an overall do whatever ship. Which should suggest that in a 5/6/6 setup you now have should have the ability to A) shield tank Or B) Armor tank C) have a split weapon system which can be a little more fair to the skill training if you allow us to pick out what we want for fire power guns or missiles
muxacb07 Eye of God Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:44:00 - [694] and since this is a naglfar/citadel thread just make citadels so they are on the lines of being able to hit as well as the other dreads from shuttles to titans....let's just make it fair
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:13:00 - [695] Edited by: isdisco3 on 12/05/2009 21:13:57 Originally by: Bronson Hughes -post- (a tiny bit less shield boost from that 5th CPR) So, it's got a great active tank and great damage potential. What else do you want in a dread? 5 CPR's will never be fit on a nag. Or rather, it should never be fit. As for the rest of your argument, the 7 mids of the phoenix means that it will always have a better active tank than the nag. Arguments about the lows providing more cap don't mean more tank, it means marginally more cap stability. What do I want from the nag? I want it to do something the other dreads don't already do, better. I repeat what I said earlier - there is no reason a non-minmatar pilot would want to train into a nag at present, with these changes.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.13 01:47:00 - [696] Originally by: isdisco3 5 CPR's will never be fit on a nag. Or rather, it should never be fit. Exactly why not? 4+ CPRS coupled with an SBA to more than cover the shield boost penalty gives you about as strong an active shield tank that you can get. Originally by: isdisco3 As for the rest of your argument, the 7 mids of the phoenix means that it will always have a better active tank than the nag. Arguments about the lows providing more cap don't mean more tank, it means marginally more cap stability. Why exactly? List me the 7 mids used on a common active-tanked Phoenix; I'd bet that at least one of them is a cap recharger in which case there's no reason that a dread with only 6 mids can't tank just as well as long as it has enough cap. Tank is largely meaningless in a dread if you don't have the cap to run it. Originally by: isdisco3 I repeat what I said earlier - there is no reason a non-minmatar pilot would want to train into a nag at present, with these changes. This part I agree with. These changes will make current Nag pilots happier and more useful, but I doubt that many pilots will switch to training a Nag. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.13 06:42:00 - [697] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Originally by: isdisco3 I repeat what I said earlier - there is no reason a non-minmatar pilot would want to train into a nag at present, with these changes. This part I agree with. These changes will make current Nag pilots happier and more useful, but I doubt that many pilots will switch to training a Nag. I don't care to discuss theory-fits of dreads. If you agree with my last statement, then you agree with what is important - that this dread, compared to the others, is nothing that non-minmatar people will want to fly.
aldarrin	Posted - 2009.05.13 07:02:00 - [698] Originally by: isdisco3 5 CPR's will never be fit on a nag. Or rather, it should never be fit. As for the rest of your argument, the 7 mids of the phoenix means that it will always have a better active tank than the nag. Arguments about the lows providing more cap don't mean more tank, it means marginally more cap stability. [Naglfar, shields] Damage Control II Co-Processor II Co-Processor II Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Republic Fleet Gyrostabilizer Capital Shield Booster I Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Ogre II x5 Needs implant to fit, expensive to lose. 3k sustained tank, 15k burst tank for 2.5 minutes. 3.7k dps [Naglfar, shields w/ CPR] Damage Control II Co-Processor II Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Capital Shield Booster I Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Ogre II x5 8k sustained tank. 12k burst tank for 4.5 minutes. 2.8k dps. CPRs do have an effect on tank because cap stability is crucial to shield tanking. (currently needs a 1% CPU implant to fit) -- Flame on.
aldarrin	Posted - 2009.05.13 07:21:00 - [699] Originally by: ian666 Edited by: ian666 on 29/04/2009 18:04:55 what about slot layout and citadel torpedo explosion velocity Agreed. Explosion velocity is 3 m/s on sieged torps. that's an order of magnitude lower than the max transveral @ optimal of any of the other weapon systems. -- Flame on.
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.13 07:43:00 - [700] Originally by: aldarrin Originally by: ian666 Edited by: ian666 on 29/04/2009 18:04:55 what about slot layout and citadel torpedo explosion velocity Agreed. Explosion velocity is 3 m/s on sieged torps. that's an order of magnitude lower than the max transveral @ optimal of any of the other weapon systems. This. It wasn't AS BAD before the web nerf, but now its terrible. Needs to be about 20-30m/s in siege MINIMUM. ______________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008

Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.13 11:50:00 - [701] Originally by: isdisco3 I don't care to discuss theory-fits of dreads. I wasn't discussing theory-fit dreads, I was discussing honest-to-God small-to-medium gang active shield tank fits. Where's the theorycraft? Originally by: isdisco3 If you agree with my last statement, then you agree with what is important - that this dread, compared to the others, is nothing that non-minmatar people will want to fly. Um, I don't really see many Amarr pilots rushing out to train for a Moros; that doesn't mean that the Moros isn't worth training for only that they prefer to stick with what they've already poured gobs of training into. Originally by: aldarrin [Naglfar, shields w/ CPR] Damage Control II Co-Processor II Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Capital Shield Booster I Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Ogre II x5 8k sustained tank. 12k burst tank for 4.5 minutes. 2.8k dps. CPRs do have an effect on tank because cap stability is crucial to shield tanking. (currently needs a 1% CPU implant to fit) Um, you appear to have missed the fact that the Nag got a boost in its base CPU from 700 to 850 (so 1062.5 TF with Electronics V) and another midslot: [Naglfar, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Capital Shield Booster I Photon Scattering Field II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I [Capacitor Control Circuit I] [Capacitor Control Circuit I] [Capacitor Control Circuit I] This is more or less what an active-tanked 'New-Naglfar' should look like. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Sonreir Gallente Band of Builders Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2009.05.13 11:58:00 - [702] I like the ideas about tweaking the peak along with TSM skill, but instead of broadening it, how about it gets flattened? That is, the difference between peak recharge and valley recharge (is that even a word?!) would be lessened. For instance, with TSM 0 you may have a peak recharge of 40 shield per second and a valley recharge of 4 shield per second. TSM may cut the difference by 5% per level (or something like that so valley recharge is boosted to 13 per second. Maths: Actual Valley Recharge = ((((Peak Recharge - Base Valley Recharge) * .05) * TSM) + Base Valley Recharge)
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.13 12:03:00 - [703] Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 13/05/2009 12:04:50 Fail boost again. Now Naglfar have more slots than other dreads and their double weapon system idea is a sht. CCP move to wrong way again. First fail = two weapon system = double training time. Second fail = tank for shield without bonus Third fail = tank for armor with lesser low slot than other armor tanked dreads The capital projectile boost not is the good solution for Naglfar boost. I saw just one correct idea for this changes : Swapping the missile rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% projectile damage bonus per level. But the others is "FAILS" 1 low slot needed and not one med, and remove the citadel torps to 3/3 projectile guns.
Tom Hanks Raype Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.13 12:09:00 - [704] I just wanted to remind CCP that the Citadel explosion velocity needs to be increased significantly. A mothership can currently speed tank phoenixes no problem, which is absurd. I do not want capital cruise missiles either, since this does nothing to solve the actual problem of citadel explosion velocity, which could easily be fixed with a number change. As of now my Phoenix is about 4x less effective as other dreads when shooting at a moving capital ship, which is very unbalanced. Please do not overlook this in the next patch. If I wanted to do that level of damage, I would fly a raven, not a phoenix. Caldari Racial Purity
Muschiu	Posted - 2009.05.13 12:25:00 - [705] Edited by: ****u on 13/05/2009 12:26:38 Originally by: Bronson Hughes Originally by: isdisco3 I don't care to discuss theory-fits of dreads. I wasn't discussing theory-fit dreads, I was discussing honest-to-God small-to-medium gang active shield tank fits. Where's the theorycraft? Originally by: isdisco3 If you agree with my last statement, then you agree with what is important - that this dread, compared to the others, is nothing that non-minmatar people will want to fly. Um, I don't really see many Amarr pilots rushing out to train for a Moros; that doesn't mean that the Moros isn't worth training for only that they prefer to stick with what they've already poured gobs of training into. Originally by: aldarrin [Naglfar, shields w/ CPR] Damage Control II Co-Processor II Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Capital Shield Booster I Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Ogre II x5 8k sustained tank. 12k burst tank for 4.5 minutes. 2.8k dps. CPRs do have an effect on tank because cap stability is crucial to shield tanking. (currently needs a 1% CPU implant to fit) Um, you appear to have missed the fact that the Nag got a boost in its base CPU from 700 to 850 (so 1062.5 TF with Electronics V) and another midslot: [Naglfar, New Setup 1] Damage Control II Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Amarr Navy Capacitor Power Relay Capital Shield Booster I Photon Scattering Field II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I, EMP XL Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Citadel Torpedo Launcher I, Thor Torpedo I Siege Module I [Capacitor Control Circuit I] [Capacitor Control Circuit I] [Capacitor Control Circuit I] This is more or less what an active-tanked 'New-Naglfar' should look like. ahahahahahahahaha, can't stop, hahahahaha, HALP! lol, those fits are really funny, you guys should stop this "my e-fit it's better" thing, for the simple reason that you have no ideea how to actually fit a dread. how about flying one in a battle first and then comme here and teach the rest of us how to fit one? this thread it's not about ravens, the "pls boost missiles" thread it's --> that way
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2009.05.13 12:49:00 - [706] and welcome to eve... making bull**** threads about stuff that's already decided patch notes are out - from now on, shove your "nothing is written in stone"™ up your assault frig. - putting the gist back into logistics
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.13 13:14:00 - [707] Originally by: Roemy Schneider and welcome to eve... making bull**** threads about stuff that's already decided patch notes are out - from now on, shove your "nothing is written in stone"Ö up your assault frig. Bro you told the truth, just read the first thread : "Summary At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. As mentioned at the start, we realize that there are more fundamental issues with dreadnoughts and specific focuses on their anti-capital ship abilities. Feedback is most welcome!:" Dont Feedback we decided what is bllsht boost for Naglfar. :D And again we got a failboost from a developer who never flew with a Naglfar :D Now Naglfar will 17 slots, other dreads all have 16 slots. Splitted 2 and 2 weapon racks with sh*t damage, but you need longer training time than other dreads. Worst tanking abilities than other dreads because you will have lesser mid or low slot than other dreads. This is a failboost again from CCP, but never mind last two years ago, we never saw logic under changes what the CCP did. This is my 2 cents.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.13 14:37:00 - [708] 2 weeks ago... Originally by: CCP Chronotis So, what are we looking at changing with the Naglfar? * Swapping the missile rate of fire bonus for a 7.5% projectile damage bonus per level. * Increasing the base CPU to 850 (+150) * Decreasing the base powergrid to 560,000 (-65,000) * adding one medslot ... Summary At this point, we are gathering feedback and nothing is set in stone at all. Patch notes today: Ships * The Naglfar has been overhauled to bring it in line with other Dreadnaughts. The Naglfar will now receive an additional mid slot along with a further 150 CPU. The powergrid has been reduced to 560,000 (-65,000). A new damage bonus has been added which will give the ship an additional 7.5% damage to projectile turrets per Minmatar Dreadnaught skill level. The bonus to citadel torpedo damage has been removed; however, the velocity of citadel torpedoes has been increased to 2,750 m/s while the flight time has been decreased to 25 seconds. The upside is, it wasn't set in stone. The downside is, it was set in quickcrete that dried much faster than expected?? Oh, i also had a question about this: Originally by: CCP Chronotis The Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I will have some changes to base it of the 1400mm artillery: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) I didn't see this in the patch notes. Does that mean the blanket ship bonus is replacing the above, are they doing both or....
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.13 14:44:00 - [709] Originally by: Hun Jakuza another matar whine with foreign accent this time Hey Bro so the matar dread should do as much dmg as the others,while having capless weapons+usuall matar advantages and no disadvantages? Sounds balanced... What tank do you need on a dread anyway? 2-2.2m ehp and a repper and a sb should be enough + dmg mods and some cap mods thats all you need. and the new naglfar will be able to fit these. Imho it will be one of the best dreads if not the best. my 2 isk bullsht.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.13 14:57:00 - [710] Originally by: *****u ahahahahahahahaha, can't stop, hahahahaha, HALP! lol, those fits are really funny, you guys should stop this "my e-fit it's better" thing, for the simple reason that you have no ideea how to actually fit a dread. how about flying one in a battle first and then comme here and teach the rest of us how to fit one? this thread it's not about ravens, the "pls boost missiles" thread it's --> that way For those of us who don't fly dreads in massive 0.0 battles where dreads get popped in 2-3 minutes once they get primaried regardless of their fit, active tank fits work better than buffer fits. I've never needed to buffer fit a dread, I use mine in smaller fights where active tanking is a vastly better option. Can you show me a better active-tank fit for the new-Nag? If not, then stop blasting mine. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne*

Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.13 15:19:00 - [711] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Hun Jakuza another matar whine with foreign accent this time Hey Bro so the matar dread should do as much dmg as the others,while having capless weapons+usuall matar advantages and no disadvantages? Sounds balanced... What tank do you need on a dread anyway? 2-2.2m ehp and a repper and a sb should be enough + dmg mods and some cap mods thats all you need. and the new naglfar will be able to fit these. Imho it will be one of the best dreads if not the best. my 2 isk bullsht. Best dread with this bonuses the Naglfar ? Lol. For what ? I will tell you, best for primary, because no buffer on tank like on previous version and will be easy kill again. Better damage with splitted damage mods ? Never. Capless dread ? Phoenix capless to, but those ship is fail too, like a new Naglfar with this crapy changes. The list still: 1th Moros 2nd Revelation 3rd-4th Naglfar-Phoenix But always Naglfar will the primary if more than 1 dread fight. And more an another 2 cents, if someone learn naglfar need another 2 months learning for second weapon system, but he learn Moros save this times, and get better dread. Has to learn just more with only 3 weeks longer if this is his second BS lvl5 and capital turret skill, has been to right even so, as if would learn the second weapon system on Naglfar.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.13 15:58:00 - [712] There is no reason a non-minmatar pilot would cross-train into this ship. All the other dreads have specific roles at which they excel, giving pilots incentive to fly them. The nag does not. And I formally give up on the feedback process, because its not like suggestions are being listened to. Nozh makes his agility thread, posts 3 times, leaves for 3 weeks and suddenly we get them in the patch notes. Chronitis makes more of an effort (with 2 proposed iterations), but then leaves for 10 days and we get his lukewarm boost in the patch notes. Its bad PR, and its making for bad upgrades to this game.
arbiter reborn	Posted - 2009.05.13 16:19:00 - [713] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 13/05/2009 15:50:50 Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Hun Jakuza another matar whine with foreign accent this time Hey Bro so the matar dread should do as much dmg as the others,while having capless weapons+usuall matar advantages and no disadvantages? Sounds balanced... What tank do you need on a dread anyway? 2-2.2m ehp and a repper and a sb should be enough + dmg mods and some cap mods thats all you need. and the new naglfar will be able to fit these. Imho it will be one of the best dreads if not the best. my 2 isk bullsht. Best dread with this bonuses the Naglfar ? Lol. For what ? I will tell you, best for primary, because no buffer on tank like on previous version and will be easy kill again. Better damage with splitted damage mods ? Never. Capless dread ? Phoenix capless to, but those ship is fail too, like a new Naglfar with this crapy changes. The list still: 1th Moros 2nd Revelation 3rd-4th Naglfar-Phoenix But always Naglfar will the primary if more than 1 dread fight. And more an another 2 cents, if someone learn naglfar need another 2 months learning for second weapon system, but if he learn Moros save this times, and will get better dread. Has to learn just more with only 3 weeks longer if this is his second BS lvl5 and capital turret skill, has been to right even so, as if would learn the second weapon system on Naglfar. revelation is by far the best dred , what happens the day you have to snipefit your moros lol
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2009.05.13 16:43:00 - [714] Originally by: isdisco3 And I formally give up on the feedback process, because its not like suggestions are being listened to. Nozh makes his agility thread, posts 3 times, leaves for 3 weeks and suddenly we get them in the patch notes. Chronitis makes more of an effort (with 2 proposed iterations), but then leaves for 10 days and we get his lukewarm boost in the patch notes. true. the faux process of feedback is more like a slap in the face. i'd rather they change stuff without even telling us. this illusion that they are 'listening' is pretty weak. CCP to be somewhat fair and to throw you a bone, how about you actually DISCUSS the feedback. Tell us WHY you are doing something, show us THE NUMBERS behind your ideas. It's your own game for gods sakes. I think it wouldn't be too much of a brainbuster to come in here and discuss some of the figures relating to these ships performances vs each other. Real numbers, stats (you know, the things you are changing) The most feedback we got in this thread was 'we can't add a turret because IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DO WITHOUT 4 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT' oh right, that would be something you would do if this was a REAL feedback/brainstorming thread. not just a meaningless gesture you can point to later and say 'see, we all discussed it'
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.13 17:26:00 - [715] Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Originally by: isdisco3 And I formally give up on the feedback process, because its not like suggestions are being listened to. Nozh makes his agility thread, posts 3 times, leaves for 3 weeks and suddenly we get them in the patch notes. Chronitis makes more of an effort (with 2 proposed iterations), but then leaves for 10 days and we get his lukewarm boost in the patch notes. true. the faux process of feedback is more like a slap in the face. i'd rather they change stuff without even telling us. this illusion that they are 'listening' is pretty weak. CCP to be somewhat fair and to throw you a bone, how about you actually DISCUSS the feedback. Tell us WHY you are doing something, show us THE NUMBERS behind your ideas. It's your own game for gods sakes. I think it wouldn't be too much of a brainbuster to come in here and discuss some of the figures relating to these ships performances vs each other. Real numbers, stats (you know, the things you are changing) The most feedback we got in this thread was 'we can't add a turret because IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO DO WITHOUT 4 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT' oh right, that would be something you would do if this was a REAL feedback/brainstorming thread. not just a meaningless gesture you can point to later and say 'see, we all discussed it' This was the case always. And still ppl think their feedback matters , lol. For hun jakuza: It will have as much buffer as a moros has or even more. It will have 2700dps from guns with 3 gyro 1000dps from citadels with 0 bcu this dps should be enough due to choosable dmg type to some degree. Also matar carrier is good with a shield tank --> no need to learn capital armor tank. Currently: 1st Revelation 2nd Moros 3rd Naglfar 4th Phoenix will be: 1st Revelation 2nd Naglfar 3rd Moros 4th Phoenix Moros is good against sub capitals , which is not the primary job of a dread anyway.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.13 17:27:00 - [716] Could any matar fanboy make a list what would be a "good" naglfar with stats pls?
Juliette DuBois	Posted - 2009.05.13 17:54:00 - [717] 3/4/7 2 turrets 100% damage bonus to capital projectile turrets (and turret stats tweaked to be competitive with rails and beams). Ideal, no extra modelling work for CCP, easier to train for (same "best" tanking as nidhoggur too). Only one weapon system in use, with instant hit damage. And yea, it would basically be minmatar revelation. For shield tanking same high slots, maybe 3/7/5. But whatever, lets see how this "new" naggie works since CCP is already driving it into game.
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.13 18:15:00 - [718] Originally by: Tom Hanks I just wanted to remind CCP that the Citadel explosion velocity needs to be increased significantly. A mothership can currently speed tank phoenixes no problem, which is absurd. THIS
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.13 18:49:00 - [719] Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 13/05/2009 18:50:12 Originally by: Naomi Knight For hun jakuza: It will have as much buffer as a moros has or even more. It will have 2700dps from guns with 3 gyro 1000dps from citadels with 0 bcu this dps should be enough due to choosable dmg type to some degree. Also matar carrier is good with a shield tank --> no need to learn capital armor tank. Currently: 1st Revelation 2nd Moros 3rd Naglfar 4th Phoenix will be: 1st Revelation 2nd Naglfar 3rd Moros 4th Phoenix Moros is good against sub capitals , which is not the primary job of a dread anyway. What do you talk about ? Moros have with just 5 Ogre II over 1100dps, almost 4200 dpswithout damage mods + Drones. With nice tank and +2 magfieldstab 5600dps. Damagefit hit over 6k with 3 magfieldstab. And one more thing, with drones the Moros can kill fast the moving BS, but the Naglfar can't. 3700 vs 5600 ? You are a big mathematician. Naglfar better than Moros ? This is a bad joke.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.13 19:19:00 - [720] Originally by: Hun Jakuza What do you talk about ? Moros have with just 5 Ogre II over 1100dps, almost 4200 dpswithout damage mods + Drones. With nice tank and +2 magfieldstab 5600dps. Damagefit hit over 6k with 3 magfieldstab. And one more thing, with drones the Moros can kill fast the moving BS, but the Naglfar can't. 3700 vs 5600 ? You are a big mathematician. Naglfar better than Moros ? This is a bad joke. I lol at your fail blaster fitted moros. Omg is there anybody still uses blasters... you cant even shot the tower from the edge of the shield. how much is your dread's dps at 50km? And what tank does it have? I bet the naglfar fit has better dps and tank. Are you playing this game or only do PVE in empire?Have you flown a dread before? Pls stop posting about pvp ships ,if you are a carebear. And yes naglfar will be >>> moros

Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.13 19:20:00 - [721] Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 13/05/2009 19:23:19 Originally by: Hun Jakuza Naglfar better than Moros ? This is a bad joke. And nobody uses dreads to fight outside of drone control range, right? The new Naglfar will very likely out-DPS the Moros beyond 60km where the Moros has only its guns doing damage. EDIT: Originally by: Naomi Knight And yes naglfar will be >>> moros At 'closer' ranges (i.e. drone control range and under, I'm not talking about capital blasters), the Moros will still probably have an advantage over a Nag if the Moros pilot has very good drone support skills. It will also still be the only dread that can effectively engage sub-caps. But see my comment above about the Nag's superiority over the Moros at longer ranges. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.13 19:31:00 - [722] Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia Oh, i also had a question about this: Originally by: CCP Chronotis The Quad 3500mm Siege Artillery I will have some changes to base it of the 1400mm artillery: * Damage multiplier increased to 12.075 (from 8.4) * Rate of Fire decreased to 35.438 secs (from 28.688) * Tracking Speed decreased to 0.0045 (from 0.005625) * Optimal Range increased to 80,000m (from 64,400) * Power need increased to 162,500mw (from 137,500) The 6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I will have similar changes made to keep the original scaling inline: * Damage Multiplier increased to 5.39 (from 3.85) * Rate of Fire decreased to 11.813 secs (from 8.438) I didn't see this in the patch notes. Does that mean the blanket ship bonus is replacing the above, are they doing both or.... It will be added to the patch notes shortly.


CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.13 19:32:00 - [723] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Tom Hanks I just wanted to remind CCP that the Citadel explosion velocity needs to be increased significantly. A mothership can currently speed tank phoenixes no problem, which is absurd. THIS the explosion velocity and capital shield operation skill pre-reqs we brought up in the earlier post are being looked at and potential changes made in the following patch after apocrypha 1.2. It is not forgotten about by any means.

Neu Bastian Minmatar Valklear Guard	Posted - 2009.05.13 20:24:00 - [724] /me signs for 3 turret hardpoints Quote: Neu Bastian Valklear Guard - CEO
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.05.13 20:47:00 - [725] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Tom Hanks I just wanted to remind CCP that the Citadel explosion velocity needs to be increased significantly. A mothership can currently speed tank phoenixes no problem, which is absurd. THIS the explosion velocity and capital shield operation skill pre-reqs we brought up in the earlier post are being looked at and potential changes made in the following patch after apocrypha 1.2. It is not forgotten about by any means. Thank you :)
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.14 03:43:00 - [726] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 13/05/2009 19:23:19 Originally by: Hun Jakuza Naglfar better than Moros ? This is a bad joke. And nobody uses dreads to fight outside of drone control range, right? The new Naglfar will very likely out-DPS the Moros beyond 60km where the Moros has only its guns doing damage. EDIT: Originally by: Naomi Knight And yes naglfar will be >>> moros At 'closer' ranges (i.e. drone control range and under, I'm not talking about capital blasters), the Moros will still probably have an advantage over a Nag if the Moros pilot has very good drone support skills. It will also still be the only dread that can effectively engage sub-caps. But see my comment above about the Nag's superiority over the Moros at longer ranges. Can you read the Moros info text ? Special Abilities 5% bonus to Capital Hybrid Turret damage per level 50% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints per level 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module Yes the Moros pilot need good Drone skills, just the idiots use it without them. Can you hear sentry drones ? You can shot with drones over 100km. You guys just separating the shiptypes with one simple battlesituation, which name is 0.0 sniper fight. LoL But the Eve have more system not just simple one 0.0 world. And more something, Naglfar get over 120km ~3300dps but Moros get over 4100. And more something important over 150km Citadel torps not hit anymore. You will lose 2 weapon damage, 40% damage will gone. CCP created Naglmao.
Verlokiraptor All Around Research Inc Onslaught.	Posted - 2009.05.14 03:44:00 - [727] Originally by: Sonreir I like the ideas about tweaking the peak along with TSM skill, but instead of broadening it, how about it gets flattened? That is, the difference between peak recharge and valley recharge (is that even a word?!) would be lessened. For instance, with TSM 0 you may have a peak recharge of 40 shield per second and a valley recharge of 4 shield per second. TSM may cut the difference by 5% per level (or something like that so valley recharge is boosted to 13 per second. Maths: Actual Valley Recharge = ((((Peak Recharge - Base Valley Recharge) * .05) * TSM) + Base Valley Recharge) I like this idea as long as the peak recharge stays the same, as that's where the real strength of a passive tank lies. It would also be significantly easier to program than my solutions. Maths: NewShieldRecharge = (1-0.05TSM)CurrentShieldRecharge + 0.05TSMpeakrecharge
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.14 13:01:00 - [728] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Can you read the Moros info text ? Yes actually, I fly them quite regularly. Originally by: Hun Jakuza Yes the Moros pilot need good Drone skills, just the idiots use it without them. My comment was more directed to the fact that the Moros is a split weapon Dread just like the Naglfar, yet you don't hear nearly as many people complaining about it. But yes, you'd be surprised by the number of people who fly Moroses with T1 drones and crappy skills; it would be like fitting battleship-class torp launchers on a Nag. Originally by: Hun Jakuza Can you hear sentry drones ? You can shot with drones over 100km. Have you ever heard of drone control range? Unless you're fitting drone mods to your Moros or placing your sentries into sniper position behind you realtive to your target, your sentries are only going to hit out to about 55km. Beyond 55km, the Moros's damage potential drops a lot. Originally by: Hun Jakuza You guys just separating the shiptypes with one simple battlesituation, which name is 0.0 sniper fight. LoL But the Eve have more system and playable situation, not just simple one 0.0 sniper world. Actually, I've been breaking them down into different range categories. Different dreads perform differently at different ranges. Moroses will always do best up-close, the new Nag should perform best between 55km and 150km, the Rev will have the best average performance over all ranges, and the Phoenix is, well, the Phoenix. It's called variety and it's a good thing. Originally by: Hun Jakuza And more something, Naglfar get over 120km ~3300dps but Moros get over 4100. And more something important over 150km Citadel torps not hit anymore. You will lose 2 weapon damage, 40% damage will gone. Okay, this last bit is somewhat hard to understand but I'll try to make sense of it. The Moros loses about 30% of its DPS at about 55km due to the drone control limit. Yes, the Nag does lose more damage at 150km, but it gets to keep all of its weapons on target roughly 3x longer than a Moros can. Yes the Moros can do more damage at shorter ranges than the Naglfar can, but once you go beyond drone control range the Nag will beat it hands down. Guess what, that's pretty much the way it is with all Gallente and Minmatar ships. See my comment above regarding variety. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Midjutetur Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.14 13:06:00 - [729] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. are you gonna go through with this?
Random Womble Minmatar Emo Rangers Electric Monkey Overlords	Posted - 2009.05.14 23:55:00 - [730] For any who think nag should not be shieled tanked heres a loss (from empire bear in mind obviously in large 0.0 enagements diffrent setups are appropriate) from about a year ago and the positive comments from PL about the setup. https://www.pandemic-legion.com/killboard/view_kill.php?id=115657 for anyone that dislikes a lack of damage mods when you cant do much damage with or without damage mods better to make other use of slots.

Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.15 05:35:00 - [731] Originally by: Bronson Hughes The Moros loses about 30% of its DPS at about 55km due to the drone control limit. Yes, the Nag does lose more damage at 150km, but it gets to keep all of its weapons on target roughly 3x longer than a Moros can. Yes the Moros can do more damage at shorter ranges than the Naglfar can, but once you go beyond drone control range the Nag will beat it hands down. Guess what, that's pretty much the way it is with all Gallente and Minmatar ships. See my comment above regarding variety. Hello; Meet my 100km sentry drones. ___________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 ^Third Times a Charm^
Aston Vette	Posted - 2009.05.15 06:10:00 - [732] Originally by: Tom Hanks I just wanted to remind CCP that the Citadel explosion velocity needs to be increased significantly. A mothership can currently speed tank phoenixes no problem, which is absurd. I do not want capital cruise missiles either, since this does nothing to solve the actual problem of citadel explosion velocity, which could easily be fixed with a number change. snip What I would propose is changing the name of the existing "torpedos" to "cruise missiles", fixing the moving target and range issues, and also implementing "new" torpedoes that would parallel autocannons, blasters & pulse a bit better regarding range, damage, ability to hit moving targets, etc.
Nova Satar Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.05.15 12:26:00 - [733] Originally by: Midjutetur Originally by: CCP Chronotis Tactical shield manipulation V pre-req makes us emo It is true that this skill is not so useful and pretty much the only reason to train this skill to 5 is so you can use capital shield boosters. We are open to possibly changing this to shield management 5 (a skill most of you should have and find more useful) but this does not help those of you who have gone through the pain already, only potential future naglfar pilots or those who specifically armour tanked their ships only and might be branching towards the phoenix for example. are you gonna go through with this? Would be nice, minmatar skill routes are getting ridiculously long, if you;re an aamrr pilot think yourself lucky ffs, Training "Armour" and "Gunnery" must be lvoely you should all have amazing chars by 25mil sp tbh lol.. Minmatar cap pilots now need "Armour" "Shield" "Capital Projectile" AND "Capital Torp"
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.15 13:31:00 - [734] Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 15/05/2009 13:33:07 Originally by: Blane Xero Hello; Meet my 100km sentry drones. And how often do you fit a Drone Link Augmentor to your Moros? Because without it, your 100km sentry drones aren't shooting much past 55km. There's a reason why Curator IIs are popular with Moros pilots; Bouncer IIs and Warden IIs lose a lot of their range due to the drone control limit. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.15 15:45:00 - [735] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 15/05/2009 13:33:07 Originally by: Blane Xero Hello; Meet my 100km sentry drones. And how often do you fit a Drone Link Augmentor to your Moros? Because without it, your 100km sentry drones aren't shooting much past 55km. There's a reason why Curator IIs are popular with Moros pilots; Bouncer IIs and Warden IIs lose a lot of their range due to the drone control limit. 55km ? With your skills ? You not learning too mutch :D
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.15 17:47:00 - [736] Originally by: Hun Jakuza 55km ? With your skills ? You not learning too mutch :D Regardless of what kind of drone you're using, no matter how much range it has, you cannot order any drone to attack a target that is further away from you than your drone control range. Maximum drone control range without any bonuses or drone upgrade modules is 60km; 57km or 54km is more common as not many people train Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing to V. Even if you were using sentries with a range of 100km, you cannot order them to attack anything beyond that 60km (or less) limit. Unless, of course, you're fitting a Drone Link Augmentor in one of your dread's high slots, but even then that only gets you to 80km (or less). So really, you'd need to fit two Drone Link Augmentors to use these wonderful 100km sentries of yours. Or, you could fit 3 guns and a siege module and still do good damage. Also, for the record, there are no sentry drones that have 100km of range unless they're fighting at half falloff; both the Warden II and Bonucer II with max skills can do it (75km+30km and 60km+42km). However, you can improve that performance if you want to fit some Omnidirectional Tracking Links in your mids along with the two Drone Link Augmentors up top. I wouldn't reccomend it though. tl;dr version: Learn2Drone, seriously. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.15 22:25:00 - [737] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 15/05/2009 13:33:07 Originally by: Blane Xero Hello; Meet my 100km sentry drones. And how often do you fit a Drone Link Augmentor to your Moros? Because without it, your 100km sentry drones aren't shooting much past 55km. There's a reason why Curator IIs are popular with Moros pilots; Bouncer IIs and Warden IIs lose a lot of their range due to the drone control limit. To be honest from my understanding of Sentry drones, i was unde the impression that they were able to attack anything so long as the drones themselfs are within the 54-60km control range. If this is not the case, then i apologise. But if it is indeed as you say, then it needs to be looked at in my opinion. The control range makes sense for normal moving drones not being able to attack outside of control range (Because they, in turn, need to leave the control range to attack the target) but Sentries do not. ___________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 ^Third Times a Charm^
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.15 22:39:00 - [738] Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 15/05/2009 22:39:43 Originally by: Blane Xero To be honest from my understanding of Sentry drones, i was unde the impression that they were able to attack anything so long as the drones themselfs are within the 54-60km control range. If this is not the case, then i apologise. But if it is indeed as you say, then it needs to be looked at in my opinion. The control range makes sense for normal moving drones not being able to attack outside of control range (Because they, in turn, need to leave the control range to attack the target) but Sentries do not. As an avid Sentry Domi user, I can assure you that this is the case. Sentry Drones use the exact same logic as normal drones: they must be within drone control range, as must their targets, for any command to register. The only differences are the sniper-like stats and the very low speed. In fact, if you watch a sentry drone attacking a target long enough, you'll see that it is approaching it like any other drone albeit very slowly. No apology necessary but I appreciate it nonetheless. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Rognin Minmatar Rule of Five The Junta	Posted - 2009.05.16 01:19:00 - [739] Originally by: c0rn1 Why don't we use a different approach to the Naglfar as to other Dreads? Just leave it as it is, BUT change it's role completely. Say we have the 2/2/1 layout in highslots. 2 turret, 2 missile, 1 siege module. BUT give this ship a role like the following: A Capital Killer: This requires the following upgrades to Eve: A Capital Energy Neutralizer: Power Grid: 125,000MW CPU Need: 100tf Activation Cost: 1600 Energy Energy Neutralized: 2000 Energy Activation time: 24s Special Abilities to the Naglfar: + 5% ROF and Damage to Capital Projectiles per skill level + 20% to Energy Destabilizers range and amount per skill level (Siege mode affects this as well as the damage above) 99% reduction in CPU need for Siege Module Screw the torp bonus completely and make it an even more than sup-par Dread to siege POSs but let its time come when capitals are to be killed! I think we don't need 4 dreads in line with each other. Give them certain roles what they are good at. At least do it to the Nag since that one has no character as of now. This would solve the solution of a redesign and it would make it invincible in the role it has. Just kill another capital better than any other dread but basically suck at shooting POSs. The above mentioned characteristica are just taken out of my mind and do not reflect a 100% thought through solution. I just want to show a different way to go with the naglfar. Cheers c0rn1 +1
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2009.05.16 03:06:00 - [740] Originally by: Bronson Hughes Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 15/05/2009 22:39:43 Originally by: Blane Xero To be honest from my understanding of Sentry drones, i was unde the impression that they were able to attack anything so long as the drones themselfs are within the 54-60km control range. If this is not the case, then i apologise. But if it is indeed as you say, then it needs to be looked at in my opinion. The control range makes sense for normal moving drones not being able to attack outside of control range (Because they, in turn, need to leave the control range to attack the target) but Sentries do not. As an avid Sentry Domi user, I can assure you that this is the case. Sentry Drones use the exact same logic as normal drones: they must be within drone control range, as must their targets, for any command to register. The only differences are the sniper-like stats and the very low speed. In fact, if you watch a sentry drone attacking a target long enough, you'll see that it is approaching it like any other drone albeit very slowly. No apology necessary but I appreciate it nonetheless. TBh i prefer ogres over sentries anyway But thanks for the insight. ___________________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008 ^Third Times a Charm^

Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.16 16:18:00 - [741] Originally by: Hun Jakuza CCP created Naglmao and Naomi Knight can't use brain, because she never flew with Naglfar, she just a simple whinningbot alt. Why? Do you fly it, Seal King? Go back to your seal puddle and do lvl4 missions instead of making a joke of yourself ,believes that moros can order its drones farther than 60km .... seal king.
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.17 05:12:00 - [742] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Hun Jakuza CCP created Naglmao and Naomi Knight can't use brain, because she never flew with Naglfar, she just a simple whinningbot alt. Why? Do you fly it, Seal King? Go back to your seal puddle and do lvl4 missions instead of making a joke of yourself ,believes that moros can order its drones farther than 60km .... seal king. Yes i can fly with them, but i dont using them long time ago, because the Naglfar a crap dread, dear whinningbot. Go back to your noobcorp to Jita and try save your pod when flying with your Imparior, my friend. http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view/player-Naomi+Knight-kills.html And forget the EFT try real Eve life.
St Drakul	Posted - 2009.05.17 20:21:00 - [743] Edited by: St Drakul on 17/05/2009 20:22:55 3rd turret hardpoint. /sign And can't wait for this Tactical Shield Manip. obstacle removed... Hope it will be fixed soon. And just ignore Naomi K., every post of his/her are just another troll as far as i have seen.
Nova Satar Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.05.18 08:03:00 - [744] Edited by: Nova Satar on 18/05/2009 08:03:26 i love how people see ccp make one ship change and suddenyl every other ship in the class needs a boost! Waaaaaaaaaa my sentry drones insta popped a recon ship waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Everyone thinks they need to tank their dread to **** then complain about the dps, ALL DREADS NEED TRIPLE DAMAGE MODS! NOOOOOBS.
Tiger's Spirit	Posted - 2009.05.18 09:14:00 - [745] Originally by: St Drakul Edited by: St Drakul on 17/05/2009 20:22:55 3rd turret hardpoint. /sign And can't wait for this Tactical Shield Manip. obstacle removed... Hope it will be fixed soon. And just ignore Naomi K., every post of his/her are just another troll as far as i have seen. /signed 3 gun turret for Naglfar, forget it torpedoes And yes ignore NaomiK, she just spamming all thread.
AncientLord	Posted - 2009.05.18 10:00:00 - [746] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Originally by: St Drakul Edited by: St Drakul on 17/05/2009 20:22:55 3rd turret hardpoint. /sign And can't wait for this Tactical Shield Manip. obstacle removed... Hope it will be fixed soon. And just ignore Naomi K., every post of his/her are just another troll as far as i have seen. /signed 3 gun turret for Naglfar, forget it torpedoes And yes ignore NaomiK, she just spamming all thread. /signed 3 gun turrent and remove siege launcher.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.18 14:01:00 - [747] Originally by: AncientLord Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Originally by: St Drakul Edited by: St Drakul on 17/05/2009 20:22:55 3rd turret hardpoint. /sign And can't wait for this Tactical Shield Manip. obstacle removed... Hope it will be fixed soon. And just ignore Naomi K., every post of his/her are just another troll as far as i have seen. /signed 3 gun turret for Naglfar, forget it torpedoes And yes ignore NaomiK, she just spamming all thread. /signed 3 gun turrent and remove siege launcher. Quit '/sign'-ing for a third turret hardpoint already. Aside from the fact that CCP has already said there will be no third turret hardpoint, the existing changes have already gone through. The new Nag already does the best DPS between 60km and 150km, active tanks better than a Phoenix, and has one more slot overall than all of the other dreads. Suck up the split weapon training like Moros pilots have always done and live with your newly wonderful dread. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Tiger's Spirit	Posted - 2009.05.18 15:23:00 - [748] Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 18/05/2009 15:26:04 Originally by: Bronson Hughes Quit '/sign'-ing for a third turret hardpoint already. Aside from the fact that CCP has already said there will be no third turret hardpoint, the existing changes have already gone through. The new Nag already does the best DPS between 60km and 150km, active tanks better than a Phoenix, and has one more slot overall than all of the other dreads. Suck up the split weapon training like Moros pilots have always done and live with your newly wonderful dread. CCP nothing to said for third turretpoint and pls dont change character for answer. Second question ? Which weapon training need Moros pilot ? Drones ? LOL All dread pilot can useing drones, and all learned t2 heavy or another drontypes. Third question ? How mutch another pilot need splitted weapon training ? How mutch another pilot need splitted tank system training ? No one else just the minmatars. Most of pilot need for Nidhoggur armor tank, now we need to learn capital shield repairing for Naglfar too. Double time learning for tank system and double time learning time for splitted weapon system. And what we have ? Two bllsht capital with four plus learning months than others pilot. Man, four monts for nothing. Best DPS within 60 to 150km ? This is not true. Best active tank like Phoenix ? LOL again. Who you could make it better tank than Phoenix, when Phoenix have +1 med slots and never forget shiled EM resist starting with 0 resist. Oh my. So just do /signing, because Naglfar is still a crap and three turret slot need for balancing into other ships.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.18 16:33:00 - [749] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit CCP nothing to said for third turretpoint and pls dont change character for answer. I'm not entirely sure what that sentence says, but CCP did clearly state earlier in this thread that a third turret hardpoint on the Nag simply is not going to happen anytime soon. Whether you believe their reasons for stating so is up to you. Also, this is the only character that I post with aside form the occasional alt blunder in which case I clear the post and re-post it with this character. Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Second question ? Which weapon training need Moros pilot ? Drones ? LOL All dread pilot can useing drones, and all learned t2 heavy or another drontypes. Well, when you consider that non-Moros pilots can very easily get away with using T1 drones, yeah it's a big deal. Each capital turret requires a rank 5 skill at V as a prereq. Citadel torps only requires a rank 4 skill to V as a prereq. T2 Heavy Drones and Sentry Drones each require a rank 5 skill to V as a prereq. I'll grant you that the drone skills are far more versatile, but they are pretty much required to get peak performance out of a Moros whereas they're more or less optional for the others. Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Third question ? How mutch another pilot need splitted weapon training ? How mutch another pilot need splitted tank system training ? No one else just the minmatars. Most of pilot need armor tank for Nidhoggur, now we need to learn capital shield repairing for Naglfar too. Double time learning for tank system and double time learning time for splitted weapon system. And what we have ? Two bllsht capital with four plus learning months than others pilot. Man, four monts for nothing. I will grant you that Naglfar pilots having to train capital shield boosters for their previously armor-tanked Nag is a pain. No two ways around it, having to train new skills for a ship that you used to be able to fly sucks. But the end result is a better dread is so many ways that none of the Nag pilots that I've asked about it really mind. The Moros technically requires more weapons training than the Naglfar does. Nobody complains about it because the secondary weapon system is far more useful than citadel torps, but the training requirement is there nonetheless. The Niddy can be shield tanked almost as effectively as it can be armor tanked (similar tank, more cap regen, fewer utility midslots); the only reason that everyone armor tanks them is this annoying perception that 'ZOMG armor is better for PvP'. If you still think that both Minny caps are 'bllsht', you have a lot to learn. Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Best DPS within 60 to 150km ? This is not true. Best active tank like Phoenix ? LOL again. Who you could make it better tank than Phoenix, when Phoenix have +1 med slots and never forget shiled EM resist starting with 0 resist. Oh my. Between the edge of drone control range and the max range of citadel torps (60km to 150km), the new Nag does the best damage of the dreads. Go read back a few pages and look at the math for yourself. There's even pretty graphs to show it. Pretty much every active tanked Phoenix that I've ever seen uses one of its seven midslots for a cap recharger. So you drop that CR and add another CPR in your extra low slot and you know what you have? The pretty much the exact same tank that you have on a Phoenix with better cap stability so you can run it longer. For buffer fits though, the Phoenix still wins hands down. Originally by: Tiger's Spirit So just do /signing, because Naglfar is still a crap and three turret slot need for balancing into other ships. Have fun thinking the new Nag is crap. If you are even remotely capable of flying them, I suggest that you suck it up and adapt a little; you'll be happy with the results -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.18 17:40:00 - [750] Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Siege Module - "Explosion Velocity Bonus" The penalty to explosion velocity is currently -92.5%, same penalty which is applied to turret tracking when in siege mode as well. It is recognised that the effect of -92.5% on explosion velocity and turret tracking are not the same so the penalty needs finer tuning. It is this simple approach we are looking at for improving the damage of citadel torpedoes against moving capital ships as a nice relative increase in damage whilst not being too overpowered increasing the damage envelope to smaller ships when out of siege mode. Currently, we are looking at decreasing the penalty to -60% which entails hitting a capital ship which is moving at around 100m/s for about ~3,500 damage on average per missile (this number of course varies a lot). Previously under the same conditions, the missile damage was around ~840 hp to give a ballpark improvement amount. The Damage Over Time or cumulative damage was much more comparable to turrets though this again is heavily dependant on the exact scenario. Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever!


Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.18 18:09:00 - [751] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Pure win in a bottle And that, folks, is why the Nag is the new Rev. Solid tank, good DPS, citadel torps that don't suck. Heck, after these changes there won't be much of anything for any Dread pilot to complain about: 1. Nag got fixed 2. Citadel torps got fixed (velocity and explosion velocity buffs) so the Phoenix will be useful against non-POS targets 3. The changeover from armor-tanking to shield-tanking the Nag got made far less painful (assuming people read about this now instead of later) I love it. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.18 19:18:00 - [752] Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 18/05/2009 19:19:33 Originally by: Bronson Hughes Well, when you consider that non-Moros pilots can very easily get away with using T1 drones, yeah it's a big deal. Each capital turret requires a rank 5 skill at V as a prereq. Citadel torps only requires a rank 4 skill to V as a prereq. T2 Heavy Drones and Sentry Drones each .... The Moros technically requires more weapons training than the Naglfar does. Nobody complains about it because the secondary weapon system is far more useful than citadel torps, but the training requirement is there nonetheless. Fail again. T1 dr0nes for another capital pilots ? This is not thrue. All good pilots need t2 drones. So, drones learning time equal with Moros pilot and for others. (I can use t2 drones like ogre , berserker etc too and i'm not a moros pilot) We see it the weapon system trainingtimes: Learn any capital guns from lvl0 gunskill to lv5 capital guns skill (short or longrange) need ~52 days. Citadel torpedo launcher need ~52 days too from lvl0 missiles skill to lvl5 cit. torp. launcher skill. Moros pilot need 2x52 (2x capital guntype) days + drone skill (drones equal for all pilot) Naglfar pilot need 3x52 day (2x capital guntype + 52 days cap. torp training time) + drone skill Results: +52 days longer learning time for Naglfar pilot Originally by: Bronson Hughes I will grant you that Naglfar pilots having to train capital shield boosters for their previously armor-tanked Nag is a pain. No two ways around it, having to train new skills for a ship that you used to be able to fly sucks. But the end result is a better dread is so many ways that none of the Nag pilots that I've asked about it really mind. The Niddy can be shield tanked almost as effectively as it can be armor tanked (similar tank, more cap regen, fewer utility midslots); the only reason that everyone armor tanks them is this annoying perception that 'ZOMG armor is better for PvP'. If you still think that both Minny caps are 'bllsht', you have a lot to learn. +1 midslot: 15 mins ago you told a idiotic version, with -1 mid slot you make it better tank than Phoenix, and you now told again another terrible ideas. Everyone thinking about, armor tank better for PVP ? No, but Nidh work better with armor tank than shield tank. This is the reason why using many pilot on Nidhoggur armor tank. This is the reason, why could learning two tanktypes for minmatars. Learn like Maelstrom and Phoon. Now we lost again so mutch learning time against another faction of pilot. Another wasting of time: one capital tanktype need to lvl5 two months learning time. Remember 52days longer weapon system training time + two months repair system training time. Tiger's Spirit reckoned, when she said that it is necessary to learn by 4 months much longer than others. Originally by: Bronson Hughes ..the new Nag does the best damage of the dreads. Go read back a few pages and look at the math for yourself. There's even pretty graphs to show it. Pretty much every active tanked Phoenix that I've ever seen uses one of its seven midslots for a cap recharger. So you drop that CR and add another CPR in your extra low slot and you know what you have? The pretty much the exact same tank that you have on a Phoenix with better cap stability so you can run it longer. Oh my... again You can use one CPR in low slot told you, but the Phoenix pilots say for you , we not need split damage mods on low slot and we can use more. You just try to whinning but not using your brain. +1 mid slot better for shield tank and need to low just BCS. Naglfar need BS + gyrostab. Allright your next words a will not to use BCS, what i will say ? You need try using 2 Citadel torp without damage mods.In siege you will hit below 1000dps :D Oh and you said 60km-150km. I'll say 60km ? Moros use with drones and rail 4400dps, Naglfar 4100 and distances need another bullettypes XL EMP not good, you will lost almost half of your damage reason: missed shot,scraching etc.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:05:00 - [753] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Learn any capital guns from lvl0 gunskill to lv5 capital guns skill (short or longrange) need ~52 days. Citadel torpedo launcher need ~52 days too from lvl0 missiles skill to lvl5 cit. torp. launcher skill. Moros pilot need 2x52 (2x capital guntype) days + drone skill (drones equal for all pilot) Naglfar pilot need 3x52 day (2x capital guntype + 52 days cap. torp training time) + drone skill Wrong. Citadel torps do not take as long to train as Capital Turrets. The prereq. skill (Torpedoes) is only rank 4, whereas all of the Large Turret skills are rank 5. So shave about 10 days off of your 'required' training. Also, assuming time spent training from zero skill is just plain silly. Any aspiring Minmatar BS pilot should have Large Projectiles and Torpedoes trained to IV before focusing on battleship/dread training. The only case where your numbers would hold is if you have a Gallente or Amarr pilot with zero missile skills suddenly deciding to cross-train into a Naglfar. I'm not going to argue with you about whether T2 Sentries/Heavies are 'required' for a Moros as opposed to other dreads; it's a matter of opinion. Many pilots I know hardly consider them 'required' for a dread aside from the Moros but to each their own. Originally by: Hun Jakuza Tiger's Spirit reckoned, when she said that it is necessary to learn by 4 months much longer than others. That estimate is assuming the extra time used to train for the split weapon system (which is perfectly valid) along with training both capital shield and armor tanks. Someone training for the Nag right now isn't going to bother train capital armor reppers because it's such a better shield tanker now. Also, with the upcoming change to the prereqs to capital shield boosters (Shield Management V and Engineering V), your 'required' training time takes another hit because these are basic skills that any capital ship pilot should already have trained. Rather like your T2 Heavy and Sentry drones.... So is the Naglfar a pain to train for because of its split weapon system? Absolutely. I never said it wasn't. It's a Minmatar ship and pretty much the entire Minnie line of ships is a pain to train for. It's just not nearly as bad as people are complaining about and not the only dread that has the problem. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.18 20:38:00 - [754] Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 18/05/2009 20:41:33 Originally by: Hun Jakuza Learn any capital guns from lvl0 gunskill to lv5 capital guns skill (short or longrange) need ~52 days. Citadel torpedo launcher need ~52 days too from lvl0 missiles skill to lvl5 cit. torp. launcher skill. Moros pilot need 2x52 (2x capital guntype) days + drone skill (drones equal for all pilot) Naglfar pilot need 3x52 day (2x capital guntype + 52 days cap. torp training time) + drone skill Originally by: Bronson Hughes Wrong. Citadel torps do not take as long to train as Capital Turrets. The prereq. skill (Torpedoes) is only rank 4, whereas all of the Large Turret skills are rank 5. So shave about 10 days off of your 'required' training. What do you talk about ? Your large guns learning need 2 days longer than rank4 topedoes because that's it rank 5 skill, but torpedoes need missile launcher operations 5 so, thats need 5 days learning time. Which one longer from 0 skill ? And another thing, all capital turret skill is rank 7 skill. Ok you are a noob and you using them at lvl0 :D but the PPL using them at lvl5. Thas all need over 30 days to lvl5 and the Naglfar need citadel torps skills too, not just gun skills. Double training time. Capise mr smart guy ? You talk about 10 days, your next idea maybe will be "i using them at lvl3 that's just 3 days difference." So you talk again idiotic things. I think better if i not wasting my time for your horrible answers. Just a question what do you playing with ? You playing with another Eve or Evemon ? :D
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.18 21:01:00 - [755] Edited by: Bronson Hughes on 18/05/2009 21:05:07 Originally by: Hun Jakuza What do you talk about ? Your large guns learning need 2 days longer than rank4 topedoes because that's it rank 5 skill, but torpedoes need missile launcher operations 5 so, thats need 5 days learning time. Which one longer from 0 skill ? Originally by: Hun Jakuza So you talk again idiotic things. I think better if i not wasting my time for your horrible answers. Just a question what do you playing with ? You playing with another Eve or Evemon ? :D Funny, I'm using the EvEMon that clearly points out that Large Turrets require Gunnery V. The same EvEMon that tells me that the prereqs for Citadel Torps take less time to train for than Capital Turrets. Originally by: Hun Jakuza And another thing, all capital turret skill is rank 7 skill. Ok you are a noob and you using them at lvl0 :D but the PPL using them at lvl5. Thas all need over 30 days to lvl5 and the Naglfar need citadel torps skills too, not just gun skills. Double training time. Capise mr smart guy ? You talk about 10 days, your next idea maybe will be "i using them at lvl3 that's just 3 days difference." You'll notice that I only ever discussed the prereq skills. You are correct in that the training times for the actual capital weapon skills is the same. To train a capital weapon skill from 0 to IV takes about a week. IV is pretty common, V not so much. See my previous comments about the entire Minnie line of ships requireing more training than the other races and sucking it up because you get something rather useful out of it now. Minnie have always been a pain to train for, but their ships are usually worth the effort. The old Nag was borderline useless, the new one is well worth the extra time spent training for a split-weapon ship. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Bary OBama	Posted - 2009.05.18 21:15:00 - [756] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: These are good changes.
Khefron GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.18 22:20:00 - [757] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Siege Module - "Explosion Velocity Bonus" The penalty to explosion velocity is currently -92.5%, same penalty which is applied to turret tracking when in siege mode as well. It is recognised that the effect of -92.5% on explosion velocity and turret tracking are not the same so the penalty needs finer tuning. It is this simple approach we are looking at for improving the damage of citadel torpedoes against moving capital ships as a nice relative increase in damage whilst not being too overpowered increasing the damage envelope to smaller ships when out of siege mode. Currently, we are looking at decreasing the penalty to -60% which entails hitting a capital ship which is moving at around 100m/s for about ~3,500 damage on average per missile (this number of course varies a lot). Previously under the same conditions, the missile damage was around ~840 hp to give a ballpark improvement amount. The Damage Over Time or cumulative damage was much more comparable to turrets though this again is heavily dependant on the exact scenario. Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! Hi, yes. This is encouraging, but does nothing to address the relative delta in usefullness in shooting a pos between the Missile Dreads and Turret dreads. Currently Turret dreads do 100% dps to all classes of pos mods (small guns, big guns, neuts, etc.) while the Phoenix, at the very best, does 40% to large guns and much, much less to everything else. Since the phoenix doesn't do vastly more damage to the POS itself when compared to other dreads, I cannot imagine any sort of balance issue that would necessitate such a massive disparity. Please address this.
Matting NQX Innovations The Gurlstas Associates	Posted - 2009.05.19 00:14:00 - [758] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Siege Module - "Explosion Velocity Bonus" ... Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill ... Both great changes and a step in the right direction. Main one for me is the Capital Shield Operation pre-req change as having to training TSM5 is a pain when the Nid uses Armour tanking. Plus you get capital armour reqs from using sub cap armour skills and the new shield ones are more inline for someone already using sub cap shields.
Kwint Sommer Caldari XERCORE Cult of War	Posted - 2009.05.19 01:26:00 - [759] While I agree that Tactical Shield Manipulation V never should have been required, shafting those people that trained this otherwise useless Rank 4 skill doesn't seem like the solution. If you're going to remove it as a requirement then you also need to make the skill worth having to compensate.
aevistyne Caldari Solarflare Heavy Industries Doctrine.	Posted - 2009.05.19 07:17:00 - [760] Originally by: Bronson Hughes stuff I believe what he was trying to say is that it takes the same amount of time to train the CAPITAL skill from lvl 0 to lvl 5, not the prereqs, and when you look at it that way then it makes sense, since for t2 sentries its only the sentry drone interfacing skill to V that needs to be trained, and no advanced skill. I also have to agree on the fact that any decent capital pilots should have t2 sentries trained up anyway so its a bit of a moot point. ------- EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER

darkmancer	Posted - 2009.05.19 09:04:00 - [761] Originally by: Bary OBama Edited by: Bary OBama on 18/05/2009 21:47:56 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: These are good changes. Edit: TSM is a terrible skill. CCP should introduce skill respecs. Also give the Phoenix a bigger drone bay. It might be an idea to give the phoenix a 20150m3 drone bay. It would allow the use of 4 fighters which would open up an array of options to Phoenix pilots. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Hun Jakuza Guargumi INC.	Posted - 2009.05.19 09:13:00 - [762] Originally by: darkmancer Originally by: Bary OBama Edited by: Bary OBama on 18/05/2009 21:47:56 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: These are good changes. Edit: TSM is a terrible skill. CCP should introduce skill respecs. Also give the Phoenix a bigger drone bay. It might be an idea to give the phoenix a 20150m3 drone bay. It would allow the use of 4 fighters which would open up an array of options to Phoenix pilots. I give to you a better idea : Split the weapons system to 2 hybrid gun and 2 citadel torp turret and CCP give to you +1 high slot as Naglfar. :D
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2009.05.19 09:31:00 - [763] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Siege Module - "Explosion Velocity Bonus" I believe the problem lies deeper within the missile mechanics and not necessarily in the siege module's penalties, I would consider this only a stopgap measure. Quoted myself(i'm so awesome) below as a further request on this. Originally by: CCP Chronotis Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill That looks acceptable for a temporary fix. Making tactical shield manipulation more usefull would be great however. /me raises hand as one of the people who has trained capital shield tanking already. Originally by: CCP Chronotis Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! NO NO not Citadel Cruise missile, Dread missile, GO NOW and spread the word! you know that's way better! Say it with me... Dread Missile. As for Tactical Shield Manipulation, perhaps making shield start leaking sooner would make it a nice skill to have trained. Like instead of starting to leak at 25% it starts at 75% with tactical shield manipulation reducing it by 15% per level. lvl 0, 75% - lvl 1, 60% - lvl 2, 45% - lvl 3, 30% - lvl 4, 15% - lvl 5, 0%. PS. on the missile mechanics: Originally by: Reatu Krentor I made a spreadsheet about missile damage so I could understand the way missiles work now and the resulting graph I got is on eve-files, what it shows is damage from a citadel torp from a sieged naglfar(all lvl 5's). Assuming the formula found by the community is correct, it would appear that damage from missiles falls away rapidly and then slows down instead of falling away slowly similar to how turret falloff functions. This rapid drop in effect is noticeable on every missile type, other missiles that are affected by this seem to be for instance rockets, which have great trouble hitting frigates for good damage. A few m/s difference in velocity can mean a big difference in damage. Of course this is assuming the formula reverse engineered from ingame data is accurate, I don't have a reason to believe it is not though, some form of confirmation would be nice pwetty please . Could I have your opinion on this Chronotis, thx -- stuff --
Nova Satar Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.05.19 11:31:00 - [764] this thread is so funny. Before the changes there wasnt a single person talking about moros, now it seems to have ebcome the worst thing in game that it has a drone bonus lol, why has this suddenly come up?
Krathos'lor	Posted - 2009.05.19 12:05:00 - [765] Originally by: Nova Satar this thread is so funny. Before the changes there wasnt a single person talking about moros, now it seems to have ebcome the worst thing in game that it has a drone bonus lol, why has this suddenly come up? Its all because the Nag is becoming a great dread, I've heard people even say its better than a Rev now, The people that cross trained to another race for the dread are upset(and I was working on this same cross training myself0. But either way the changes they have made and are planing to make are great. I have stopped my cross training plan and my soon to be Phoenix pilot is jumping up and down because he wont have to train Tactical Shield Manipulation to 5. Good call guys
darkmancer	Posted - 2009.05.19 15:28:00 - [766] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Originally by: darkmancer It might be an idea to give the phoenix a 20150m3 drone bay. It would allow the use of 4 fighters which would open up an array of options to Phoenix pilots. I give to you a better idea : Split the weapons system to 2 hybrid gun and 2 citadel torp turret and CCP give to you +1 high slot as Naglfar. :D Yup, infact it'd just be a better Naglfar (given the same bonus's) which would defeat the point of the rebalance. The fighters idea is just something interesting for the Phoenix to have to make up for its many fallings (suits caldari backstory too) --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Tiger's Spirit	Posted - 2009.05.19 16:23:00 - [767] Originally by: Krathos'lor I've heard people even say its better than a Rev now blablabla I heard dread pilots said after changes, Nag came better, but still worse than Rev and Moros
Banfire Bat	Posted - 2009.05.19 17:24:00 - [768] The skill change really should have been done while the Naglfar was becoming a sheild tanker.... Now i have to wait a month for the skill change to happen while i have trained up the skills @ V allready for the new pre skill requirment for the Cap sheild booster, then i can use my Dread again...
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.19 17:33:00 - [769] Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Originally by: Krathos'lor I've heard people even say its better than a Rev now blablabla I heard dread pilots said after changes, Nag came better, but still worse than Rev and Moros Then those pilots are dumb. Also Naglfar doesnt need to be the best dread, it is usefull now ,compared to other dreads,that should be enough.
isdisco3 Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2009.05.19 17:44:00 - [770] Great changes. This continues my growing love affair with your chron. Wanna go get dinner or something?

Tiger's Spirit	Posted - 2009.05.19 17:47:00 - [771] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Tiger's Spirit Originally by: Krathos'lor I've heard people even say its better than a Rev now blablabla I heard dread pilots said after changes, Nag came better, but still worse than Rev and Moros Then those pilots are dumb. Also Naglfar doesnt need to be the best dread, it is usefull now ,compared to other dreads,that should be enough. No, you are a dumb. Thread spammer. You are spamming all thread and whine always. Go away, we dont need you.
Doweena Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.05.19 22:51:00 - [772] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Siege Module - "Explosion Velocity Bonus" The penalty to explosion velocity is currently -92.5%, same penalty which is applied to turret tracking when in siege mode as well. It is recognised that the effect of -92.5% on explosion velocity and turret tracking are not the same so the penalty needs finer tuning. It is this simple approach we are looking at for improving the damage of citadel torpedoes against moving capital ships as a nice relative increase in damage whilst not being too overpowered increasing the damage envelope to smaller ships when out of siege mode. Currently, we are looking at decreasing the penalty to -60% which entails hitting a capital ship which is moving at around 100m/s for about ~3,500 damage on average per missile (this number of course varies a lot). Previously under the same conditions, the missile damage was around ~840 hp to give a ballpark improvement amount. The Damage Over Time or cumulative damage was much more comparable to turrets though this again is heavily dependant on the exact scenario. Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! Put these in soon, these changes sound great!
Incantare	Posted - 2009.05.19 22:52:00 - [773] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Siege Module - "Explosion Velocity Bonus" The penalty to explosion velocity is currently -92.5%, same penalty which is applied to turret tracking when in siege mode as well. It is recognised that the effect of -92.5% on explosion velocity and turret tracking are not the same so the penalty needs finer tuning. It is this simple approach we are looking at for improving the damage of citadel torpedoes against moving capital ships as a nice relative increase in damage whilst not being too overpowered increasing the damage envelope to smaller ships when out of siege mode. Currently, we are looking at decreasing the penalty to -60% which entails hitting a capital ship which is moving at around 100m/s for about ~3,500 damage on average per missile (this number of course varies a lot). Previously under the same conditions, the missile damage was around ~840 hp to give a ballpark improvement amount. The Damage Over Time or cumulative damage was much more comparable to turrets though this again is heavily dependant on the exact scenario. Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! These are both good changes. However I am still concerned about citadel damage against moving capitals. They would be losing about 50% of their raw damage using your example. I understand guns and missiles aren't easy to balance as to be of overall equivalent effectiveness, and that looking at damage over time in different situations is the most reasonable way to do it. Specifically the problem as I see it is that citadel damage doesn't scale with engagement size. If you get a group of turret dreads to fire at a moving carrier some will be facing higher transversal than others but with citadels every single one will be taking the maximum penalty at a given speed. That's why the damage loss seems too harsh and I urge you to run some tests involving multiple dreads firing at the same carrier, as is frequent in game. (If you haven't already.) Now that the Nag has gotten a boost the Phoenix gets the title of "worst dread" and will remain so for the foreseeable future even with the citadel buffs. Conceptually it trades off the best tank for the worst damage which makes sense but in game being a hard to kill low damage target just means the enemy will pick off the easier to kill, more threatening dreads which contribute more to the fight before Phoenixes. Tank aside there's really nothing "special" about the Phoenix that would make it worth flying over another dread. Being missile based at current engagement ranges is a liability more than anything and the one true advantage they bring in damage type selection comes at the cost of losing a 25% damage bonus. What I'm getting at is that the Phoenix could use a bonus change to be made a more attractive dread. Several ideas have already been posted in this thread. Here is mine: Base it off a missile ship design that works, the Raven. One bonus to rate of fire and another to missile velocity. That way not only would it get true, no strings attached, damage selection, both useful and unique among dreads, but also improved performance at range where it is lacking the most.
Aston Vette	Posted - 2009.05.20 01:09:00 - [774] So, basically, you want a 12 low slots and 3 mids right? 3xBCS, 3xGyrostabs, 6 slots for armor tank and 3 cap rechargers. (Or maybe a painter & 2 webs for moar damage?) Sounds great right? Unfortunately, that's not available so I guess you're either going to have to fit your Nag differently, or fly something else. Or you could whine about it more and see if that helps. Personally, I think CCP's done a pretty decent job of realigning things.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.20 10:32:00 - [775] Originally by: Aston Vette So, basically, you want a 12 low slots and 3 mids right? 3xBCS, 3xGyrostabs, 6 slots for armor tank and 3 cap rechargers. (Or maybe a painter & 2 webs for moar damage?) Sounds great right? Don't forget the extra powergrid needed for dual CARs. And who needs that extra CPU? -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Granmethedon III Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.05.20 11:24:00 - [776] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Any eta on when this would be done? From a skillplan point of view, obviously would rather not train TSM 5 if avoidable, but if its going to be a significant amount of time before the change is made then it may become necessary in order to actually use the ship. :D
aevistyne Caldari Solarflare Heavy Industries Doctrine.	Posted - 2009.05.20 20:42:00 - [777] Originally by: Granmethedon III Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, An update on the two changes we are looking at in the next round of small updates: Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Any eta on when this would be done? From a skillplan point of view, obviously would rather not train TSM 5 if avoidable, but if its going to be a significant amount of time before the change is made then it may become necessary in order to actually use the ship. :D This would be nice to know, i'm in the same boat, tossing up between keeping a gimped armor tanked nag or training tsm V while i wait for the skill reqs to be changed. Would be good to know where we stand in terms of a timeframe. ------- EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER
Raxlar Kalimar	Posted - 2009.05.21 03:55:00 - [778] OK i am not a dread pilot yet....mostly just bacause i am mini and it did not seem worth it till now with the nag being rubbish and all. So i have read this thread with interest. However now that it has a duel dammage bonus to projectiles I was wondering if you could fit two projectiles and two cap remote sheild reps in the high slots and spider tank a group of nags. Forgetting the missles all together, they dont seem to add nearly as much as the projectiles anyway looking at EFT aspecially if you use more than two damage mods. If not can a cap pilot tell me why this is a bad idea / why you can't do this?
Don Shadow Viper Squad Triumvirate.	Posted - 2009.05.21 07:11:00 - [779] Originally by: Raxlar Kalimar OK i am not a dread pilot yet....mostly just bacause i am mini and it did not seem worth it till now with the nag being rubbish and all. So i have read this thread with interest. However now that it has a duel dammage bonus to projectiles I was wondering if you could fit two projectiles and two cap remote sheild reps in the high slots and spider tank a group of nags. Forgetting the missles all together, they dont seem to add nearly as much as the projectiles anyway looking at EFT aspecially if you use more than two damage mods. If not can a cap pilot tell me why this is a bad idea / why you can't do this? very bad ideea, you can't remote shield/armour a sieged dread
Nikuno	Posted - 2009.05.21 11:04:00 - [780] So a citadel torp will do 3,500 damage to a cap ship moving at 100m/s. What damage does it do to a cap ship moving slower than that or stationary?

Xavier Sunder	Posted - 2009.05.21 15:27:00 - [781] Edited by: Xavier Sunder on 21/05/2009 15:29:14 Thanks for the update. As for Tactical Shield Manipulation, it's not a useful skill at all now. In terms of a change, how about the concept that once your shields are exhausted and you're taking damage to armor/hull, TSM can provide residual shield protection. Such as an extra 1% per level of TSM. It's not a lot, but it shouldn't be since shields are relatively balanced without a big new skill upsetting things. Also, I would like a little more variety in the dreads themselves. Besides just damage/gun/protection types. They all feel relatively the same.
Valya Dire	Posted - 2009.05.22 00:05:00 - [782] Any idea on how far off the capital shield booster skill changes are to going in? i've got the new pre-reqs already trained and loathe sink the 15-16d into TSM 5 right now.
Nova Satar Annihilate.	Posted - 2009.05.22 10:36:00 - [783] yeah id be keen to get some dates on the skill changes.... I've got the rpe reqs all done and dusted, but i don't want to get 10 days into that usless Tactical Manip skill then they suddenly change it!! lol LET US NOW CHRONOTIS YOU SEXY LITTLE RASCAL
Ound	Posted - 2009.05.23 09:37:00 - [784] What could be the ETA for those changes, they look good, especially Capital Shield Booster preq. For Capital Armor you would need Hull Upgrades V and Mechanic V, Shield Managment V just makes sense for Capital Shield Booster preq.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.05.23 18:00:00 - [785] We cannot release an ETA yet but within the next month is a very approximate window assuming nothing changes (which it may very well do which is why we hate giving ETAs) I would not worry too much about tactical shield manipulation benefit in the long term however as we would like to change it to something more useful but it will take longer to figure out a good bonus to the skill and get the changes through the pipeline so for those of you who have already trained it, the skill points wont be useless forever, at least not the advanced spaceship command extent!

Bladen Kerst Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2009.05.23 19:23:00 - [786] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V?
Arele Minmatar The Hull Miners Union	Posted - 2009.05.23 19:38:00 - [787] Get to training then, it's a whole 10 days oh-noes
Ai Zian Violation of Freedom	Posted - 2009.05.23 20:59:00 - [788] Originally by: Bladen Kerst Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V? and...why are you flying a shield tanking capital without management V?
steave435 Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.24 00:54:00 - [789] Originally by: Ai Zian Originally by: Bladen Kerst Originally by: CCP Chronotis Folks, Change of Pre-Requisite to Capital Shield Operation skill This was a change to the pre-requisite skills for capital shield operation primarily changing from tactical shield manipulation V to shield management V with the tertiary skill requirement of engineering V added for some completeness (though most of you should have that anyway). Summary Both changes are simple changes and whilst there are ideas for further development such as citadel cruise missiles or a change to the tactical shield manipulation skill effect, these essentially require more time to work on so we are focused on concise changes which achieve our goals for now. Your feedback on both proposed changes is welcome as ever! What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V? and...why are you flying a shield tanking capital without management V? He may not, but remember how many ******s exist in this game and then again consider the how likely it is that some people have that. This is a interesting question, will this lead to people being able to have a skill they do not have the pre-req for, or will it somehow become unusable until the new pre-req has been trained?
Sephrin Minmatar Imperium Forces Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.05.24 03:10:00 - [790] Grr... Finished TSM V 23 hours ago... oh well at least i already have the new pre-req, Thats what i get for going woohoo on the original Nag changes and not checking up on this thread till today. Please Make TSM V something usefull, I would like the skill to reduce the CPR Shield Boost penalty but that may be OP. Just make it worth it. Sephrin

Kweel Nakashyn Minmatar Star's Dust Industrie	Posted - 2009.05.24 08:51:00 - [791] It's still the longest Dread to train, therefor, it's still not "on par" with the others. Gameplay-wise, if it's the longest Dread to train, it should be the best dread. Fetchez la vache ! moar(tm) < soon(tm) :(
Juliette DuBois	Posted - 2009.05.24 09:26:00 - [792] Edited by: Juliette DuBois on 24/05/2009 09:33:28 New version actually performs just fine with missile support skills and citadel torpedoes at level 4. Training all those up to five adds less than 100 dps (missile range skills are of course useful to have at 5, you get 20km extra range). So it¦s not that much extra training as it first appears. Nagl is now an actual turret dreadnought with some added dps from auxiliary weapons. Now that torpedoes fly pretty fast it¦s not at disadvantage at close ranger ranges, and even at long range you outdamage revelation and moros with same number of damage mods [160+km range, difference is negligible however].
Artassaut Minmatar Oblivion Amalgamated	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:23:00 - [793] Originally by: CCP Chronotis the skill points wont be useless forever, at least not the advanced spaceship command extent! Confirming ASC will be useless forever.
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.05.27 00:37:00 - [794] Originally by: CCP Chronotis ... I would not worry too much about tactical shield manipulation benefit in the long term however as we would like to change it to something more useful but it will take longer to figure out a good bonus to the skill and get the changes through the pipeline so for those of you who have already trained it, the skill points wont be useless forever, at least not the advanced spaceship command extent! Let me help you, 5% capacitor usage reduction for shield booster per level.
Kurt Xiaoping Wildlands Heavy Technologies Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.05.27 13:22:00 - [795] Originally by: XFreedomX Let me help you, 5% capacitor usage reduction for shield booster per level. Shield Compensation already exists.
Alex Raptos Caldari Phoenix Rising.	Posted - 2009.05.27 16:35:00 - [796] 2.5% bonus to the effect of shield boost amplifiers. __________________
Bladen Kerst Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2009.05.27 21:08:00 - [797] Originally by: Bladen Kerst What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V? I really need to know...
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2009.05.27 22:09:00 - [798] Originally by: Bladen Kerst Originally by: Bladen Kerst What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V? I really need to know... They will train Shield Management to V if they want to fit Capital Shield Boosters.
Reatu Krentor Minmatar Void Spiders Fate Weavers	Posted - 2009.05.27 22:09:00 - [799] Originally by: Bladen Kerst Originally by: Bladen Kerst What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V? I really need to know... I would suggest whoever hasn't trained shield management 5 and is flying cap ships to train it, it's only a rank 2 skill that adds buffer, it's usefull and should only take at most 10 days to train. Unlike tactical shield manipulation which is rank 4 and is pretty much useless. -- stuff --
Aston Vette	Posted - 2009.05.28 04:08:00 - [800] Originally by: Alex Raptos 2.5% bonus to the effect of shield boost amplifiers. To be honest, I'd be fine with ANY change to make the skill useful. Hell, a 1% bonus to all resists per level would be better than the current effect. Bonus to shield boost amps, bonus to base resistances, bonus to EM resistance, bonus to active hardeners, bonus to shield boosters while seiged, bonus to shield rep duration, ANYTHING.

FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.28 07:11:00 - [801] I could go for TSM giving CPU reduction for all shield modules _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
Artassaut Minmatar Oblivion Amalgamated	Posted - 2009.05.28 11:04:00 - [802] Something tells me TSM is going to be along the lines of "5% reduction of signature radius penalty for shield upgrade modules" --- The Gate: Lol, try targeting me in a fleet fight. The Station: No U.
Bronson Hughes ADVANCED Combat and Engineering	Posted - 2009.05.28 14:31:00 - [803] Originally by: Artassaut Something tells me TSM is going to be along the lines of "5% reduction of signature radius penalty for shield upgrade modules" If this included shield rigs, I'd be all over it.... -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne
Bladen Kerst Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2009.05.28 15:28:00 - [804] Edited by: Bladen Kerst on 28/05/2009 15:31:31 Originally by: Reatu Krentor Originally by: Bladen Kerst Originally by: Bladen Kerst What about people who trained Capital Shield Operation skill but not Shield Management V? I really need to know... I would suggest whoever hasn't trained shield management 5 and is flying cap ships to train it, it's only a rank 2 skill that adds buffer, it's usefull and should only take at most 10 days to train. Unlike tactical shield manipulation which is rank 4 and is pretty much useless. Let see: Training shield management from lvl 4 to lvl 5 would increase my shield buffer by approximately 4%. Considering there is also armor and hull to take into account total increase in EHP would be approximately only 2%. 2% increase in buffer on an active tanking ship! Which would take me 16.5 days to train for, with my current lopsided attributes (perception/willpower). Considering I will be in Revelation pretty soon anyway I won't have to use phoenix too often. Which means that without capital shield booster(for which I have already trained once) I will probably use it even less often if not at all.
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.05.29 07:00:00 - [805] Originally by: Kurt Xiaoping Originally by: XFreedomX Let me help you, 5% capacitor usage reduction for shield booster per level. Shield Compensation already exists. Plenty of skills which boost the same attribute. Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing and Scout Drone Operation for an example. Now that I think about it it should be 10% cap reduction per level.
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.29 08:27:00 - [806] Why not make it something useful instead? Like say, -10% cpu usage on remote shield reps per level. Or maybe even +10% range for them, so if you have to waste half your cpu on shield reps you can at least do it at a longer range than armor reps. ---
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.05.29 09:24:00 - [807] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Why not make it something useful instead? Like say, -10% cpu usage on remote shield reps per level. Or maybe even +10% range for them, so if you have to waste half your cpu on shield reps you can at least do it at a longer range than armor reps. Or -15% cap use for shield resist mods.
Alex Raptos Caldari Phoenix Rising.	Posted - 2009.05.29 10:02:00 - [808] Originally by: XFreedomX Originally by: Kurt Xiaoping Originally by: XFreedomX Let me help you, 5% capacitor usage reduction for shield booster per level. Shield Compensation already exists. Plenty of skills which boost the same attribute. Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing and Scout Drone Operation for an example. Now that I think about it it should be 10% cap reduction per level. No. It really shouldn't. Stop trying to come up with a solution to something you really do not understand, especially on the level of a little thing called "balance" Originally by: Dirk Magnum I've become gay for Mark Harmon despite my initial reservations about the show NCIS but nobody will ever know
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.05.29 11:24:00 - [809] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Nuts Nougat Why not make it something useful instead? Like say, -10% cpu usage on remote shield reps per level. Or maybe even +10% range for them, so if you have to waste half your cpu on shield reps you can at least do it at a longer range than armor reps. Or -15% cap use for shield resist mods. This would make invuls usable on frigs, but it would also make them overpowered shield EANM variants on larger ships imo... ---
Bizheep	Posted - 2009.05.29 21:23:00 - [810] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Nuts Nougat Why not make it something useful instead? Like say, -10% cpu usage on remote shield reps per level. Or maybe even +10% range for them, so if you have to waste half your cpu on shield reps you can at least do it at a longer range than armor reps. Or -15% cap use for shield resist mods. and will still remain a useless skill to train at lv5

Suedomza Ralav	Posted - 2009.05.29 22:00:00 - [811] Tactical Shield could provide a benefit to shield HP received via remote repping. This might help even out remote armor/shield repping in PVP, so that both occur evenly.
XFreedomX	Posted - 2009.05.30 00:03:00 - [812] Originally by: Alex Raptos Originally by: XFreedomX Originally by: Kurt Xiaoping Originally by: XFreedomX Let me help you, 5% capacitor usage reduction for shield booster per level. Shield Compensation already exists. Plenty of skills which boost the same attribute. Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing and Scout Drone Operation for an example. Now that I think about it it should be 10% cap reduction per level. No. It really shouldn't. Stop trying to come up with a solution to something you really do not understand, especially on the level of a little thing called "balance" Yes of course, perfectly balanced between buffer tank vs active tank atm.
steave435 Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.05.30 02:38:00 - [813] Originally by: XFreedomX Yes of course, perfectly balanced between buffer tank vs active tank atm. The issue is usually not being able to boost enough to make up for the lost buffer, not running out of cap though. Maybe a bonus to boost amount, or a reduction to cycle time like repair systems for armour?
Alex Raptos Caldari Phoenix Rising.	Posted - 2009.05.30 03:09:00 - [814] Originally by: steave435 Originally by: XFreedomX Yes of course, perfectly balanced between buffer tank vs active tank atm. The issue is usually not being able to boost enough to make up for the lost buffer, not running out of cap though. Maybe a bonus to boost amount, or a reduction to cycle time like repair systems for armour? I still stand by my Shield Boost Amp bonus Originally by: Dirk Magnum I've become gay for Mark Harmon despite my initial reservations about the show NCIS but nobody will ever know
RC Denton	Posted - 2009.05.30 15:45:00 - [815] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Tom Hanks I just wanted to remind CCP that the Citadel explosion velocity needs to be increased significantly. A mothership can currently speed tank phoenixes no problem, which is absurd. THIS the explosion velocity and capital shield operation skill pre-reqs we brought up in the earlier post are being looked at and potential changes made in the following patch after apocrypha 1.2. It is not forgotten about by any means. I just read about the proposed changes via the dev finder so if someone has brought this up already I'm duplicating. But: Shouldn't it be Shield Operations 5 and not shield management 5. Since the shield operations skill is the primary skill for shield boosters, it would make more sense to have it be the pre-requisite for capital shield boosters.
Artassaut Minmatar Oblivion Amalgamated	Posted - 2009.05.31 05:16:00 - [816] Originally by: RC Denton I just read about the proposed changes via the dev finder so if someone has brought this up already I'm duplicating. But: Shouldn't it be Shield Operations 5 and not shield management 5. Since the shield operations skill is the primary skill for shield boosters, it would make more sense to have it be the pre-requisite for capital shield boosters. Well, Capital Armour Repairers require Mechanic V, Hull Upgrades V and Repair systems V, which adds up to 4 skill ranks total. Capital Shield Boosters require TSM V and Shield Operation V, adding up to 5 skill ranks. Needing only Shield Operation V will be too small a training time, but add Shield Management V to that, and it will put CSB's to 4 skill ranks. That should be balanced according to training time needed to fit the modules. --- The Gate: Lol, try targeting me in a fleet fight. The Station: No U.
AngryMax Gallente Executable Inc	Posted - 2009.06.02 03:56:00 - [817] Originally by: something somethingdark Originally by: CCP Whisper stuff oh boy ... where to start ... 10098 polygons sounds like allot at first but if you look at it in more detail ... no its not... its just not How long does it take to make a ship model or modify an existing one? Anywhere from six months to a year yes thats actualy true!... if your the only concept artist, model designer, texture guy, import to game guy, last but not least QA and you spend about 30 minutes a day on it here is how it should look 1 week for the concept artist to come up with a couple of preliminary designs 1-2 days to settle on one another few days for idk ... management type of things 2 weeks for the model crew to do the changes (srsly they work 8 hours a day not 5 minutes) 1 week for tweak and testing 1 week as a buffer for misc things an aditional week if your scared and another 2 months till the changes are actualy unleashed onto sisi because the other departments still twiddle their thumbs or do something completly diffrent do the arty changes and give it another medslot + some cpu done everybodys happy and your ar** can sit arround designing stunning new faction variants (read : we play with the hue of a texture) LOL! Thank you! I've seen Concept -> Digital -> Physical models done in less time for car shows than this. Thats with mockup interiors... 6 months? WOW CCP! Quote:** because the other departments still twiddle their thumbs That pretty much says it all.
Arturus Vex Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.06.03 21:05:00 - [818] Originally by: Jelmer You do not see a caldari dread with both missile and hybrid... So, my suggestion would be - remove the missile slots and make this ship pure projectile. Thank you. I agree with this. There is a reason you don't see a lot of typhoons in blob fleets. Split weapon systems are ok for PvE and solo pvp, but in fleet fights and pos bashing (the only thing you seriously use a dread for, honestly), everything has to be min/maxed. That means you can't waste low-slots on damage mods for both missiles and projectiles. I really am not sure how you guys come up with these sorts of complex changes when there are simpler changes that seem obvious (maybe just to me). (A general boost to projectiles would do nicely as well, but I think that is a more complex issue than what is specifically wrong with the Nag).
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.06.04 12:45:00 - [819] Nag now better than Rev, and people still whining about it. Good job on the boost Mr. CCP Chronotis, don't listen to these guys. Thanks a bunch, I now have a reason to train past cruiser :D ---
Ound	Posted - 2009.06.04 21:42:00 - [820] Are those changes still planned ? The Capital Shield Booster preq. set to Shield Managment 5 still planned or you not going to change it ?

Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.06.05 10:44:00 - [821] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Nag now better than Rev, and people still whining about it. Good job on the boost Mr. CCP Chronotis, don't listen to these guys. Thanks a bunch, I now have a reason to train past cruiser :D This Looks like the phoenix needs a boost now. It does crapy dmg compared to other dreads. Usually phoenixes do 70% or less dmg of rev/naglfar during pos shooting that is realy unacceptable as it should be the best pos shooter. Give them +50% dps against towers to solve this problem.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.06.05 12:30:00 - [822] Originally by: Ound Are those changes still planned ? The Capital Shield Booster preq. set to Shield Managment 5 still planned or you not going to change it ? Yes, should be on sisi soon

Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.06 09:53:00 - [823] fix boost vs resistance bonus rokh and mael have same tanks with 2 invu and xl booster, but rokh got 25% more ehp
Akira Miyamoto Caldari The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.06.06 09:58:00 - [824] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Ound Are those changes still planned ? The Capital Shield Booster preq. set to Shield Managment 5 still planned or you not going to change it ? Yes, should be on sisi soon Are you planning to inform this to the general public before you get n+1 people not being able to use their capital shield boosters due to not having SM5 trained? Not everyone keeps up with sisi changes.
Ocularus Dothumiter Amarr Arcana Immanis NEGATIVE TENDENCIES	Posted - 2009.06.08 19:02:00 - [825] If you are going to change the skill requirements for CSB would you mind making a public announcement about it? Many capital pilots like my self who haven't trained Shield Management 5 would love the heads up.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2009.06.09 09:18:00 - [826] Originally by: Ocularus Dothumiter If you are going to change the skill requirements for CSB would you mind making a public announcement about it? Many capital pilots like my self who haven't trained Shield Management 5 would love the heads up. if you already have the capital shield operation skill trained then it does not matter if you do not have shield management V trained yet.

Rakshasa Taisab Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.09 16:55:00 - [827] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Ocularus Dothumiter If you are going to change the skill requirements for CSB would you mind making a public announcement about it? Many capital pilots like my self who haven't trained Shield Management 5 would love the heads up. if you already have the capital shield operation skill trained then it does not matter if you do not have shield management V trained yet. Hey, I was quite enjoying the whines...
Zanquis Caldari Universal Exports Cult of War	Posted - 2009.06.10 08:50:00 - [828] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Ound Are those changes still planned ? The Capital Shield Booster preq. set to Shield Managment 5 still planned or you not going to change it ? Yes, should be on sisi soon I am curious though as to why shield related skills need to be so much more difficult to acquire then armor. Armor is already by far the most popular PvP tank in the game, and few even bother with shield skills considering this. So lets compare what is required to use the capital tanking items... Armor Tanks [TOTAL 1,024,000 sp) Capital Armor Repair =>Capital Repair Systems (Rank 8) --->Hull Upgrades V (Rank 2)[512,000 sp] --->Mechanic V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] --->Repair Systems V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] Other tank specific skills required to tank properly [0 sp] None Shield Tanks AFTER Proposed Changes[TOTAL 1,280,000 sp] =>Capital Shield Operation (Rank 8) --->Shield Operation V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] --->Shield Management V (Rank 3) [768,000 sp] --->Engineering V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] Other tank specific skills required to tank properly [TOTAL 693,020 sp] =>Tactical Shield Manipulation IV (Rank 5) [181,020 sp] =>Shield Compensation V (Rank 2) [512,000 sp] Proper Capital Armor Tank requires 1,024,000 sp vs Shield tank which requires 1,973,020 sp, which means shield tanks require 48.1% more sp to properly function. This doesn't take into consideration the Shield Upgrades fitting skill which is critical for non capital class shield ships. Though I must admit this is still a massive improvement over the previous pre-req's which took significantly more sp for shield tanks, and was relatively more training because it required you to bring two skills to V which most pilots leave at IV, unlike fitting skills which are generally always at V. ---------------------------------------------- EvE Personality Test
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.06.10 09:56:00 - [829] Originally by: Zanquis Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Ound Are those changes still planned ? The Capital Shield Booster preq. set to Shield Managment 5 still planned or you not going to change it ? Yes, should be on sisi soon I am curious though as to why shield related skills need to be so much more difficult to acquire then armor. Armor is already by far the most popular PvP tank in the game, and few even bother with shield skills considering this. So lets compare what is required to use the capital tanking items... Armor Tanks [TOTAL 1,024,000 sp) Capital Armor Repair =>Capital Repair Systems (Rank 8) --->Hull Upgrades V (Rank 2)[512,000 sp] --->Mechanic V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] --->Repair Systems V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] Other tank specific skills required to tank properly [0 sp] None Shield Tanks AFTER Proposed Changes[TOTAL 1,280,000 sp] =>Capital Shield Operation (Rank 8) --->Shield Operation V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] --->Shield Management V (Rank 3) [768,000 sp] --->Engineering V (Rank 1) [256,000 sp] Other tank specific skills required to tank properly [TOTAL 693,020 sp] =>Tactical Shield Manipulation IV (Rank 5) [181,020 sp] =>Shield Compensation V (Rank 2) [512,000 sp] Proper Capital Armor Tank requires 1,024,000 sp vs Shield tank which requires 1,973,020 sp, which means shield tanks require 48.1% more sp to properly function. This doesn't take into consideration the Shield Upgrades fitting skill which is critical for non capital class shield ships. Though I must admit this is still a massive improvement over the previous pre-req's which took significantly more sp for shield tanks, and was relatively more training because it required you to bring two skills to V which most pilots leave at IV, unlike fitting skills which are generally always at V. Armor guys need a bunch of compensation skills to at least IV though, and most even train them to 5...
Elaron Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2009.06.10 17:10:00 - [830] Originally by: Zanquis Proper Capital Armor Tank requires 1,024,000 sp vs Shield tank which requires 1,973,020 sp, which means shield tanks require 48.1% more sp to properly function. This doesn't take into consideration the Shield Upgrades fitting skill which is critical for non capital class shield ships. Though I must admit this is still a massive improvement over the previous pre-req's which took significantly more sp for shield tanks, and was relatively more training because it required you to bring two skills to V which most pilots leave at IV, unlike fitting skills which are generally always at V. Whether or not this is in or out of balance, I'm not really able to say; what I will say, though, is that from what little the devs have said about the factors they use to determine balance, time to train is not one of them. Originally by: Nuts Nougat Armor guys need a bunch of compensation skills to at least IV though, and most even train them to 5... Mostly because ANM II and EANM II are great modules made awesome by those skills; there are equivalent skills for shields but, as there's no direct EANM equivalent for shields, the skills go mostly untrained.

Zanquis Caldari Universal Exports Cult of War	Posted - 2009.06.11 02:32:00 - [831] Originally by: Nuts Nougat Armor guys need a bunch of compensation skills to at least IV though, and most even train them to 5... You do not actually NEED those compensation skills to IV or V, though it definitely helps with the EANMII's. I generally fly armor tanks now since I pretty much always pvp and shield tanks are unacceptable in most fleets. I created some very strong tanks without having those skills trained, and yes they did improve as I trained them. However it is a marginal improvement made even more marginal after its stacking penalized. However it IS an improvement and every little bit helps, even if its only 1%-2% across the board in the end as the module is passive and doesn't require capacitor to use. As an additional note EANMII = 20% bonus to all resistance base with 0 compensation skills, 25% bonus with all compensation to V, and 24% bonus with all compensation to IV on all resistance. After stacking penalized with DCII and 1-2 EANMII or rigs plus EANMII you end up getting about 1%-2% for each resistance type across the board with rank V skills. If you lower the skill from rank V to rank IV you end up with around the same being off by a fraction of a percentage point. Those compensation skills exist for shields too and point to another imbalance, they are mostly useless for shield tanks because fitting is super tight on shields (with many shield ships having to use rig slots to free up room in mids for point and other utility), and the only helpful module for am omni tank on shields doesn't use any of the skills unless its offline aside from the fact that Invulnerability Fields are already cap heavy for a resistance module and can be shut off with cap warfare. The EM compensation is somewhat useful for the passive module which would end in the player sacrificing some resistance when compared to the active EM hardner to to reduce cap use and more importantly make EM's minimum resistance a minimum 45% even after all your cap is drained. Shield users would love to have a use for these compensation skills, as they currently represent more of an advantage armor has over shields. Invulnerability field II vs EANMII Invulnerability Field II + 10% more base resistance (Total 30% global), though this is mitigated by the fact that shields generally have a total 20% less precentage points of resistance base then armor as a starting point. + Can be overloaded to +36% resistance for a limited time - Uses 3.2 cap/s per module and can't be effected by skills - Doesn't benefit from compensation skills unless you turn it off (if you have all compensation at V you get 5% to all resistances when this module is offline) - Vulnerable to capacitor warfare, can be turned off if you are capped out - Needs to be on the entire fight, since shields is the first line of defense you can't save cap by turning it off until you take fire. - High fitting requirements. Requires 44 cpu and 1 power to fit, compared to active armor hardeners and EANMII's which use 36 cpu and 1 power. EANMII's + Immune to capacitor warfare, you can't turn this off when your capacitor has been drained by a nuke + Passive, its always on (lag has no effect) + Zero capacitor Drain + Light fitting requirements, only uses 36 cpu and 1 power to fit. + Can receive significant bonus from compensation skills - Lower net resistance bonus by 10% (5% with compensation skills) - Requires you to train compensation skills for best results - Can't be overloaded I'm willing to call EANMII's way better then Invuln Field II's after lots of combat testing and this analysis. The slight bonus in resistance over the EANMII is lost in the natural resistance difference between shields and armor. The vulnerability to capacitor war is a huge problem. Furthermore the cap drain 3.2 cap/s seems minor but when combined with other standard items you can feel it, badly if you have 2. The extra 8 cpu cost for shield hardeners also is noticeable but minor.
Zanquis Caldari Universal Exports Cult of War	Posted - 2009.06.11 02:56:00 - [832] Some comparison to illustrate what I mean by the natural resistance imbalance between shields vs armor which tends to mitigate the few advantages of a Invuln Field II over an EANMII. In every case you have a total of 110% points of shield and 130% points of armor resistance over all racial ships in various classes and sizes. Another further inhibitor is that the vice for shields is signature radius which has multiple disadvantages including being locked faster, but most of all it makes targets do higher damage to you on average (cleaner hits, more hits, and in missiles more damage) which is counterproductive for a tank. Armor's main disadvantage is weight which results in slower acceleration time and lower max speeds if you use rigs and speed modules, however speed modules still preform exemplary in this environment, and this vice does nothing to increase the damage you take. Popularity is also another big issue when you compare the two tanks, because armor is so common and shield's so unpopular if you use a shield ship you will likely end up primary target and dead first unless your in a capital in siege where shield boosting has a minor edge against duel reps when you can't receive remote assistance. It doesn't help that shield transfer modules are horrendously harder to fit then remote repair modules, and have terrible cap efficiency by comparison and basically no advantage other then the fact its boost is immediate which is mitigated by the loss of early warning because shields are the first line of defence where as armor has time to call for rep and get locked because you have a shield buffer as warning. Rokh Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(45%), KN(25%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Megathron Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(35%), KN(35%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Apocolypse Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(35%), KN(25%), EX(20%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Phoenix Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(45%), KN(25%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Revelation Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(35%), KN(25%), EX(20%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Moros Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(35%), KN(35%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Naglfar Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(60%), TH(35%), KN(25%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Drake Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(45%), KN(25%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Myrmidon Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(35%), KN(35%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Harbinger Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(50%), TH(35%), KN(25%), EX(20%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor Hurricane Shield: EM(00%), TH(20%), KN(40%), EX(50%), TOTAL(110%) Armor: EM(60%), TH(35%), KN(25%), EX(10%), TOTAL(130%) Result: 20% more % points in Armor ---------------------------------------------- EvE Personality Test
steave435 Caldari SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.06.11 12:00:00 - [833] Quote: - Doesn't benefit from compensation skills unless you turn it off (if you have all compensation at V you get 5% to all resistances when this module is offline) Actually, it's 15% resist when it's turned off (3%/level), but the rest is true.
Tessho Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.14 08:04:00 - [834] we are in the middle of june, do we have an ETA ? :)
Granmethedon III Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.16 10:05:00 - [835] LOL both TSM 5 and Shield Man 5 done since this announcement was made.... I no longer care for the outcome! :D
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.06.17 09:17:00 - [836] Its cute when CCP extends the life of a balancing thread so it looks like they are adressing all the issues in the general balance thread they said they would- wihtout do so Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Tessho Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.24 19:20:00 - [837] still no ETA ? :)
Talaar The Dead Parrot Shoppe Inc. Balance of Judgment	Posted - 2009.06.26 13:01:00 - [838] Skill change is going in on Monday's patch! Thanks devs!
darkmancer	Posted - 2009.06.26 15:44:00 - [839] Yay good changes, shame TSM has been left unaltered though. --------------------------------- There's a simple solution to every problem. It is always invariably wrong
Talianax Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.28 08:56:00 - [840] Originally by: darkmancer Yay good changes, shame TSM has been left unaltered though. w8, we still have to train TSM 5 now? And they were saying it would get changed to a different skill...



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.

◕◡◕

ps. was joking about making the naglfar horizontal!