Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xanos Blackpaw
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.05.02 17:23:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Mystafyre Trasher is pretty much the only destroyer capable to be effective in pvp.
in FW the coercer kinda work to. it create a 40km sphere no-fly zone... --------------------------------------------- Playing minmatar is "like going down a flight of stairs in a office chair firing an Uzi". |
DARTHxFREE
State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2009.05.02 18:49:00 -
[32]
You need to fly Destoyers to have an opinion, and with good skils if you flew them you would never head to the forums with a \boost campain.
All the destoyers are good in different ways, slight weakness on the Catlyst due to cost for T2 hybrid atm.
Thrasher is what I use for FW, gone threw 32 but tag'd 308 kill mails.
The huge volly damage from Arty-Thrasher can commonly 1 shot ceptors, this is a big deal since the ocasional ceptor is a rigged faction mwd ship scoring 60-75m on thekill board.
Highest volly so far was 2055 on a Huricane
Referance /join Cheeze & Whine Club
|
Footoo Rama
|
Posted - 2009.05.02 23:15:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Mephesto Nizal the catalyst is such a friggen hard thing to get a beautifull fit for.
Works fine for level 1 missions... then becomes the best salvager out there...
5/3 tractor/slavager 2x expanded cargo II 1x cap recharger II 1x AB
fast, cap stable, and has almost 900m3 of space.
But in a Level 1 mission Desty east frigs with thier range bonuses. Level 2 can start to have problems, since they have effectively lower tanks then frigs due to less med and low slots.
|
Madner Kami
|
Posted - 2009.05.02 23:54:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Madner Kami on 02/05/2009 23:56:50
Originally by: Footoo Rama 5/3 tractor/slavager 2x expanded cargo II 1x cap recharger II 1x AB
fast, cap stable, and has almost 900m3 of space.
Um... No way.
Besides that: Destroyers are good at what they're supposed to do: Blast frigates into tiny bits of nothingness. And I support what Coriander Rinne wrote.
|
Evthron Macyntire
|
Posted - 2009.05.03 02:46:00 -
[35]
I love fighting destroyers in missions. They combine the weakness of frigates and cruisers into one ship. ------------------------------ Sigs like this. |
Laur Khal
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 01:04:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Kuritorisu they are fine they work pretty well at their job, taking our frigates.
by 'frigates' you mean 'wrecks', right?
in that case i agree.
|
E villMonkeigh
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 03:01:00 -
[37]
Destroyers are great as they are. The average noob uses them for lvl 1s,then (a) takes them to losec pvp once, loses it almost instantly (thanks to having only destroyer II); and thereafter relegates them to salvager or (b) EFT crunches and decides they don't have enough ehp/dps or whatever.
Excellent points made so far: -Destroyer 5 is pretty much manadatory -It's all about ALPHA which is why Thrasher is best -Some slot layouts are a bit gimped -Destroyers swat frigates and inties with ease, but they are poor tacklers due to sig radius -They are very cheap; you can lose 5 dessies for a rigged inty and still be ahead
All above Thrasher fits are decent; I tend to fit a point in small gang so I can be a 2ndry tackler in an emergency.
Highs: 250s or 280s IIs (latter have better ALPHA) Mids: MWD; then SB, track comp or point; TP unecessary if destroyer 5 skills and attracts attention to you Lows: Gyros, MAPCs if needed.
I can fly other dessies but Thrasher has IMO superior ALPHA and balanced slot layout.
|
TheBaptist
Vori V Zakoni Parallax.
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 09:36:00 -
[38]
tl;dr
I thought destroyers are only there to have salvagers and tractor beams fitted on them?
|
GBlair
Caldari Knights of the elite
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 21:12:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Lazarann They're great salvaging ships. Seriously though, while you really shouldn't ever compare Eve to RL, having another tech 2 destroyer designed to be an anti-cloaker would be badass. That's a great idea, go post it in the Features and Ideas forum.
^^ This. Bleep bloop, I have achevables. |
Mordican
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 21:43:00 -
[40]
Throw away Coercer glass cannon:
[Coercer, Pulse] Partial Power Plant Manager: Diagnostic System Heat Sink I Heat Sink I Heat Sink I
Monopropellant I Hydrazine Boosters
Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S Medium Afocal Pulse Maser I, Multifrequency S
200dps at close range, 115dps at 12-15km with my skills.
[Coercer, Pulse Tanked] Heat Sink I Heat Sink I Damage Control I 400mm Reinforced Nanofiber Plates I
1MN MicroWarpdrive I
Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S Dual Light Pulse Laser I, Multifrequency S
Obviously faster with some amount of speed. about 25% less DPS, a bit less range, but over 6k EHP.
Think about a group of 3-4 of these with a dedicated tackler. 5 man gang, 600+ DPS, lose 1, but take down a cruiser/BC? works for me.
|
|
Sexrex Taerg
|
Posted - 2009.05.04 21:57:00 -
[41]
Destroyers do their jobs exceedingly well- kill frigates and inties.
The Thrasher has an outstanding alpha. The Catalyst is a close-range DPS machine. The Coercer creates a 15km sphere of death with Scorch. And while lower DPS, the Cormorant has outstanding range.
Coercer is really only hurt by the lack of a 2nd mid.
|
Wannabehero
Absolutely No Retreat
|
Posted - 2009.05.05 00:09:00 -
[42]
Destroyers are by no means useless.
True, in specific examples they require some love, but in general they do their jobs exceedingly well... Cheap, mobile anti-frig death-traps.
The course of game development, in case you haven't noticed, is towards making small ship classes more survivable vs. larger ship classes. This in hopes that a diverse fleet make-up with tactical options will be better than a no-brain biggest-is-best setup. There is still a long way to go, but with the recent missile, web, scrambler, and inty-signature changes, frigates, interceptors, assault frigates, and stealth bombers have become a lot more dangerous to Battleships, Battlecruisers, and cruisers. A single well piloted destroyer can absolutely devastate all ships in the frigate family and provide defense for the larger ships in his gang from several of those ships.
I'm not saying that some designer attention shouldn't be thrown their way, by all means it should, but to say that destroyers are useless is pure tripe. --
Don't harsh my mellow |
Kadavreski
Caldari State Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.05 00:26:00 -
[43]
To be honest, I don't think buffing the tank would be that bad on these things at all; look at their big brothers, the battlecruisers - some (lol drake) can tank straight out the wazoo, so what'd it hurt?
Of course, one of the reasons BCs last so long is because people rig them; I doubt anyone would rig a destroyer (well, beyond fitting a salvage tackle or two anyway )
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2009.05.05 02:48:00 -
[44]
I wish you could get T1 destroyers with T2 resists.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.05.05 03:36:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Ghoest I wish you could get T1 destroyers with T2 resists.
It would have to be really well done. My thrasher kills most interceptors in two salvoes. Some of the most fun I've had is playing "Rambo" alone in a system w/ multiple enemy interceptors. They usually end up w/ 2 dead and 2 in structure before I'm pinned and overwhelmed. Do you really want to take the "glass" out of my glass cannon?
|
Renesis Maximus
|
Posted - 2009.05.05 19:58:00 -
[46]
i absolutely love destroyers. They are one of my favorite suprise butt**** ships. Nobody expects the destroyer, and nobody primaries it. It's a perfect cheapfleet ship, as it has decent DPS with great tracking (awesome against cruiser sized and smaller). A rail Cormorant is the perfect anti-interceptor ship, as it can pop it before it even gets into range (one or two volleys is all it takes). My corp used fleets of Cormorants & Flycathcers as anti-nano gangs back in the day. Drop a bubble and wait for the roving nano-gang to pass through....lock, and fire. We killed over 75 interceptors in 3 days at one point...
Destoryers have their uses, but nobody uses them for what they are intended to be used as. They are not super-heavy weapons platforms. They are throwaway harasser ships that are great at ****ing off and killing ships much more costly than themselves...
|
Max Hardcase
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.05.06 16:43:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Max Hardcase on 06/05/2009 16:43:01
Originally by: Zarnak Wulf
Originally by: Ghoest I wish you could get T1 destroyers with T2 resists.
It would have to be really well done. My thrasher kills most interceptors in two salvoes. Some of the most fun I've had is playing "Rambo" alone in a system w/ multiple enemy interceptors. They usually end up w/ 2 dead and 2 in structure before I'm pinned and overwhelmed. Do you really want to take the "glass" out of my glass cannon?
Would have to second that assesment, with T2 resists like an assault frig you just about invalidate the need for assault frigs. If T2 destroyers with a combat specialty were to designed I'd rather have CCP give them more fittings options by increasing the amount of medium and low slots.
I do still think the overly large sig radius leaves destroyers somewhat fragile compared to frigs.
|
Saotome Nana
|
Posted - 2009.05.06 18:59:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Saotome Nana on 06/05/2009 19:04:21 Well, while you're all whining about how bad Destroyers are, I'll be in a gang of friends with Thrashers annihilating battlecruisers.
1200 damage with a cycle time of 8 seconds means that from t=0 to t=8 you've done 2400 damage (300 dps) multiplied by however many boats you've got. In a gang of say five Thrashers that's 12000 damage over 8 seconds (1500 dps). Ponder what you can do with that, especially considering that a T2 fit Thrasher costs under six million and even a cheap named version can pull 900-1000 alpha with decent skills.
Edit: And btw these are extremely modest numbers that are easy to hit, in practice it ends up being 10-20% higher. |
Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
|
Posted - 2009.05.06 19:39:00 -
[49]
The current T1 Destroyers fill their roles perfectly well. The problem with destroyers is that they are very easily killed by cruiser-sized weapons. If you take a frigate gang against a bunch of destroyers, the frigates will either have to run or get slaughtered, but toss in a few bigger ships and the destroyers will fold very quickly.
There are two problems with destroyers that make them so vulnerable to larger-caliber weapons.
The first is slot layout. Destroyers each have one less non-high slot than their tier 3 frigate counterpart, which makes fitting any sort of tank to go with the 8 highs somewhat hard. The fix is simple, give each destroyer hull one more low or mid slot, whichever is appropriate.
The second is base HP. The difference in HP, percentage-wise, between a cruiser and a battlecruiser is considerably larger than the difference between frigates and destroyers. Battlecruisers have roughly 2.5x-3x the base hitpoints of their tier 3 cruiser counterparts (not to mention more fitting slots), whereas destroyers only have about 1.5x-2x. If you buffed Destroeyrs base HP, they wouldn't fold so quickly under fire from bigger ships so they could actually fulfill their role on the battlefield, which is anti-frigate support.
tl;dr Destroyers do their jobs against frigate-only gangs really well but could use some mild to moderate buf***e to help them stand up to bigger ships. -------------------- "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 |
Saotome Nana
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 00:13:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Saotome Nana on 07/05/2009 00:14:15
Originally by: Bronson Hughes tl;dr Destroyers do their jobs against frigate-only gangs really well but could use some mild to moderate buf***e to help them stand up to bigger ships.
I hate to say it but I think you're doing it wrong. My Thrasher gangs eat solo battlecruisers. We take losses, usually one or two out of five or six depending, to be sure. But destroyer gangs are absolutely capable of going up against ships out of class. I can't remember if we've fought a gang of cruisers before but we downed an Arbitrator and Thorax together once. It was seven of us and we lost three. Still, we took less ISK damage than they did.
Edit: Should be noted that it was our tacklers that we lost, and we didn't lose any boats directly to guns. It was the drones that killed us. We usually have two of our guys with tracking disruptors.
|
|
Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 00:36:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Saotome Nana solo battlecruisers
Exactly. You get in under their guns and tracking-tank them. The problem is that you can only do that to one at a time; with more than one they spread out and pick you off with surprising ease. -------------------- "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 |
Tarazed Aquilae
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 04:38:00 -
[52]
HereÆs (from memory) more or less what happened in real lifeà
Nations spent a fortune building battleships. These battleships were large, had powerful engines, thick armor, massive guns, and cost enough to bankrupt a small nation. The naval arms race was placing such an economic strain on many large nations that treaties were signed to limit the number and size of battleships.
A new weapon was developed in the late 1800s, the torpedo. This weapon had the potential to sink a battleship. Of course a single hit might not actually sink a battleship. But, even if it didnÆt sink, a single torpedo hit could make the ship return to port for expensive and time consuming repairs. This was actually better than a kill in a short war since it removed a naval asset and tied up workers and facilities for months. And multiple hits would sink a battleship.
So, the torpedo boat was developed. These were small craft that werenÆt capable of extended operations at sea. A torpedo boat wouldnÆt be any threat to a battleship sailing in the ocean. But a battleship fleet that came in close to shore (to shell a town or blockade a port) faced the constant threat that a swarm of torpedo boats would emerge from their hiding places and attack.
And this led to the development of the ôtorpedo boat destroyer.ö (now just called a ôdestroyerö) These ships were intended to be large enough to travel the oceans with a battleship fleet and protect the battleships from torpedo boats.
Destroyers were mostly unarmored ships with a fair number of small (3ö-5ö or so) guns. They were also given some torpedoes to make them a threat to larger ships.
Then the submarine was developed. The destroyer was then given the job (and the tools) to detect and defend against submarines. This meant sonar and depth charges were added.
Then airplanes became effective naval weapons. So the destroyerÆs guns were modified to allow them to fire flak shells and were given numerous smaller antiaircraft guns. They acted as the first line of AA defense for a fleet.
And then missiles were developed, so the destroyers gained missile systems to shoot down incoming anti-ship missiles.
But all this ability meant that the destroyer had to steadily grow larger. As I understand it, today there is no real size difference between a destroyer and a cruiser.
In many ways, minus the torpedoes, the Eve destroyer mirrors the early destroyers. However there really arenÆt any torpedo boats for them to fight. Frigates are close but a frigate can only tackle a battleship, it canÆt realistically kill one. (WeÆre talking fleet action here, not some guy in a poorly fitted megathron who gets caught in a belt by a frigate with a lot of spare time)
Giving the destroyer some anti stealth, anti drone, and anti missile, abilities would go a long way to making them more useful. Still, they are just cheap T1 ships. Maybe we need another tier of destroyer, new ships having more slots, expanded roles, and better defenses.
|
ChickenOfDoom
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 07:18:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Rakrist Edited by: Rakrist on 02/05/2009 08:34:46
Originally by: Abervest
Originally by: Zarnak Wulf My Thrasher has an alpha of 1369, moves 1800ish m/s, and can two shot most interceptors. On rare occasions I've instapopped them. It's one of the few t1 ships that can manhandle its t2 counterpart.
Id love to see that fitting, but i understand if you dont want to share
Got this in a few minutes:
[Thrasher, New Setup 1] Gyrostabilizer II Reactor Control Unit II
Tracking Computer II, Tracking Speed Catalyzed Cold-Gas I Arcjet Thrusters X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S [empty high slot]
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Alpha 1395, speed 1873 w/ maxed skills but without implants.
Of course, that's with a lot of Tech II, which you wouldn't necessarily fit on such a cheap ship. You could probably get similar results with crappy name guns and free up CPU for a disruptor.
Do you actually manage to web many inties? Once they get a good orbit on me I've never been able to do it, they're too fast. Or are you relying on them being dumb and warping to zero on you?
|
Imaos
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 07:41:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Sexrex Taerg Destroyers do their jobs exceedingly well- kill frigates and inties.
The Thrasher has an outstanding alpha. The Catalyst is a close-range DPS machine. The Coercer creates a 15km sphere of death with Scorch. And while lower DPS, the Cormorant has outstanding range.
Coercer is really only hurt by the lack of a 2nd mid.
The coercer is great even with only one mid slot. It is an escort ship and so it don't need tackle. Needs high gunnery, cap and destroyer skill to get it cap stable, but the 20km scorch sphere is nice. (Damn change on rig stacking (was 24km before).
Imaos ------------------------------------------
Originally by: NoNah
My friend, this is EVE, as it's a space oriented game, they couldn't have trolls. We have Caldari. |
Eavee
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 10:30:00 -
[55]
Real life destroyers these days are anti missile / anti aircraft ships or at least this is the case in the Royal Navy, I cant comment for other Navys :P
Anti aircraft seems to fit the anti frigate role in eve but I guess some missile defence would add something useful to them? :| Not sure how balanced that would be since it wouldnt effect any guns.
Frigates in real life are the anti submarine ships ( again in the RN ) so I guess you could give that to destroyers too in eve? Some kind of cloak detection like some other people have commented.
They do make nice salvage ships but it seems a shame to have an entire class of ship reduced to salvaging :P If they wanna do that then dont call them destroyers... and give them 40km tractor range :D
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 12:50:00 -
[56]
Originally by: ChickenOfDoom
Do you actually manage to web many inties? Once they get a good orbit on me I've never been able to do it, they're too fast. Or are you relying on them being dumb and warping to zero on you?
That's not my fit exactly. I use a MAPC, not a RCU, and a named target painter rather then the web. The thrasher was my first real pvp ship. The area of space I was in had opponents that loved interceptors and it was back in the nanoage where they could go 14km/s +. I trained up the thrasher and my gunnery, loaded it w/ 250's, tracking mods, tracking rigs(!), and a target painter. Back then the projectile rigs were going for 3 million in Jita so it's not as crazy as it sounds. I went out and in one night collected three gisti MWD that I turned around and made a tidy profit on. After that I've sworn by the thrasher. I've changed my fit. After the speed nerf I don't need the 250s or the rigs. I've posted my final fit somewhere in this thread. It's the final product after a year of using the thrasher and I'm pretty happy with it.
|
BlackMatrix
Gallente Green Planet Industries
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 15:01:00 -
[57]
Get 10+ Destroyers in a gang....then come back and comment. http://blackmatrix.org.uk
|
Max Hardcase
Art of War Cult of War
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 18:25:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Max Hardcase on 07/05/2009 18:25:31 Realise that 10 cruisers could have done it better, and been more generally usefull ?
|
Renesis Maximus
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 18:49:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Renesis Maximus on 07/05/2009 18:50:22
Originally by: Max Hardcase Edited by: Max Hardcase on 07/05/2009 18:25:31 Realise that 10 cruisers could have done it better, and been more generally usefull ?
No, you are glad you didn't have cruisers because all they had were assault ships and inties...
|
Galan Undris
|
Posted - 2009.05.07 18:55:00 -
[60]
Destroyers are balanced pretty much spot on imo. They're about as vulrenable to bigger ships as they are dangerous to smaller ships, they're just a bit more marginal.
Buffing they're survivability would be pushing then into AF-territory.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |