EVE Search - [Proposal] - Minmatar Large Projectile/Ship Fix

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] - Minmatar Large Projectile/Ship Fix - Astrophobic's

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.08.29 02:13:00 - [1] I am going to be placing all those who sent me ideas into seperate threads so that people can vote and decide which fix would be considered the best for the Minmatar. I know that some will want to make suggestions, but at this point, it would be best if of the three (and hopefully more) that are being put up, you choose the one you like the best. So, here is Astrophobic's idea on fixing the Minmatar situation: I believe that the weapon systems should be changed across the board. This includes small and medium projectiles. Now, I understand that minmatar are already quite good in small and fairly good in medium sized ships. A percentage change across the board means that large projectiles get the "most" benefit from the changes while still keeping things fairly in line across the board. Without further ado, my proposed changes: All autocannons: +35% falloff. Hit quality reduces the damage at optimal + falloff to 38.6%, tracking independent. This is a very steep loss of damage and ambits are practically manditory on every AC ship just to get decent damage. Tiered falloff: Keep the falloff the same for the middle tiered autocannons. Reduce the falloff of the lower tier by 10%, increase the falloff of the upper tier by 10%. This gives incentive to fit the larger tiered autocannons when currently there is little reason to, which also addresses the low powergrid usage of low tier autocannons. Ammo: Switch Fusion damage types with EMP. New Fusion L would be 36 explosive damage, 12 kinetic damage. New EMP L would be 26 EM, 12 Explosive, 6 kinetic. The change to EMP also gives a higher percentage of EM damage than is currently done and gives an advantage to those who can switch out ammo before fights. Currently it's spread too evenly between two contrasting damage types which makes it fairly mediocre. This would also remedy the 9% DPS loss when compared to other high damage ammos. Carbonized lead and other long range ammo should have their damage reduced to match other races' long range ammo. Normally I would welcome diversity, however the t2 long range ammo makes this minmatar "trait" simply a disadvantage. Artillery: Increase the base damage modifier by 50%. Compensate by increasing the rate of fire by 50% as well. This gives artillery a bit of it's bite back, but not all of it. It's a midway point between the current state and the pre-HP boost state. Increase clip size by 50% as well. Finally, increase optimal by 10% across the board. The result is a higher alpha but the same DPS, and a little bit less pain from reloading. The optimal increase is necessary to make minmatar battleships even remotely acceptable in fleet fights. The Tempest: Increase speed and agility by 15%. Change the bonuses as following: Damage bonus to 10% per level, 5% falloff per level. This gives it a little bit of seperation from the maelstrom which currently overshadows it in nearly every role. It makes the tempest a much better pirate boat and gives it a good anti-support role while staying mobile. It has the option of sitting nice and close with a large alpha from artillery, or being a mobile autocannon and neutralizer machine. It will still suffer from a confused mid/low slot configuration, so it won't be the next gank/tank battleship like the mega or geddon. It will actually lose DPS in favor for some true versatility. The Muninn: Move a highslot to a midslot. Utility highslots don't belong on sniper HACs, nevermind two of them. Increase speed and agility by 10%. Combined with the artillery changes, I think it will be just fine. It may not reach the dps/tracking of the zealot, but it will have a seperate damage type and be faster and more agile. There is no reason why the amarr HAC should be faster than the minmatar HAC. The Typhoon: Switch armor and shield. Give it some more fitting room (+1000 PG/40 CPU) and it would go a long way into becoming the versatile boat it was designed to be. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
Comrade Bliss Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.29 05:44:00 - [2] I like it. Got my vote Life is a grave...Dig it...
Yzman Shhan Blind Violence Huzzah Federation	Posted - 2009.08.29 06:03:00 - [3] I like the idea, it would change the tempest to something I'd actually like to fly instead of the phoon. I've missed the alpha of arties since for ever, and this would bring some of the former glory back to minmatar artillery.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.08.29 08:03:00 - [4] maybe some extra drones on the tempest? 100m¦ perhaps to still allow the phoon to "shine"..? - putting the gist back into logistics
Urhgo Khanab Rogen's Heroes Shadow of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.08.29 09:05:00 - [5] supported
Chestrano	Posted - 2009.08.29 09:33:00 - [6] sounds good
RedSplat Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.08.29 10:26:00 - [7] Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
Brendor Hasinor	Posted - 2009.08.29 12:49:00 - [8] I like this proposal the best.
Cold Shade	Posted - 2009.08.29 14:52:00 - [9] Astro has my vote.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.08.29 15:04:00 - [10] Edited by: AstroPhobic on 29/08/2009 15:15:12 Edited by: AstroPhobic on 29/08/2009 15:12:00 Edited by: AstroPhobic on 29/08/2009 15:08:41 edit: Orakkus, do you mind boldfacing the subjects of each paragraph? It's a bit wall-of-text ish. edit 2: Originally by: Roemy Schneider maybe some extra drones on the tempest? 100m¦ perhaps to still allow the phoon to "shine"..? I think the pest will be very competitive with the proposed changes.

Roland Thorne Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori	Posted - 2009.08.29 16:22:00 - [11] This has my vote, plus the 'phoon change would be welcome. Hell, all of it is welcome.
SickSeven The Undead Righteous Knights	Posted - 2009.08.29 17:30:00 - [12] These changes are awesome! I support this!
Eri'kana Motugi	Posted - 2009.08.29 20:02:00 - [13] A big ol' thumbs up.
phantom ghost	Posted - 2009.08.29 20:40:00 - [14] Edited by: phantom ghost on 29/08/2009 20:40:40 Spot on
Spaztick Terminal Impact	Posted - 2009.08.29 23:14:00 - [15] I noticed there was an option to support this topic, so I decided to respond and click that little box. On another topic, I finally removed that annoying sentence in my signature.
Traderboz SlaveMart	Posted - 2009.08.29 23:24:00 - [16] Originally by: Cold Shade Astro has my vote.
Hashin Kyojin	Posted - 2009.08.30 00:41:00 - [17] Edited by: Hashin Kyojin on 30/08/2009 00:40:49 support
Vic Tenrach I.M.M	Posted - 2009.08.30 00:55:00 - [18]
Kalez Pitt	Posted - 2009.08.30 01:03:00 - [19]
Mattk50 House Maadiah	Posted - 2009.08.30 04:18:00 - [20] /signed

Rayokashi Order of Anarchy	Posted - 2009.08.30 09:57:00 - [21] I support this. This needs to be done.
Zoe Tanaka Agent-Orange	Posted - 2009.08.30 10:19:00 - [22] Very much supported.
Uncle Smokey	Posted - 2009.08.30 10:31:00 - [23] supported .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. \o/ EVERYBODY SAY HELL YEAH! \o/
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.08.30 14:21:00 - [24] Sounds pretty good.
Destination SkillQueue Are We There Yet	Posted - 2009.08.30 15:19:00 - [25] Something on these lines would be the best.
ian666 Lamb Federation Navy	Posted - 2009.08.30 17:24:00 - [26] hell yes
Liang Nuren Perkone	Posted - 2009.08.30 23:50:00 - [27] This seems the most well thought out set of changes I've seen. I would register the following reservations: - The Muninn should lose both of its utility high slots. There is no reason to limit the ship at its max range to what an Eagle can do with so much more range. I believe moving the two utility highs to a mid and a low is the Right Answer(tm) here. - The artillery changes is a nerf to Minmatar mission runners (I think, I have not run the numbers). While I am ok with this, it should be noted. - A bit more CPU on the Cyclone please. :) Looks good Astro. Looks like you took my ideas and polished them up nicely. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
Tyler Lowe DROW Org Brotherhood of the Spider	Posted - 2009.08.31 01:51:00 - [28] I still have some reservations, but this is overall the best of the suggestions that have been forwarded. You have my support sir.
A'ruhn Intergalactic Spacegoats Inc.	Posted - 2009.08.31 06:04:00 - [29] Very much supported, been flying amarr for years, and started branching off with a vengeance into Minnie lately. I love the mix of mobility/firepower, but I can definitely see the shortcomings and I think these ideas would do a lot to fix that.
Herschel Yamamoto Agent-Orange	Posted - 2009.08.31 06:58:00 - [30] Edited by: Herschel Yamamoto on 31/08/2009 06:58:25 I don't fly Min, but this seems good to me.

ClogMan Caldari Caldari Anvil	Posted - 2009.08.31 10:29:00 - [31] Supported.
To mare Advanced Technology	Posted - 2009.08.31 11:52:00 - [32] support everything except the ship bonus change on the tempest. it dont need a dps nerf.
Mr Pentex	Posted - 2009.08.31 11:54:00 - [33] This is an good selution in my oppinion. /Signed
Levistus Junior Trojan Trolls Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2009.08.31 12:22:00 - [34] supported
Liang Ming	Posted - 2009.08.31 12:48:00 - [35] /signed
Idril Celebrindar	Posted - 2009.08.31 12:49:00 - [36] I support all proposed changes.
Seriously Bored	Posted - 2009.08.31 14:52:00 - [37] I'm going to toss my weight behind this one, actually, even though Orakkus posted my idea also. Good ideas Astro.
Wedge Ascon	Posted - 2009.08.31 14:58:00 - [38] /signed
Wedge Ascon	Posted - 2009.08.31 14:59:00 - [39] Originally by: Wedge Ascon /signed
Inconspicuous Scout	Posted - 2009.08.31 19:03:00 - [40] do it so

Volir Dot.	Posted - 2009.08.31 20:24:00 - [41] I like it but not the ammo change. The entire ammo line should be revamped so that no two kinetic / explosive ammos are in the same ~range. From short to far example: Fusion (-50% range), Emp, Titanium Sabot, Phased Plasma, Nuclear (0% range), Depleted Uranium, Proton, Carb Lead (+60% range) The current setup, for comparison, is: Emp (-50%), Phased Plasma, Fusion, titanium Sabot, Depleted Uranium(0%), Proton, Nuclear, Carb lead (+60%) The actual damage numbers would have to be adjusted to fit the new ranges, but these changes would provide actual useful choices in ammo for both ACs and artillery. under the proposed ammo setup above, every engagement style would have an ammo useful against shields and against armor.
Xephys Dark Twilight Solutions	Posted - 2009.08.31 21:20:00 - [42] Signed, I agree on pretty much everything, buffs plox.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.08.31 21:34:00 - [43] Please limit discussion to the ongoing thread in the Ships and Modules, located here: Ships and Modules Discussion I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
Naim Obeji Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition	Posted - 2009.09.01 01:13:00 - [44] Edited by: Naim Obeji on 01/09/2009 01:15:00 Please...throw us downtrodden Minmatar a bone. I pretty much agree with all the points in the OP. I have absolutely maxed out my Minnie gunnery skills and I still find the current array of weaponry pretty "meh," as-is. I still love my muninn, but it would be great to get one of those hi-slots back and turned to something more useful in the mid- or low slots.
Hiroshima Jita	Posted - 2009.09.01 01:26:00 - [45] I'm pretty happy with this.
Bibbleibble	Posted - 2009.09.01 08:22:00 - [46] Confirming that this is a good idea. ________________________________________________ For changes to Minmatar Battleships click here (Now with added summary!)
irion felpamy HellJumpers Corp Indecisive Certainty	Posted - 2009.09.01 09:06:00 - [47] phobic changes best changes
Doklan	Posted - 2009.09.01 14:04:00 - [48] sounds good. supported
d'hofren Queens of the Stone Age Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.09.01 21:08:00 - [49]
Xydros	Posted - 2009.09.01 23:55:00 - [50] Fix our BSes already. They suck.

Myrkala Aurora Acclivitous	Posted - 2009.09.02 00:34:00 - [51] I support.
Crownsith Potentium Force	Posted - 2009.09.02 07:30:00 - [52] supported
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity	Posted - 2009.09.02 09:50:00 - [53] I like this. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
farl	Posted - 2009.09.02 10:35:00 - [54]
swordmaster125 The Soulforged Combat Group	Posted - 2009.09.02 13:12:00 - [55] this
Bonecrow	Posted - 2009.09.02 17:25:00 - [56] Supported
Secluse	Posted - 2009.09.02 18:45:00 - [57] AC's and Art need a boost, hopefully CCP can at least get the message to spend a look at the balancing.
Ecky X	Posted - 2009.09.02 20:41:00 - [58] .
Min Qa	Posted - 2009.09.02 23:39:00 - [59] supported
Kelbesque Crystalis	Posted - 2009.09.02 23:54:00 - [60] Projectiles need something.

maya ibuki2 THORN Syndicate Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.09.03 00:33:00 - [61] Originally by: ClogMan Supported. 0ok!
Solid Prefekt Haven Front	Posted - 2009.09.03 05:30:00 - [62] Here are my personal initial thoughts. Overall I think it is way too many changes. I am tired of CCP making so many changes to mechanics as it is. Changes should be small and gradual so you can look back and fully grasp the direct and indirect affects of a change. All autocannons: +35% falloff. Hit quality reduces the damage at optimal + falloff to 38.6%, tracking independent. This is a very steep loss of damage and ambits are practically manditory on every AC ship just to get decent damage. - I see no value in making this change. ACs are fine the way they are. I don't want to be forced to put on ambits. Tiered falloff: Keep the falloff the same for the middle tiered autocannons. Reduce the falloff of the lower tier by 10%, increase the falloff of the upper tier by 10%. This gives incentive to fit the larger tiered autocannons when currently there is little reason to, which also addresses the low powergrid usage of low tier autocannons. - You do currently have an incentive of 5% increase damage. Maybe take tracking penalty off then you will see more people switch between the different tiers. A 10% in falloff is too great and too much of an advantage. Artillery: Increase the base damage modifier by 50%. Compensate by increasing the rate of fire by 50% as well. This gives artillery a bit of it's bite back, but not all of it. It's a midway point between the current state and the pre-HP boost state. Increase clip size by 50% as well. Finally, increase optimal by 10% across the board. The result is a higher alpha but the same DPS, and a little bit less pain from reloading. The optimal increase is necessary to make minmatar battleships even remotely acceptable in fleet fights. - So you want a 10% increase in optimal on top of the Tempest optimal bonus? Couple that with a 50% Alpha increase on guns that take no cap and have a nice falloff compared to the other guns? The Tempest: Increase speed and agility by 15%. Change the bonuses as following: Damage bonus to 10% per level, 5% falloff per level. This gives it a little bit of seperation from the maelstrom which currently overshadows it in nearly every role. It makes the tempest a much better pirate boat and gives it a good anti-support role while staying mobile. It has the option of sitting nice and close with a large alpha from artillery, or being a mobile autocannon and neutralizer machine. It will still suffer from a confused mid/low slot configuration, so it won't be the next gank/tank battleship like the mega or geddon. It will actually lose DPS in favor for some true versatility. - So 25% falloff increase plus the 10% increase you want to give guns? When you factor in all the mods and skills I wonder what optimal + falloff range you get. The Muninn: Move a highslot to a midslot. Utility highslots don't belong on sniper HACs, nevermind two of them. Increase speed and agility by 10%. Combined with the artillery changes, I think it will be just fine. It may not reach the dps/tracking of the zealot, but it will have a seperate damage type and be faster and more agile. There is no reason why the amarr HAC should be faster than the minmatar HAC. - Hmm. This one I am on the fence with. We have 2 utility plus drones that are both useless for a Sniper. I would almost be fine taking away a utility plus the drones for a mid. The one extra utility could possibly be used for a neut (though you won't have grid for it) The Typhoon: Switch armor and shield. Give it some more fitting room (+1000 PG/40 CPU) - You mean switch the slot layout so it is shield? I like the armor phoon. This is still a good and fun BS, just takes a lot of SP. More grid would be nice (I would be willing to make drone bay smaller for it). And then a double dmg bonus for just one of the weapon types (missile or arty) (like you did with Naglfar).
Ecky X	Posted - 2009.09.03 06:13:00 - [63] Edited by: Ecky X on 03/09/2009 06:13:50 Originally by: Solid Prefekt All autocannons: - I see no value in making this change. ACs are fine the way they are. I don't want to be forced to put on ambits. That doesn't make any sense. "Don't increase my base range, I don't want to have to fit rigs to increase my range." ?? Originally by: Solid Prefekt Tiered falloff: - You do currently have an incentive of 5% increase damage. Maybe take tracking penalty off then you will see more people switch between the different tiers. A 10% in falloff is too great and too much of an advantage. Why do blasters get a falloff increase and not autocannons? Also remember that falloff is only about 38.5% as strong a mechanic as optimal. Originally by: Solid Prefekt Artillery: - So you want a 10% increase in optimal on top of the Tempest optimal bonus? Couple that with a 50% Alpha increase on guns that take no cap and have a nice falloff compared to the other guns? The Tempest does not have an optimal bonus, nor is astro calling for one. Even with his proposed changes, artillery will still be the shortest long range weapon. His Tempest proposal actually lowers its DPS, below its already lowest-in-class DPS. I'm against his Tempest-specific changes, but for different reasons. I support the rest. Originally by: Solid Prefekt The Tempest: - So 25% falloff increase plus the 10% increase you want to give guns? When you factor in all the mods and skills I wonder what optimal + falloff range you get. Still far, far less than the 90km optimal you get with an Apoc using pulse lasers. Originally by: Solid Prefekt The Typhoon: - You mean switch the slot layout so it is shield? I like the armor phoon. This is still a good and fun BS, just takes a lot of SP. More grid would be nice (I would be willing to make drone bay smaller for it). And then a double dmg bonus for just one of the weapon types (missile or arty) (like you did with Naglfar). No, he means give it more armor than shield. Right now, it has 7 lowslots and more shield than armor - a very confused ship. It doesn't have the grid for an active armor tank either... but I feel the Phoon is pretty decent already. --- Given these clarifications, would you support his changes?
Solid Prefekt Haven Front	Posted - 2009.09.03 07:25:00 - [64] Edited by: Solid Prefekt on 03/09/2009 07:26:08 Edited by: Solid Prefekt on 03/09/2009 07:24:50 Originally by: Ecky X Given these clarifications, would you support his changes? I updated my post and where I do support the changes I noted it. I don't support all of it (especially all at one time). Though, if you did get this all in, it would definitely benefit me.
Kiko Hamasaki	Posted - 2009.09.03 09:01:00 - [65] /signed
Hanen	Posted - 2009.09.03 09:03:00 - [66] got my vote
Kaito Haakkainen	Posted - 2009.09.03 11:39:00 - [67]
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2009.09.03 12:12:00 - [68] Yeah, what he said... Minmatar is already Eve on Hard Mode, so make their ships worth the effort.
Stonewall Zachhoefs Peces Of Eighte YARRR and CO	Posted - 2009.09.03 14:47:00 - [69] yes...1000x yes!!! love the look of minnie ships...especially the pest...now, give me a good reason to fly it. and in conclusion, thank you for reading my sig.
Undertow Latheus Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.09.03 17:07:00 - [70] supported, although im thinking arty may need something more... The increase in alpha will help artillery instapop things, but will only be helpful if instapopping things. And even with 10% more optimal they will still be the shortest range and have by far the worst tracking. For sniping against targets that you know you can not kill in one volley, artillery would be even worse besides for the much needed optimal boost

nafiy gnaw	Posted - 2009.09.03 18:47:00 - [71] supported
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.03 18:55:00 - [72] Originally by: Undertow Latheus supported, although im thinking arty may need something more... The increase in alpha will help artillery instapop things, but will only be helpful if instapopping things. And even with 10% more optimal they will still be the shortest range and have by far the worst tracking. For sniping against targets that you know you can not kill in one volley, artillery would be even worse besides for the much needed optimal boost The intent wasn't to make them a better fleet weapon, the intent was to give them more of a role in small gang combat where they excel while keeping around the same performance in a fleet. The optimal nudge plus the falloff bonus of the pest will make it a little easier to use arties in a fleet setting, but the big change is small gang and hit and run mechanics. I want people to say "oh ****" when they see 4 tempests sitting on a gate. Right now it's "lol".
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.03 21:05:00 - [73] Originally by: Solid Prefekt - So a straight up 35% falloff increase? So my Vaga can then hit from outside point range and still do pretty good damage. Would have to see a graph to compare it with other race weapons, but seems a little overpowered. I don't know what you call "pretty good damage" as the vaga has mediocre to poor damage at optimal. I'd love to include some graphs but I don't really have the tools necessary. The falloff increase would make the graph look somewhat like the EFT graphs. Currently EFT graphs don't account for hit quality, so a 33% boost would make more or less identical. Quote: - You do currently have an incentive of 5% increase damage. Maybe take tracking penalty off then you will see more people switch between the different tiers. So on top of the 35% you want another 10% i am guessing for Tier 3? Would have to see this in comparison to others (factoring tracking, cap usage, ammo bonuses, and ammo types) Other guns have scaling optimal AND damage, I don't see why minmatar should get the shaft here. Another 10% ontop of the 35% proposed is very little when considering DPS at range, honestly. That's what, a single ambit? The equivalent of a 3-4% boost in optimal if my math serves me right. Quote: - So you want a 10% increase in optimal on top of the Tempest optimal bonus? Couple that with a 50% Alpha increase on guns that take no cap and have a nice falloff compared to the other guns? Yes. You fail to note the abysmal DPS, optimal, ROF, fitting reqs among other things. Quote: - So 25% falloff increase plus the 10% increase you want to give guns? The tempest does have 2 utility slots so it can quickly turn into an RR/Neut BS without any sacrifice of slots and it has the unused cap to use them. Why not just have a total of 2-3 BS in the game as they are all turning the same. I don't know what you're talking about here. The proposed change will actually make it do less damage than before (9 effective turrets vs 10), but instead give it a larger alpha and some extra range. It will continue to be paper thin with a crap medium/low config, low sensor strength, low lock range and other things. It will basically turn into an oversized BC. Quote: - More grid would be nice (I would be willing to make drone bay smaller for it). And then a double dmg bonus for just one of the weapon types (missile or arty) (like you did with the Naglfar). I think the bonuses and slots are fine, and will be fine especially if the changes applicable to autocannons go through.
Bomberlocks Icarus Prime	Posted - 2009.09.03 23:26:00 - [74] Signed, Minnies need some fresh air as it's getting kind of musty and dank inside our old rust buckets. Some caveats though: I don't see the need to reduce the Minnie long range ammos damage (Carbonised Lead, Titanium Sabot, Proton etc), since they are about the only counter that Minnies have in long range engagements with Caldari, for instance (unless you want to really use tremor, which wasn't even mentioned here, because just about no one uses it because its dps is so anemic). Personally, I don't like the arty ROF changes either. What arties need are better optimal, higher rof and bigger clip sizes. (And they'll still be worse than either missiles or lasers at long range) But the rest of the proposals, yes.
Ecky X	Posted - 2009.09.04 00:40:00 - [75] Edited by: Ecky X on 04/09/2009 00:43:56 Originally by: Bomberlocks Some caveats though: I don't see the need to reduce the Minnie long range ammos damage (Carbonised Lead, Titanium Sabot, Proton etc), since they are about the only counter that Minnies have in long range engagements with Caldari, for instance (unless you want to really use tremor, which wasn't even mentioned here, because just about no one uses it because its dps is so anemic). Erm, you do realize that Tremor does more damage than Proton, Nuclear, and Carbonized lead, right? Ammos other than phased plasma, EMP, and fusion, + T2 long range are rarely used, for good reason. Minmatar long range ammos do more damage than other races, but Astro is suggesting that all minmatar ammos are moved 1 "damage level" toward close-range, since nobody uses long range ammos.
Xoth Freefall New Horizon Industries	Posted - 2009.09.04 01:14:00 - [76] I support this.
Hatsumi Kobayashi Bannable Offense. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.09.04 11:53:00 - [77] Signed, supported, loved, touched and kissed. ______
Black Kestrel GK inc.	Posted - 2009.09.04 15:51:00 - [78] Supporting all but the tempest changes. I don't believe any concessions need be made to justify boosting that ship. Ecky's tempest changes seem superior. All of astro's other changes I fully support. Signed x2.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.04 17:24:00 - [79] Originally by: Black Kestrel Supporting all but the tempest changes. I don't believe any concessions need be made to justify boosting that ship. Ecky's tempest changes seem superior. All of astro's other changes I fully support. Signed x2. This seems to be a recurring theme. I'd love to work on the tempest some more (to be completely honest this whole list was from the top of my head written in 10 minutes), but I have no faith in CCP using a 100% role bonus on a tech 1 ship. I do quite licke Ecky's change, but I don't think it's realistic at all. I think we should come up with something easier or more concrete, perhaps something as simple as 7.5% ROF/5% falloff. This gives it even more DPS than 10% damage/level and doesn't have quite the overwhelming alpha. I'm open to suggestions, always.
Ecky X	Posted - 2009.09.04 18:11:00 - [80] Originally by: AstroPhobic Originally by: Black Kestrel Supporting all but the tempest changes. I don't believe any concessions need be made to justify boosting that ship. Ecky's tempest changes seem superior. All of astro's other changes I fully support. Signed x2. This seems to be a recurring theme. I'd love to work on the tempest some more (to be completely honest this whole list was from the top of my head written in 10 minutes), but I have no faith in CCP using a 100% role bonus on a tech 1 ship. I do quite licke Ecky's change, but I don't think it's realistic at all. I think we should come up with something easier or more concrete, perhaps something as simple as 7.5% ROF/5% falloff. This gives it even more DPS than 10% damage/level and doesn't have quite the overwhelming alpha. I'm open to suggestions, always. There are a number of equivalent ways to boost the Tempest. 100% role + 25% damage + 10% falloff is the same DPS with battleship V as: 6 turrets, 8 highs 8% ROF per level (gives 10.00 effective turrets) + 10% falloff -same DPS, less alpha than current but better range 6 turrets, 8 highs 13.5% damage bonus per level (10.05 effective turrets) + 10% falloff -same DPS, far more alpha, better range --- But again, the above changes would make the Tempest very heavily dependent on Battleship V.

AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.04 19:32:00 - [81] Originally by: Ecky X Originally by: AstroPhobic Originally by: Black Kestrel Supporting all but the tempest changes. I don't believe any concessions need be made to justify boosting that ship. Ecky's tempest changes seem superior. All of astro's other changes I fully support. Signed x2. This seems to be a recurring theme. I'd love to work on the tempest some more (to be completely honest this whole list was from the top of my head written in 10 minutes), but I have no faith in CCP using a 100% role bonus on a tech 1 ship. I do quite licke Ecky's change, but I don't think it's realistic at all. I think we should come up with something easier or more concrete, perhaps something as simple as 7.5% ROF/5% falloff. This gives it even more DPS than 10% damage/level and doesn't have quite the overwhelming alpha. I'm open to suggestions, always. There are a number of equivalent ways to boost the Tempest. 100% role + 25% damage + 10% falloff is the same DPS with battleship V as: 6 turrets, 8 highs 8% ROF per level (gives 10.00 effective turrets) + 10% falloff -same DPS, less alpha than current but better range 6 turrets, 8 highs 13.5% damage bonus per level (10.05 effective turrets) + 10% falloff -same DPS, far more alpha, better range --- But again, the above changes would make the Tempest very heavily dependent on Battleship V. 7.5/8% ROF and 10% falloff sounds pretty acceptable to me. Yeah it would pretty much demand BS 5, but I think I'm okay with that. The maelstrom is by far the easiest minnie BS to fit and use, especially for PVE and that type of thing.
Boink'urr Wasserette De Tarthorst	Posted - 2009.09.04 22:55:00 - [82] Edited by: Boink''urr on 04/09/2009 22:59:58 I love minnie and my first BS was a Typhoon... great fun and loved it to death (litterally, lost 3), but not flying it again until i got better skills. I'm cross training atmo because i feel kinda backwards for being a minnie flying minnie BS D: What i like most would be the change to getting a better alpha while retaining DPS. thats what i expect when i hear 'Artillery' - slow to reload, but when it hits, it does make your ears go 'pop'. So, good ideas - signed :D
Alt Tabbed	Posted - 2009.09.05 01:25:00 - [83] nice ideas
Bunzan Cardinal Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.05 01:43:00 - [84]
Gneeznow North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.09.05 07:04:00 - [85] yar
Petrov Kreigt Sincarnate Holding	Posted - 2009.09.05 10:20:00 - [86] Yes please, show minnie, and in particular the Tempest some love. You got my vote Orakkus.
Marz Ghola Minmatar Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2009.09.05 22:45:00 - [87] This is a very fair proposal. I would prefer moar, but this is fair. Signed
Chestrano Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.05 23:27:00 - [88] you can support this thread by click on the "check here if you want to give yout support to the idea/discussion going on"-Box at under the textbox, where you write your message. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1165197&page=2
The Cuckoo	Posted - 2009.09.06 00:42:00 - [89] Agree with everything except the last one about the typhoon.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.09.06 01:05:00 - [90] Originally by: Petrov Kreigt Yes please, show minnie, and in particular the Tempest some love. You got my vote Orakkus. Thanks, but it's Astrophobic's idea. :) I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.

Xzanos Innocent Victims	Posted - 2009.09.06 02:26:00 - [91] all in all this seems like good stuff. there might be some stacking bonuses between bosting tempest and ac/artys that could make it a bit overpowered but that could all be looked into and balanced out. i give it thumbs up all in all ------------------------------------------------ Mess with the best.....Die like the rest.
Allen Ramses Caldari Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.09.06 03:18:00 - [92] Originally by: Orakkus All autocannons: +35% falloff. No. AC falloff is already twice as much as blasters and pulses. A 20% increase to DPS is probably needed, though. Quote: Tiered falloff: Keep the falloff the same for the middle tiered autocannons. Reduce the falloff of the lower tier by 10%, increase the falloff of the upper tier by 12.5%. Fixed. And YES!! Quote: Ammo: No. CCP must have been on drugs when they created the ammo for minmatar ammo. Mixing it with this will only make it worse. Instead, CCP need to re-create Minmatar ammo from scratch. Quote: Artillery: Increase the base damage modifier by 50%. Compensate by decreasing the rate of fire by 33% as well. Fixed, and yes. As for the rest, I disagree. Quote: The Tempest: Are you high? I don't even know where to begin with this one. The 66% DPS bonus already makes this ship a beast. And you want to make it better than a tier 3 battleship?? Quote: The Muninn: I don't know enough about the muninn to say. Quote: The Typhoon: The phoon is arguably the best tier 1 vessel in the game for the sake of versatility. It doesn't need any changes IMO. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.09.06 06:07:00 - [93] Edited by: Orakkus on 06/09/2009 06:06:53 Originally by: Allen Ramses Stuff Please limit discussion on this issue to the ships and modules thread that is currently running at 32 pages now. In addition, here are some following points: Tempest: Even CCP has acknowledged that the ship is no longer viable. If you can't see that yourself, you have no business making any posts about solutions to any Minmatar issue. The Ships and Modules thread goes into great detail why the Tempest does not measure up to even Tier 2 damage dealing ships. Please read it. Muninn: See suggestion above or make a new thread. Typhoon: There is another thread on Ships and Modules on this very subject. Again please read it, and make your points there. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
The Djego Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2009.09.06 12:36:00 - [94] Supported. I didn¦t sent in my own sugestions since I was afraid of a long Eft\numbers war. Good job Orakkus, keeping the thread clean. AKs: Agreed. Tiered Falloff: Argreed, with the extra base falloff for AKs it is actualy preaty nice. I had a more linear progression(0->10%->20%) in mind but then again with the extra base falloff a very good idea to. Amno: Make it so! The damage lose is only on Nuklear and Carbonized Lead and it is not a very big one(9% weaker). Even in PVE where Nuklear has a use for artillery the new Fusion is a very good tradeoff for it. Artillery: Would work, even if I would prefere a bit more DPS+tracking over a bit more range. 40% more Damage and -25% rof would keep the DPS on the Pest nearly the same(a little higher actualy) while still having a Alpha close to 5.7k. Tempest: With the increased AK falloff yes. 5% falloff per level are good(7.5% would still be awsome). Since you can deal more damage with the changed faction Amno the DPS lose is not this big in the end, and barrage gets a lot more falloff to help it. Only drawback I see that you will end up with with a to low DPS number in general fleet fights(on top to the range issues, shooting in falloff, low base DPS, low tracking), but this is more related to the artillery change than the tempest. Munin: Agreed. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.06 16:21:00 - [95] Edited by: AstroPhobic on 06/09/2009 16:27:15 I'd like to point Allen to the discussion thread currently held in ships and modules. Please if you're going to discuss, do it there. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1130224&page=32#949
Xzanos Innocent Victims	Posted - 2009.09.06 21:51:00 - [96] This thread must stay on the front page imo its not just the tempest that needs help all the minmatar battleships do. as well as guns ------------------------------------------------ Mess with the best.....Die like the rest.
Wollari Phoenix Industries Wicked Nation	Posted - 2009.09.07 10:40:00 - [97] sounds good!
Rayokashi Order of Anarchy	Posted - 2009.09.08 06:57:00 - [98] Tempest needs fix. Projectiles need fix. Arguments have been made by others and there is active thread going on where need for fixes is made clear.
Xzanos Innocent Victims	Posted - 2009.09.08 08:20:00 - [99] Edited by: Xzanos on 08/09/2009 08:21:52 Originally by: Rayokashi Tempest needs fix. Projectiles need fix. Arguments have been made by others and there is active thread going on where need for fixes is made clear. usually when people refer to another thread they post a link to it. care to indulge us? ------------------------------------------------ Mess with the best.....Die like the rest.
Javelin6 Dirt Nap Squad	Posted - 2009.09.08 09:08:00 - [100] Supported

Hun Jakuza 24th Imperial Guard	Posted - 2009.09.08 10:18:00 - [101] Originally by: Rayokashi Tempest needs fix. Projectiles need fix. Arguments have been made by others and there is active thread going on where need for fixes is made clear. Agreed. Just look at this. Tempest no firepower and no tank. 6 mid slot for shield? Sux. No web/no scram/no cap booster/no sensor booster/no ECCM and resist same time. Dominion patch slap more the matar pilots in face -1 mid slot to the fleet pest. Ok try with armor. 6 slot too but, all armor user ship have minimum 7 low slot, like dominix,armageddon,megathron,phoon,hyperion,apoc. So.. maybe you will shorter with 1600 plate, or damage mod or anm than enemy. Mis slot cant help you, because , a sensor booster or other modules cant give to you + damage or defense and the enemy pilots will using (mid slots) same modules cap booster,mwd,web there. Firepower ? Tempest damage in short range is very bad , the other armored BSs make it better than. So... you have a worst tank and worst firepower tempest against better ships. Just see the killboards and market. Fleet battle ? Small amount of tempest, maybe lot of snipership in 0.0 but most pilot using apoc, mega there. Why primary always the tempest ? Good FC always know, because you could be kill them faster than other ships.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.08 14:37:00 - [102] Originally by: Xzanos Edited by: Xzanos on 08/09/2009 08:21:52 Originally by: Rayokashi Tempest needs fix. Projectiles need fix. Arguments have been made by others and there is active thread going on where need for fixes is made clear. usually when people refer to another thread they post a link to it. care to indulge us? 3 replies above yours. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1130224
Chestrano Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.09 21:44:00 - [103] bump - http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1165197&page=2
Kani Sectas	Posted - 2009.09.10 07:50:00 - [104] Doesn't go far enough! Double all of the things you're suggesting. And add an extra 4 high slots, just in case. Come on CCP, you know game balance is all about eradicating any possible disadvantage to each ship! This is a game, we don't want to think or make tradeoffs or any of that nonsense.
Badger Beard	Posted - 2009.09.10 10:32:00 - [105] Sounds good
Garr Anders Thukk U	Posted - 2009.09.10 10:41:00 - [106] Supporting this, though all minni boats and all projectile need some serious overhaul. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Khadrea Shakor	Posted - 2009.09.10 12:31:00 - [107]
eliminator2	Posted - 2009.09.10 14:11:00 - [108] i fly all 4 races p good but i luv flying min the only draw back is the auto's and split weapons this sounds good :) ----------------------------------------------- i met Eliminator1..... i ate it and spat it out now hes my minion :) i kill miners and missioners people say, i call them target practise
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.10 14:48:00 - [109] Originally by: Garr Anders Supporting this, though all minni boats and all projectile need some serious overhaul. I noted in the OP that it applies across the board to small, medium, and large projectiles. Not sure how many people noticed, though.
Stratigic Dark Twilight Solutions	Posted - 2009.09.10 20:14:00 - [110] Edited by: Stratigic on 10/09/2009 20:14:35 Agreed, but this might make minmitar the new fotm, can you live with that?

Equilian	Posted - 2009.09.10 20:17:00 - [111] /signed
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.10 20:40:00 - [112] Originally by: Stratigic Edited by: Stratigic on 10/09/2009 20:14:35 Agreed, but this might make minmitar the new fotm, can you live with that? I doubt it. The boost is moderate at most. Even with a 100% falloff increase, you'll still be doing more damage with more EHP as amarr. Minmatar still has fundemental issues such as EHP and sensor strength and lock range that come into play even more in today's pvp environment. It makes minnie BS usable, not overpowered.
Chestrano Minmatar	Posted - 2009.09.10 21:04:00 - [113] Originally by: AstroPhobic It makes minnie BS usable, not overpowered. Agreed, i hope CCP will test it on the testserver. I doupt your suggestion would be enough but tbh its far better then nothing. - http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1165197&page=2
Anticoriolis	Posted - 2009.09.10 23:26:00 - [114]
Axearm Thunk'um	Posted - 2009.09.11 00:20:00 - [115]
Rayokashi Order of Anarchy	Posted - 2009.09.11 07:48:00 - [116] Support is welcome!
Bomberlocks Minmatar Icarus Prime	Posted - 2009.09.11 12:07:00 - [117] Originally by: Ecky X Edited by: Ecky X on 04/09/2009 00:43:56 Originally by: Bomberlocks Some caveats though: I don't see the need to reduce the Minnie long range ammos damage (Carbonised Lead, Titanium Sabot, Proton etc), since they are about the only counter that Minnies have in long range engagements with Caldari, for instance (unless you want to really use tremor, which wasn't even mentioned here, because just about no one uses it because its dps is so anemic). Erm, you do realize that Tremor does more damage than Proton, Nuclear, and Carbonized lead, right? Ammos other than phased plasma, EMP, and fusion, + T2 long range are rarely used, for good reason. Minmatar long range ammos do more damage than other races, but Astro is suggesting that all minmatar ammos are moved 1 "damage level" toward close-range, since nobody uses long range ammos. You're right, and I mistakenly got Titanium Sabot in there as well. Shows how often I use Tremor, because I seemed to have Tremor in memory as being weaker than nuclear and proton, I don't know why.
Rab See	Posted - 2009.09.11 12:58:00 - [118] Yes . . 8/ everyone
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2009.09.11 14:45:00 - [119] I recieved a reply from one of the CSMs, Omber Zombie. He stated that CCP was in fact looking at projectiles and Minmatar ships.. He felt that he thus didn't need to bring it up as an issue at the CSM meeting. I replied essentially that I certainly hope so.. however, if they do to the Minmatar what they did to Fleet Issue Tempest.. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.11 18:07:00 - [120] Originally by: Orakkus I recieved a reply from one of the CSMs, Omber Zombie. He stated that CCP was in fact looking at projectiles and Minmatar ships.. He felt that he thus didn't need to bring it up as an issue at the CSM meeting. I replied essentially that I certainly hope so.. however, if they do to the Minmatar what they did to Fleet Issue Tempest.. I think it should be brought up regardless, otherwise we're going to see a "+50% clip size for artillery" - all done! I seriously doubt ccp recognizes the severity and depth of issues that projectiles have - some of their posts re tempest and vagabond really makes me scratch my head.

Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2009.09.12 00:31:00 - [121] Yeah, I agree. Honestly, I do understand that they painted themselves into a corner, and that it'll be a bear to get out of it. Yet, it seems that every suggestion gets things worse. Almost like they are over thinking the problem. You know, this is starting to act like they are at the dawn of doing a major re-work on the entire Minmatar design philosphy. Classically, Minmatar have been Active shield tankers, and the Minmatar specific certificates bear that out.. so, for them to force an armor tank on a Fleet Tempest is probably indicative that some major mind resets are going on. Same with the new Fleet Typhoon as well as the Republic Firetail. None of the old rules are being followed by CCP very closely... though what rules they are using seem to be pretty hazy, or hazy from our standpoint. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
Naim Obeji Dynaverse Corporation Vertigo Coalition	Posted - 2009.09.12 08:48:00 - [122] Edited by: Naim Obeji on 12/09/2009 08:50:33 Originally by: Ecky X Edited by: Ecky X on 04/09/2009 00:43:56 Originally by: Bomberlocks Some caveats though: I don't see the need to reduce the Minnie long range ammos damage (Carbonised Lead, Titanium Sabot, Proton etc), since they are about the only counter that Minnies have in long range engagements with Caldari, for instance (unless you want to really use tremor, which wasn't even mentioned here, because just about no one uses it because its dps is so anemic). Erm, you do realize that Tremor does more damage than Proton, Nuclear, and Carbonized lead, right? Ammos other than phased plasma, EMP, and fusion, + T2 long range are rarely used, for good reason. Minmatar long range ammos do more damage than other races, but Astro is suggesting that all minmatar ammos are moved 1 "damage level" toward close-range, since nobody uses long range ammos. Really? No one uses them? Flying my muninns, I quite often use the longer ranged faction ammos instead of tremor. The tracking penalty on tremor is prohibitive in my view. I only used tremor when I needed the range it gave. I guess in my mind, a greater chance of tracking the target and hitting was better than a tad more damage if you did hit with tremor. At the higher ranges (100km+), it's less of a problem, but under 100km, I tended to use faction nuclear in the mid-ranges and then, of course, faction phased plasma in the lower ranges.
Ahimsaka Baptism oF Fire Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.12 16:37:00 - [123] Got my vote.
AngryMusheen	Posted - 2009.09.12 17:59:00 - [124] I've always been Minmitar and i like this idea. I've got all the base and complementary skills to fly Vaga/Munin and already fly a Maelstrom so I'm definitely ok with some changes.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2009.09.14 15:58:00 - [125] Making sure this post keeps its attention I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
Irida Mershkov War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.09.14 16:08:00 - [126] Bump!
Sophie Malaster	Posted - 2009.09.14 18:37:00 - [127] Supported. I like very much the min race and their guns suck a bit. ________________________________________________
Saerynn Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.09.14 19:23:00 - [128] Long overdue for some Matar lovin', and these are reasonable suggestions.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.09.14 20:53:00 - [129] Yep and decrease all matar ships speed and increase their signatures too. Also make projectiles use as much cap as hybrids.Plus increase autocannons fitting requriments.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp Tactical Narcotics Team	Posted - 2009.09.14 23:10:00 - [130] Originally by: Naomi Knight Yep and decrease all matar ships speed and increase their signatures too. Also make projectiles use as much cap as hybrids.Plus increase autocannons fitting requriments. Hmm... Naomi Knight.. Troll Score: -1/10 Reason: Noob Corp, Old and discredited arguments, clear lack of attempt of any original thought, No reasoning as to why, Failed attempt at sarcasm because of complete lack of effort in reading. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.

Roland Thorne Dark Sun Collective Kahora Catori	Posted - 2009.09.14 23:14:00 - [131] Edited by: Roland Thorne on 14/09/2009 23:15:32 Originally by: Naomi Knight Yep and decrease all matar ships speed and increase their signatures too. Also make projectiles use as much cap as hybrids.Plus increase autocannons fitting requriments. Nah, I say decrease amarr ship's PG and slots so they can only gank or tank, then decrease their optimal so they are dependant on falloff in every fight, then split most their ships so they have to use missiles AND lasers. Edit: Dang, I bit didn't I lol
Ceme	Posted - 2009.09.15 04:22:00 - [132] Wow.... At least there's thought and logic to those ideas. I'd actually enjoy flying my native race again.
Tiger's Spirit	Posted - 2009.09.15 06:09:00 - [133] +1 Some projectile and some minmatar ship need little changes, because they are very weak compared to some other ships and weapons.
Hun Jakuza 24th Imperial Guard	Posted - 2009.09.15 06:14:00 - [134] Originally by: Roland Thorne Edited by: Roland Thorne on 14/09/2009 23:15:32 Originally by: Naomi Knight Yep and decrease all matar ships speed and increase their signatures too. Also make projectiles use as much cap as hybrids.Plus increase autocannons fitting requriments. Nah, I say decrease amarr ship's PG and slots so they can only gank or tank, then decrease their optimal so they are dependant on falloff in every fight, then split most their ships so they have to use missiles AND lasers. Edit: Dang, I bit didn't I lol + cargo hold, because not need +20 cap booster to empty bay, increase ammo loading time to 10 sec too, decrease tracking and low slot numbers :D But i'm just joking, but Naomi a troll leave his stupidities out of consideration.
Acid Flipper Republic University	Posted - 2009.09.15 08:40:00 - [135] signed!
Sappho Ajhannis Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2009.09.15 20:27:00 - [136] Signed.
CombatSmurf Digital assassins Mean Coalition	Posted - 2009.09.16 21:42:00 - [137] ! Whats the similarity between having sex in a canoe and drinking american beer? Its ****ing close to water.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.09.18 18:08:00 - [138] I am bringing this back up to the front of the line again, especially since the proposed changes to the Navy Tempest and the new Navy Typhoon are not very good, and in the case of the Navy Tempest, is just.. unbelieveable how bad of a idea this is. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
Ni Nee	Posted - 2009.09.18 18:20:00 - [139] Much needed change.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.09.19 15:54:00 - [140] Until we see the changes that CCP makes to projectiles and the Minmatar ship lineup, I will push this back for everyone to take a stab at it. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.

Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.09.22 15:35:00 - [141] Resubmitting, because this: Originally by: CCP The description of the Minmatar Tech I battleships has had its grammar and spelling fixed. Should not be the Minmatar fix. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
Orakkus Minmatar m3 Corp	Posted - 2009.09.23 17:29:00 - [142] Originally by: CCP Finally As CCP is truly working on this.. I will no longer post this anymore. Thank you one and all for working with me in trying to get this pushed to the forefront. I only do diplomancy because I haven't found you.. yet.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.23 18:12:00 - [143] Originally by: Orakkus Originally by: CCP Finally As CCP is truly working on this.. I will no longer post this anymore. Thank you one and all for working with me in trying to get this pushed to the forefront. I'd like to see them address hit quality, but otherwise I'm pretty stoked. Woot!
Liang Nuren The Hull Miners Union Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2009.09.23 19:01:00 - [144] Honestly, I'm pretty stoked regardless of hit quality. -Liang -- Liang Nuren - Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire www.kwikdeath.org
PMSing Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.09.24 02:51:00 - [145] Hiya Astro!
xGradiusx Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.09.24 03:36:00 - [146] aye to the minmatar race!
Admiral Seeley	Posted - 2009.09.24 03:38:00 - [147] x me up scotty!
Bomberlocks Minmatar Icarus Prime	Posted - 2009.09.24 22:56:00 - [148] Originally by: AstroPhobic Originally by: Orakkus I recieved a reply from one of the CSMs, Omber Zombie. He stated that CCP was in fact looking at projectiles and Minmatar ships.. He felt that he thus didn't need to bring it up as an issue at the CSM meeting. I replied essentially that I certainly hope so.. however, if they do to the Minmatar what they did to Fleet Issue Tempest.. I think it should be brought up regardless, otherwise we're going to see a "+50% clip size for artillery" - all done! I seriously doubt ccp recognizes the severity and depth of issues that projectiles have - some of their posts re tempest and vagabond really makes me scratch my head. I have to agree on this. CCP almost never follows player requests, even very well thought out and discussed ones such as this, but rather their own idiosyncratic logic, and my biggest fear is that CCP will do something like the Falcon nerf in the form of one element being improved, such as the +50% arty clip size (although this alone would be a good start). CCP have consistently disregarded the Minnie BSes and large projectiles over several years now, while other FOTMs come and go.
Wen Atta	Posted - 2009.09.28 21:22:00 - [149] signed
Beowulf scot Smoking Hillbillys	Posted - 2009.09.28 21:57:00 - [150] This has my Support. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Sahwoolo Etoophie ([email protected])

Vergil Kankuro	Posted - 2009.09.29 02:04:00 - [151] I've been waiting for some changes to make not only artillery a viable option but also the tempest. I love how the tempest looks but it is just too gimp to fly. Supported over and over.
Dav Varan	Posted - 2009.09.29 16:59:00 - [152] Originally by: Orakkus The Tempest: Increase speed and agility by 15%. Change the bonuses as following: Damage bonus to 10% per level, 5% falloff per level. This gives it a little bit of seperation from the maelstrom which currently overshadows it in nearly every role. It makes the tempest a much better pirate boat and gives it a good anti-support role while staying mobile. It has the option of sitting nice and close with a large alpha from artillery, or being a mobile autocannon and neutralizer machine. It will still suffer from a confused mid/low slot configuration, so it won't be the next gank/tank battleship like the mega or geddon. It will actually lose DPS in favor for some true versatility. You gotta be kidding right ? 50% more dps at level 5 where everyother battleship only get 25% bonus at level 5 If its alpha you like you could go with 10% more damage per level , -5% rof per level ( This is equal to 10% more alpha , but only 5% more dps ) per level. So as you train up you get 5% more dps , 10% more alpha per level and your clip last 5% longer per level too.
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2009.09.29 17:29:00 - [153] Edited by: The Djego on 29/09/2009 17:30:43 Originally by: Dav Varan Originally by: Orakkus The Tempest: Increase speed and agility by 15%. Change the bonuses as following: Damage bonus to 10% per level, 5% falloff per level. This gives it a little bit of seperation from the maelstrom which currently overshadows it in nearly every role. It makes the tempest a much better pirate boat and gives it a good anti-support role while staying mobile. It has the option of sitting nice and close with a large alpha from artillery, or being a mobile autocannon and neutralizer machine. It will still suffer from a confused mid/low slot configuration, so it won't be the next gank/tank battleship like the mega or geddon. It will actually lose DPS in favor for some true versatility. You gotta be kidding right ? 50% more dps at level 5 where everyother battleship only get 25% bonus at level 5 If its alpha you like you could go with 10% more damage per level , -5% rof per level ( This is equal to 10% more alpha , but only 5% more dps ) per level. So as you train up you get 5% more dps , 10% more alpha per level and your clip last 5% longer per level too. That would be even less then 25% damage bonus(namely a 17% damage bonus). Also if you might be familar with the Tempest, this change is a slight DPS lose, not gain(it got 5% damage and 5% rof per level atm). If you are not familar with it, there is a 40 pages thread in S&M to get a better picture. here you go ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.29 22:05:00 - [154] Originally by: Dav Varan You gotta be kidding right ? 50% more dps at level 5 where everyother battleship only get 25% bonus at level 5 If its alpha you like you could go with 10% more damage per level , -5% rof per level ( This is equal to 10% more alpha , but only 5% more dps ) per level. So as you train up you get 5% more dps , 10% more alpha per level and your clip last 5% longer per level too. Projectiles are pre-nerfed by 25% ROF (33.3% DPS), so that with level 5 of your respective minnie ship skill you'll be on par with the damage output of another races' ship that has NO damage bonus. This is similar to the cap usage bonus on amarr ships. So no, that would just make it terrible. Please note that a 12.5% damage per level bonus would still do less damage than a 5% damage and 5% ROF.
TimGascoigne The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.09.29 22:52:00 - [155] Edited by: TimGascoigne on 29/09/2009 22:54:07 Artillery definitely needs much more voly damage in order to be meaningful. Also requires an optimal range increase for any other improvements to actually work. As for ACs everything needs to be improved they are totally useless. Optimal range, damage and tracking need love so I'm generally called in for an overhaul. Beyond all things it is the large scale of ammunition that does not..... well ....scale. large needs to be improved so much more than medium and small.
Dav Varan	Posted - 2009.09.30 03:52:00 - [156] Originally by: The Djego Also if you might be familar with the Tempest, this change is a slight DPS lose, not gain(it got 5% damage and 5% rof per level atm). ZMOG Gonna train for min BS now. Please dont get it changed yet. Cause I reallly wanna fly a BS with double damage bonus on Capless guns.
AstroPhobic Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.09.30 05:14:00 - [157] Originally by: Dav Varan Originally by: The Djego Also if you might be familar with the Tempest, this change is a slight DPS lose, not gain(it got 5% damage and 5% rof per level atm). ZMOG Gonna train for min BS now. Please dont get it changed yet. Cause I reallly wanna fly a BS with double damage bonus on Capless guns. Poor troll or legitimate noob? I'm undecided. Also this thread doesn't serve so much of a purpose anymore, I'll keep watching the changes being made. Right now there's a few things missing (such as extra falloff on ACs, fusion being top damage, the muninn is still terrible), but I won't bother making a thread for any of it until CCP puts this stuff on TQ.
xVx Scarecrow Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.18 11:07:00 - [158] i agree. it doesnt fix everything but its most of the way
schurem Silver Snake Enterprise Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.10.18 13:16:00 - [159] excellent idea. scrappy ship should be fast, frail and make things go boom in spectacular ways.
ZigZag Joe Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.10.21 03:32:00 - [160] This is good thread.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [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.