Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Nekmet Awai
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 01:13:00 -
[511]
not much in to most of these ships, but can see you are cutting the nightmares cap/sec in half. maybe that is a bit overdoing it. wouldn't you say :/ exspecially considering it is a ship using lasers which take up a hell of a lot more then any other weapon systems.
|
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 01:15:00 -
[512]
Edited by: Blane Xero on 18/09/2009 01:21:10 Edited by: Blane Xero on 18/09/2009 01:20:23
Originally by: Nekmet Awai not much in to most of these ships, but can see you are cutting the nightmares cap/sec in half. maybe that is a bit overdoing it. wouldn't you say :/ exspecially considering it is a ship using lasers which take up a hell of a lot more then any other weapon systems.
...Umm the Nightmare is gaining cap. You might be comparing it with one that has rigs/skills applied to it.
Old Nightmare - Base Cap - 5937 Base Recharge - 1154.88
New Nightmare Base Cap - 6950 (over 1000 more) Base Recharge - 1154 (Unchanged)
Edit: Also, the CCP dude is not taking into account the *2.5 for peak cap/sec. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente The Aduro Protocol
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 01:23:00 -
[513]
OMG IT GETS THE BONUS
|
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 01:28:00 -
[514]
Originally by: Siigari Kitawa OMG IT GETS THE BONUS
Told you so. I may not know much about this new fangled thing you folks call "PEE VEE PEE" but i sure as hell know the capabilities of my faction ship collection _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
OtonasiAkari
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 03:11:00 -
[515]
Edited by: OtonasiAkari on 18/09/2009 03:16:58 Edited by: OtonasiAkari on 18/09/2009 03:16:20 Edited by: OtonasiAkari on 18/09/2009 03:14:33 Edited by: OtonasiAkari on 18/09/2009 03:12:54
Well, Vindicator is now definitely the Anubis... With the new webby bonus it will just keep you with him face to face and throw tons of DPS even before you realize you get caught...
Rattle Snake... I expect it's named wrong? It sounds more like a Dominake...
Bhaalgorn... total cheat.. free cargo almost just for cap 800s.. since you just need like 12 m3 for crystals with 4 turret... and 3 utility highs...
Machariel... total junk... I'd say it's still a fail pirate Battleship comparing with others.. weakest tank without a remarkable seed/agility leaving the whole 161m/s a bad joke and no point.
I'd surggest instead of adding a 7th turret.. make it 4guns with 100% bonus like the NM or Bhaalgorn.. Or with the ROF bonus and 7 guns.. your Cargos just full with ammunation... And I'd say mach should be shied tanking if you want to make use of his speed advantage...
thus-
Machariel- 6/7/6 or 6/6/7 4 Turret point/ no missile point. 25% ROF 25% DMG with Matari BS @ 5 37.5% Tracking With Gal BS @ 5
7th turret is really a bad idea with the ROF bonus still there...
|
Stealthbug
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 03:37:00 -
[516]
Originally by: OtonasiAkari
Machariel- 6/7/6 or 6/6/7 4 Turret point/ no missile point. 100% DMG 25% DMG with Matari BS @ 5 37.5% Tracking ( or 50% Fall off) With Gal BS @ 5
7th turret is really a bad idea with the ROF bonus still there...
no, that would just be a nightmare shooting projectiles.... seriously...
have you tried the mach on sisi yet? it's incredibly fast now. you do realize what -25% mass does to MWD right? give it a shot.
|
Guns nButter
The Nietzian Way
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:18:00 -
[517]
Edited by: Guns nButter on 18/09/2009 04:18:30 CCP should be in charge of the american economy. All of the faction ships are <gone>. Lol! (stimulus joke. haha. ha?)
|
Manu Hermanus
FaDoyToy
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 04:30:00 -
[518]
Edited by: Manu Hermanus on 18/09/2009 04:31:17
Originally by: OtonasiAkari Rattle Snake... I expect it's named wrong? It sounds more like a Dominake...
I prefer Drakinix!
Originally by: Guns nButter Edited by: Guns nButter on 18/09/2009 04:18:30 CCP should be in charge of the american economy. All of the faction ships are <gone>. Lol! (stimulus joke. haha. ha?)
if only
public FuelEconomy = 100;
worked You're posting again!? Has it really been 5 mins?
|
Rakane
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 05:44:00 -
[519]
New Rattlesnake = Only Tank and no Damage ? Unlike discribed here, the Rattlesnake on SiSi has still 4 Turrets and 4 Launchers (6 Highslots) and usually some spare grid and CPU. Tried this with 4 Cruise Launchers/3 BCS, 1 Targetpainter and 2 Tachyons. Nothing to complain about.
|
Cpt Branko
Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 08:36:00 -
[520]
Originally by: Jettisoned Can
Please give the Bhaalgorn a unique hull. The other BR ships are some of the best in the game, but the Bhall just looks like a bloody phallus.
Which is, in a way, incredibly awesome.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
Tyby
KANTAI HIKAGE White Noise.
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 08:37:00 -
[521]
Rattlesnake:
ò Slot layout: 6 high, 7 med, 6 low slots, 4 launchers, no turrets
ok so 4 launchers, and no dmg bonus...don't worry, be happy...
|
Aylara
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 10:27:00 -
[522]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Gila:
òSlot layout: 5 high, 6 med, 4 low slots, 3 launchers, no turrets òFittings: 350 CPU, 630 powergrid òBonuses: pirate: 50% to heavy and heavy assault missile velocity, Caldari cruiser: +5% to all shield resistances per level, Gallente cruiser: +10% to drone damage and hitpoints per level òHitpoints: 3188 shields, 2325 armor, 2490 hull òCapacitor: 1375 capacitor, 491.25s recharge (about 2.8 cap/s) òDronebay: 125m3 drone bandwidth, 400m3 drone bay òSpeed: 164m/s max velocity, 0.66 agility, 9,600,000kg òSensor: 55km targeting range, 7 locked targets, 275mm scan resolution, 22 gravimetric sensor strength, 150m signature radius
WOW, really awesome WTS my Ishtars!
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 11:59:00 -
[523]
Edited by: Tippia on 18/09/2009 12:02:26
Originally by: Sigras the gallente half of the ship should be around as good as the best gallente drone ship, but the new gila outclasses the ishtar in literally every way.
How so?
It gets 25m¦ more drones (big woop), but no control range bonus. It's slower and less agile, and already larger even before you've added the shield tank. Its high-slot weapons will only deal base damage. The current Gila is already a tight CPU fit — the new one gets even less, so good luck squeezing any drone upgrades in there (unless you fit no launchers, in which case it's exactly the same as a drone-only Ishtar, without the range). ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Karanth
Gallente Independent Fleet Dark Taboo
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 12:33:00 -
[524]
So why again is buffing the hell out of the other faction frigs and then wrecking my Succubus for 20% of its shields a good idea of balancing?
The bit of extra cap is nice, and the 3m less sig radius helps, but with all the crazy crap going on elsewhere (LOL Worm), what role exactly was being aimed for aside from obsolescence?
Reduce the cap recharge time maybe 20 seconds, or hell go way out to left field and trade out the tracking bonus for a 5%-7.5% shield boost amount bonus?
Then with Cruor, I'm wondering what the capacitor is going to look like when this goes live. Copying over the damage bonus from the Succubus seems kinda lazy to me, but I can't think of anything better for it.
And the Worm. When did a frankenship become an ideal? It matches the Ishkur for drone capacity and bandwidth, while having a slightly weaker tank and being 3/4ths the mass. Thankfully, it won't be seeing much use out of missions.
Daredevil is making me wonder. I like the dps boost, and while I am wondering how useful an extra 1800 meters falloff is going to be with blasters, I still think it should keep the MWD bonus and trade tracking out for the webber one. Maybe drop the damage bonus to 175% then or something, I don't know.
Dramiel, I've never flown one, so I can't really judge it too well, but at least now it looks like a ship worth flying as opposed to a reject Tristan that has all sorts of gun bonuses and more launchers than it has turrets.
Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans
Sorry, no. You have to go into wormholes and get farmed by the new AI NPCs like everyone else...
|
40 Cent
Evoke. Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 12:34:00 -
[525]
the orginal tracking bonus on the machariel is great, it would be sad to see that bonus disappear
|
RedSplat
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 12:47:00 -
[526]
Edited by: RedSplat on 18/09/2009 12:51:16 All of you that want the falloff bonus on the mach replaced with tracking are i think making a mistake.
The Mach does not tank or gank particularly well.
It is however about as agile as a BC, by design.
If you try an slug it out point blank odds are you will lose it- hell, I'd be confident of curbstomping a Mach at 0 with most t1 BS.
Warp Scramblers make getting within 15 km something you don't want to do.
The Falloff Bonus means you can Kite an opponent and still do good damage. The Tracking Bonus is useless here- if you are aiming to be fighting at 20+ km from a target in faction Disruptor range.
Quote: Daredevil is making me wonder. I like the dps boost, and while I am wondering how useful an extra 1800 meters falloff is going to be with blasters, I still think it should keep the MWD bonus and trade tracking out for the webber one. Maybe drop the damage bonus to 175% then or something, I don't know.
I'm flying one on SISI with Dual 150mm II rails with a Coreli C Type MWD.
It works.
With Blaster its something of a DPS monster for a Frig and the falloff bonus is v. useful when orbiting other blaster boats.
The Web bonus is entirely necessary and extremely deadly on this frig.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Abrazzar
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 13:08:00 -
[527]
I still say that the ship designs should be based on the faction concept and not on the skills they need to fly them. Guristas and Angel designs are off in that regard.
Also, they are pirate ships. They don't need to follow empire design philosophies. Get creative, after all, that's what you're hired for. Adding up large numbers to create the semblance of awesome just doesn't cut it. -------- Ideas for: Mining
|
Aerouge Gendai
Caldari Deep Exploration Projects and Programs
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 13:49:00 -
[528]
Okay, just overlooked the changes and tons of comments here as well, but I think the Sansha Ships could use a litle boost as well... While for Example the Nightmare still excells in long Range the Bhaalgorn meanwhile excells in every other field. Bhaalgorn got better tank, more slots, more utility bonuses, more cap, more of fricking everything! The only advantage the nightmare has is the 25% Dmgbonus and the tracking bonus and a slightly longer targeting range... the tracking bonus is neglectable at longer range and at short range the webbing and neuting a Bhaalgorn is cappable of gives you far more bang for your buck... Dont get me wrong I love the nightmare and your changes definetly did a lot of good to the Bhaalgorn, still I think the Nghtmare is supposed to be the king of DPS and not only an expansive, cool looking sniper.
Thanks :) _________________________________________________ my German Eve Blog: Ein Caldari allein in Eve |
Ancy Denaries
Caldari The Confederate Navy Forever Unbound
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 14:27:00 -
[529]
Really nice changes overall, except that the Sanshas seem to have been kicked in the nutters. Both Succy and Phantasm got nerfed (no additions except a bit of sensors) and the BS got a tiny bit more cap and sensor :( Wai u hate me zo mooch? ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 14:36:00 -
[530]
Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
|
|
|
Manu Hermanus
FaDoyToy
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 14:39:00 -
[531]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
that is it?
*cough* make the rattlesnake worth a damn*cough* You're posting again!? Has it really been 5 mins?
|
Tar Murk
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 14:56:00 -
[532]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
-200mil price tag on ashimmu on Tranq.
|
Meiyang Lee
Gallente Azteca Transportation Unlimited Gunboat Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 16:02:00 -
[533]
Originally by: Tar Murk
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
-200mil price tag on ashimmu on Tranq.
4 100% bonused turrets and all that web and neut power was a bit OP don't you agree? So, reducing it by 1 makes sense to get a more reasonable damage output. You're still looking at ~350 DPS with a very nasty set of powers to back it up.
|
Shani Mukantagara
Amarr Trans-Solar Works Rooks and Kings
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 16:20:00 -
[534]
The bhaalgorn changes will make my paladin worth-less in fleet fighting, a Bhaalgorn will do about the same DPS better nueting longer web range with GN webs ;/
buff Maruders please ^^
|
Blane Xero
Amarr The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 16:29:00 -
[535]
Originally by: Meiyang Lee
Originally by: Tar Murk
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
-200mil price tag on ashimmu on Tranq.
4 100% bonused turrets and all that web and neut power was a bit OP don't you agree? So, reducing it by 1 makes sense to get a more reasonable damage output. You're still looking at ~350 DPS with a very nasty set of powers to back it up.
No it wasn't really. The Ashimmu and Phantasm were getting pretty much identical DPS after bonuses (8 turrets with ship bonuses applied).
The phantasm gets a Tracking bonus. whereas the Ashimmu got a web bonus instead. Lasers + nuets is a recipe for dead cap tbh and not for your enemy.
While i can't grudge the change, i had tested it on Sisi and compared it with the other faction ships. (Cruisers: Vigilant/Cynabal/Phantasm) and it won some, lost some. Certainly wasn't as OP as some people were trying to make out. And definately not for a cruiser. _____________________________________ Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout :facepalm:
|
Androes
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 16:34:00 -
[536]
What the hell means: strength of stasis webifier?
|
Siigari Kitawa
Gallente The Aduro Protocol
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 16:36:00 -
[537]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
Uh?
What's the point of this? First of all the Ashimmu doesn't deserve a drone bay (look at the Blood ships history, where the hell does it get a drone bay?)
Second, smartbomb just popped your two unbonused drones.
Third, are we SERIOUSLY complaining about an extra 70 DPS? A 10m3 drone bay is a JOKE to put on this ship when you are throwing all the other ships REALLY SWEET SYNERGIES. Not that I use 4 turrets anyway on the Ashimmu, but I'm sure some specs may call for it.
Besides, 4 turrets only do 320 DPS anyway, taking one away and you're looking at a paltry 250 DPS. Seriously, either give it a 50m3 dronebay and meet us all the way, add a 7th high slot and remove a turret slot (preferred) or forget this silly change.
|
MalVortex
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 17:23:00 -
[538]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
Er, thats a ~33% turret cut in the Ashimmu's dps I'd agree that 8 effective turrets would be over the top with its other bonuses, but going to 6 effective is a massive, massive cut in its damage potential. Two hobgoblins is worth about 40dps, while one HPII turret (w/ two heatsinks) w/ scorch is worth 97 dps, making the 3-turret Ashimmu only have ~334 total dps at scorch ranges.
If this change does go through, the Ashimmu better have the grid and cap for 3x heavy pulse II and 3x Medium neuts - if its forced to use FMP, its damage would drop to ~292dps, which is dangerously close to a Pilgrim's base drone damage. The pilgrim will carry a better tank, better neuts, and a covert cloaking device - For the Ashimmu to stay releveant and desirable, it must stay as a high impact damage platform.
|
Ecky X
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 17:34:00 -
[539]
The Ashimmu was looking pretty good, but even with the 8 effective turrets, it wasn't nearly a Harbinger. I don't think it would've been a problem - though maybe 4 turrets + 80% bonus would've been better.
|
Mahke
Aeon Of Strife Dominatus Atrum Mortis
|
Posted - 2009.09.18 17:34:00 -
[540]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Small change (not going to make it for this evening test unfortunately)
Ashimmu:
òSlot layout: has lost a turret hardpoint (for a total of 3, still keeps 6 high-slots) òDronebay: received 10m3 dronebay and bandwitdh
Good.
As much as I like the changes made, the blood ships are/were overpowered.
It's not just the ashimmu though , although that's a start.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |