EVE Search - Field Command ships upgrade.

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Field Command ships upgrade.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.03.26 20:57:00 - [1] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 26/03/2010 20:57:13 I like this. Well, I think the Astarte is still problematic (because of rep bonus, and the fact midslots/lowslots are generally more valuable) but it's still a huge improvement. Now, if only the Sleipnir looked like a T2 Hurricane Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.03.28 16:37:00 - [2] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 28/03/2010 16:40:45 Originally by: Nico Terces Supported. This and a boost to local repairsystem bonusses (10% instead of 7.5% to armor rep amount) would make the astarte so much more useful. Removing it in favour of a 10% armor (or even shield, ha ha) HP bonus would make it so much more useful, honestly. In fact, it would be a very interesting ship with a extra high, a tad more grid and armor HP bonus, being basically something with the gank and buffer of a BS with T2 resists on top (but minus the range and utility highs), and would make a lot of sense in certain types of gangs. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.03.28 20:43:00 - [3] Originally by: Jacob Stov I don't like that idea. Moves the game once more towards buffer tanks. Better give all them rep/boost bonused ships the same bonus to received RR. This is in fact a very good idea. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.03.31 11:03:00 - [4] Originally by: Nian Banks Originally by: Zilberfrid Supported, and best use the tier 2 models for the field command ships, they are there, they look good, use them (save for the Eos/Astarte, Brutix model fits the Astarte better, Myrmidon role fits the intended Eos role better). Why do all you people persist in this annoying request? If you must have a T2 ship that looks like the tier2 BC, then hey why not ask for a real new T2 ship based on it? Then you won't ruin a perfectly fine looking ship or 4. Mostly because people want a gank and spank T2 ship that looks like the tier2 BC. So requests for that get answered with "but it would be more of the same". Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.03 18:33:00 - [5] Originally by: adriaans Should we perhaps propose changes to the ship bonuses as well? (only command ship bonus can be changed really unless ccp stops following the t1 -> t2 bonus conversion they do with all ships) Actually the NH does not inherit battlecruiser skill bonuses from the Drake or from the Ferox (it's ROF for the NH and kinetic damage for the Drake, and hybrid optimal for the Ferox), so it's safe to change those as well. And personally I would opt for removing the rep bonus from the Astarte (and Brutix as well, really, and Myrmidon as well) as I view it as not so useful, but some like it, so. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.13 11:33:00 - [6] The answer to woes of Field commands is not in warfare links. If you want to fit a unbonused warfare link on a ship, Tier 2 BCs already do this for a hugely lower price while generally fitting tank and DPS on top (well, with more problems on some ships, sure). Furthermore, with two ship classes bonused for warfare link efficiency there's really no point in adding a extra role bonus on top here. Sure, the Astarte could use a utility high anyway (ditto Brutix) and more fitting anyway for it not to be worthless, but that alone doesn't make the ship stop being a failboat. +1 slot to all (and extra utility high on top for Astarte and Brutix since, let's be fair, losing 10m3 of dronebay compared to a Cyclone/Sleipnir is not worth a highslot) and rebalancing bonuses and fitting across the class is imo the way to go, along with giving them Tier 2 BC base HP, and a few nice extras like higher sensor strenght and slightly higher agility as per the OP's suggestion. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.15 11:56:00 - [7] Originally by: Gypsio III My objection to the "no-GM" idea is simply that a field CS without a GM is inferior to a battleship in terms of DPS, EHP and gang utility, but costs 150 mill ISK more. Ships, especially T2 ships, need roles, and field CS don't have one. Simply boosting their base stats etc won't give them one. What's the role there? You know, you can fit a BC to have good DPS, good EHP and a warfare link and about 1/10th the price of a CS. Alternatively if your gang is sizeable enough you benefit more from a fleet CS which loses DPS but gains EHP and three bonused warfare links. Warfare link is a additional extra when we discuss field CS, not THE role, since gang boosting role is largely covered. What I basically envision field CS as is a "HAC on seteroids" with somewhat less mobility (but more then BS and preferably slightly more then Tier 2 BCs) but delivering what is essentially speaking close to BS-level DPS and having the option to fit a warfare link. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.15 22:55:00 - [8] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 15/04/2010 22:56:18 Originally by: Jacob Stov Field command ships should just comfortably fit a ganglink. I believe that would be their role. Lead small gangs, where the loss of DPS compared to a fleet command isn't worth it. Unfortunately that role is already covered by T3 cruisers. Or Tier 2 BCs if price is a concern. Some of them can sport very competitive DPS, solid EHP and a warfare link. They need to be first and foremost excellent combat ships, which some of the ships in the class most definitely are not. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.21 10:02:00 - [9] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/04/2010 10:07:52 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/04/2010 10:04:27 Tier 2 BCs are fine. As for the "they do XYZ on the cheap", nerfing them would do nothing for field CS. Why would I still fly a field CS over a HAC (more mobility, equal midslot/lowslot count, less DPS/EHP though) or, eg. shield tempest (cheaper by miles and miles, almost as mobile, generally speaking more DPS and EHP, heavy neuts, etcetera). A tier 1 BS will dominate a CS about every time, and in most cases without breaking a sweat (eg. failstarte). Which is probably the best argument for giving field CS a extra low/mid - they share mid/low slot amount with the ship half class down. Originally by: Yaay So why on god's green earth would I ever choose to use the Proph when the Teir 2 is so much stronger. Tiers on all sub-BS ships are broken, really. The Stabber is inferior in about every way bar speed to the Rupture. The Breacher/Slasher is inferior in every way to the Rifter. Etcetera. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.05.15 20:25:00 - [10] Originally by: Venkul Mul In CCP idea command ship have a role in being command ships (and so they should have the capacity to use efficiently command modules) not in being bigger HACs. Then they should not have introduced field command ships, because fleet command ships cover that role completely. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.05.15 23:56:00 - [11] Originally by: Misanth Addition of another tanking slot is already way better since 7 guns with 2 damage mods is superior to 8 with just one, and I'm yet to see any setup with 2 MFS which isn't a complete kamikaze-mobile. You could shield tank it Also, armor astarte is a suicide mobile anyway. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.06.02 17:18:00 - [12] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 02/06/2010 17:18:34 Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto I've also come up with an Astarte change that lets it have the gang link without giving it more slots than anyone else or gimping it Just add the freaking slot, actaully. Sleipnir: 8 highs, 5 meds, 5 lows. Astarte: 7 highs, 4 meds, 6 lows. (oh, it gets 10m3 more dronebay, zomg) Add the utility high on both the Brutix and the Astarte and you've gone a long way towards fixing both ships. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint

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.