EVE Search - Drakes - Do they need a nerf?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Drakes - Do they need a nerf?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.19 11:08:00 - [1] Edited by: Bad Messenger on 19/10/2010 11:10:24 Drake is in balance. If you know how to play, drake is not overpower thing in range fleets at all. Basically any fleet that has same numbers than drake fleets needs, is good on their job. But as OP is in gallente militia and they think they are superior pvpers, flying thinks that was FOTM like a 2 years ago, no wonder he is whining about drakes. Fact is that only thing why drakes are so popular is that almost every newbie trains them for missioning/ratting and then they can fly those in range pvp fleets too. If you have option to choose from any ship in eve and form a gang from those, you will not choose drakes. Edit: OP is gallente, he has trouble with his enemies, he is shouting CCP to help, as usual.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.24 13:10:00 - [2] Sniper HACs are one thing drakes can not hit at all, so nerf sniper HAC range or boost drake range.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 11:37:00 - [3] if you count together all races ships from top 20 EVE-kill Stats (generated from 2010-09-25 to 2010-10-25) you will end to next numbers: MINMATAR 267126 CALDARI 250789 AMARR 159188 GALLENTE 39856 ANGEL 34881 What we can see is that caldari race is not overpower at total, fact is that Caldari kills come from drakes and manticore. Manticore has less kills than Hound, reason why these 2 bombers are only ones on list is that those races have to learn missile skills for other ships too. Reason why all caldari pilots use drakes is that there is no other usable caldari ship. Falcon and other jamming ships may be useful on some cases but atleast we in draketrain avoid to use those as much we can because those do prevent pvp to happen atleast on small scale battles. So if ccp decides to nerf drake it means that caldari players has to start from zero to learn gunnery and drone skills if they want to move to amarr or gallente ships. If they move to minmatar ships they have atleast some use to missile skills. So nerfing drake end up to minmatar ship pvp domination on total. Ccp can nerf drake, but i think they should boost some other caldari ships to level they could be used atleast in some role. Caldari HACs are not so good, recons got nerf already, battleships are shield tanked and do not fit fleets with other races etc. It seems that finally when people understood how to fly caldari ships properly it will end to situation that other races has no ships to fit on those fleets like caldari usually does not fit fleet that has made on terms with other races.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 13:38:00 - [4] Drake has been quite long with same attributes, so why it is now so popular? What has been changed? Drake has not.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 16:41:00 - [5] Originally by: rekcuf bmuD "lol fits" How about using tremor, your hurricane shoots 278dps up to 79+46 fitting fail fits is not a good way to think about balance :)
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 19:01:00 - [6] Originally by: rekcuf bmuD Originally by: Okuu Reiuji And I have the right for this since my PG is lowest and I have 0 turret hp. The drake's PG is the lowest because it is a missile boat, and launchers require much less pg than turrets. Quote: You also suggested to nerf long range. That's unacceptable, since long-range missiles as basic weapon system are more useful than shortrange at both pvp and ratting. Imagine ratting on HAML Drake. Crap, isn't it? Solution: Fit an AB to your ratting drake. Oh but that means you wouldn't have enough tank for lvl 4's, right? I've hinted at nerfing long range missiles, but have decided to stay neutral on the missiles themselves, and focus on only making long range launchers require more pg. Allright remove long range missiles and remove artillery, railgun and beam turrets. Then we all have to fight in close range. That is what you want, isn't it?
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 20:00:00 - [7] [Hurricane, how about this] Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Sensor Booster II Invulnerability Field II 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Tremor M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Tremor M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Tremor M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Tremor M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Tremor M 650mm Artillery Cannon II, Tremor M Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thunderbolt Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thunderbolt Heavy Missile Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Hobgoblin II x4 Hammerhead II x1 no fit modules, range 57+36, 49k ehp dps without drones 310 dps close range ammo 16+36km, with drones 604 dps so hurricane may have little lower dps on max range, but if fight is little closer one hurrican has more dps than drake ever.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 20:40:00 - [8] Originally by: rekcuf bmuD ...That fits with a 5% CPU implant... 200m more isk for drake fitting :), seriously i think no one would use that on 0.0 drake clone.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.25 20:52:00 - [9] Edited by: Bad Messenger on 25/10/2010 20:54:59 If you have flown shield tanked missile ships you will end to notice that if you fit long range + tank + dps, you will need lot of CPU, and if you try to fit close range + tank + dps you will need CPU and PG. Why should drake be different form current line?
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.27 06:47:00 - [10] If you remove missile flight path you remove change to destroy those by defender missiles or smart bombs. Defender missiles are not really good, because those need missile launcher slot to fit and those work only against missiles that are coming towards you, so those does not help much in fleet battles. Maybe ccp should make highslot defender missile launcher that does not need turret or missile launcher slot, and change defender missile behavior so that those can destroy missiles that are attacking fleet members or some other usefull way to select right missiles to destroy, maybe selecting target and using those to selected targets missiles. I am sure that these changes would not reduce any lag, maybe those just create it more, but those could make almost equal counter to missiles like tracking disruptors are.

Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.29 12:44:00 - [11] Originally by: Lili Lu ...bandwidth of the Myrm was nerfed into oblivion (same bandwidth as a vexor )... yes, because it had same drone dps than dominix and almost same gun damage than dominix, and it manage to have over 1000 dps passive shield tank at same time (better than drake) . So it could easily beat bs on 1 vs 1, that was quite imbalance. OFC you can still kill bs with bc but i think it is on balance now.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.29 13:10:00 - [12] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: Malcanis http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9uVtP7IQ4 http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/skyral/thefirewall.mp4 if you want to download it. Dont worry about drakes. They're easily countered. We have no doubt that new strategies would emerge given time as posted earlier in the thread (though smartbombs also are quite load heavy albeit pretty - nice vid btw!). It still does not change the reality that we want to ensure enjoyable fleet fights for all which is our primary objective for fleet fights. Currently the drake and the many fleets utilizing it are burdening the server with much higher load simultaneously being the chief cause of the lag and then resilient to lags effects since over the sheer weight of fleet numbers we need to cope with. The logical path is to drill down and find the root cause of this popularity, something we have done by posing the question openly with you all as well to which many of you have objectively or passionately replied and broached the topic nicely which has been very cool to see. If the reason is imbalance in the ship itself or with the missiles, then its typically something that is straight forward to change in a much shorter time frame than our longer term investigation and refactoring of the missile system for example which would take significantly more man-hours (lots and lots comparatively but it will be done someday). The fighter bombers are receiving fake missiles but changing missiles you are I fire from a ship takes a lot more design and code work since we need to redo many of the game mechanics surrounding missiles if that is to happen and is not something we would label short term or even medium term to an extent given the size of the change. As CCP Atlas commented on here, we are exploring all possibilities right now. One thing that has risen from our analysis of fleet fights for example of the many drake pilots, is that only half are grouping their launchers. This obviously causes a multiplicative load value since we must track 7 missiles instead of 1 or 2 as would be usual with grouped weapons to comment on one of the other avenues we are exploring alongside investigating game balance. This could be vindictive in that they are deliberately causing load to utilize it as a weapon in lag resilient setups or we prefer the better scenario that we need to add a little more incentive to group weapons which is also being explored as well. Can CCP to make a list from ships and weapon systems that are preferred to use to reduce lag. We all do want to help CCP to make this game playable and want to help to make every thing to reduce lag. And if we think this further , ccp should give possibility people change skills from unwanted ships and weapons to those that causes less lag. CCP has tools for that , so just let it happen.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.30 14:49:00 - [13] Originally by: darius mclever Originally by: Exploited Engineer Originally by: Kiran No other battlecruiser has these bonuses applied other than shield boost on the Cyclone. Um, I think the Ferox would like to have a word with you. And the Prophecy and the Brutix have bonuses to armor (resistance/repair). and the myrm (rep bonus). so it is actually just the harbinger and the hurricane, which dont get a tanking bonus. Yes, remove damage bonus from hurricane and harbinger and add tanking bonus, problem solved.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.30 17:56:00 - [14] Originally by: Cosmic Brownies Originally by: Spugg Galdon Please be a Troll. He's a caldari pilot. He's just super sensitive to anything that might change the ship he's been sitting in for 2 years You are such fail troller. I've flown Drake more than 3 years now. I bought my 1st drake for 93m isk (those have been couple days in game), i noticed that those were so overpower that it was worth to invest such amount of isk for a drake.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.10.31 17:48:00 - [15] Originally by: Aerilis You try coordinating 20 scorps against 100 targets lol. And under your logic, scorps counter everything. If you manage to do that you have a skilled group of people doing some stuff, it does not really matter what those skilled 20 people are flying they can still engage larger numbers successfully. Without trying or without training things you are just a whiny loser who have to ask nerf for a drake.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.11.05 12:03:00 - [16] Here is good example how drake is not overpower at all: We had nice quite small fleet fight where was lot of drakes involved. Now if you look at tempest who dies and see how much he took damage before he died, Total Damage Taken:193,482. It is not needed to have huge resist or huge loads ehp on hull/fitting, if you have enough remoterep on field doing their job. If ccp want to nerf something i request that they should look towards logistic ships.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.11.06 10:45:00 - [17] Originally by: Flapkonijn Edited by: Flapkonijn on 05/11/2010 15:42:59 Originally by: Bad Messenger If ccp want to nerf something i request that they should look towards logistic ships. I LoL'd a little when reading this. I would have to say this the only ship type which actually does exactly what it should do. ANd is not overpowered as if they are used for what to should do they don't do dps and fly outside of attack ranges. Problem is that people want to see how ships explode. CCP nerfed falcon because it was preventing ships to explode, for the same reason they should nerf logistics who keep ships alive. It same as in alliance tournament, it is boring to watch / fight if your enemy does not die, no matter what you do. i think that is what is all about. Nerf Logistics.
Bad Messenger draketrain	Posted - 2010.11.07 08:05:00 - [18] Originally by: Val MeR 7.It's cheap on the skills side, most new players can fly it within a few monthà although its far from something that you describe hereà its weak on tank, dps, speed and an easy kill for just about anyoneà If you compare max skilled drake and example max skilled armor ab zealot you will end to result that those take both almost same amount of skill points. Zealot needs cruiser lvl5, and assault ships lvl4 but it does not need drones, shield skills or mwd skills etc. Maxed missile skills and medium lazorz with lvl5 supports take almost same amount of time. Drake need for shield lot of skills and it needs hull upgrades lvl4 for damage control too, and you need capacitor skills for drake too if you want to burn with mwd and keep range. Yes, you can board drake with 5 day old characters skills (in fact you can board bs too with low skills) but to make it work good you need lot of more skills than that.

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.