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) |
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 11:24:00 -
[841]
Originally by: davet517 Edited by: davet517 on 23/10/2010 03:09:16 Edited by: davet517 on 23/10/2010 03:07:57
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Some really good opinions here. Remember this is atypical of our usual communication which comes following on from some action or pending change. Here we are experimenting in communication and catalyzing an open debate on a question posed regarding drake popularity and whether it is due to it being imbalanced and gathering opinion on that.
As stated in earlier responses which I see some of you skipped(!), we would never nerf the drake because it used missiles and missiles cause additional load, that would be nonsensical indeed as many note.
IF, you really want to investigate this, load up toad and run some numbers. You folks inside the firewall have access to much better information than we do. It might sound cynical, but I don't think you're really interested in investigating. What you're doing here is trolling to fan the flames of a whine thread to give youself some political cover.
Drakes aren't overpowered, and I think you know that. They have a well earned reputation of being the tankiest of the battlecruisers with anemic DPS compared to some of the others. If you nerf their tank they'll just be the BC with anemic DPS compared to the others, and take their place on the shelf next to all of the other Caldari ships that never get used.
The only reason they are so popular is that they are an "everyman's" counter to AHACs and other popular compositions that take a lot more isk and SP to field effectively. The reason that you see so many of them isn't because they are OP, it's because so many pilots have the skill to fly them, being a popular PvE ship.
Leave them alone. IF missles are making your server cry, fix that.
EDIT: For the record, I seldom if ever fly Drakes in combat. I'm arguing for all the younger pilots who are having fun and being useful in fleet fights with them.
That might be true if everyone started out as Caldari and made the logical progression to Caldari battlecruisers.
They don't, they start out as Amarrian, Minmatar, Gallante and Caldari and then for some reason they cross train to fly the drake.
Now what could that reason be. Why would so many newbies decide to get a drake over their own BC's? The answer is obvious.
Sig ---
Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 11:59:00 -
[842]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 13/11/2010 12:03:03
Quote: The answer is obvious.
The fact it steamrolls level 3 missions? That's why a few of my corp trained it.
Quote: People can and do passive tank drakes for PVP
Yes, idiots bringing their mission ships passive tank them. PVP fit Drakes on the other hand are buffer fitted. (Did you just not know the difference? Either way you shouldn't even be part of this debate.)
Quote: The fits I linked are not mission ships
Yeah, they actually are mission/general PVE ships. That's what passive tanking is used for, and the only place it's actually impressive. Good PVP fits do not passive tank. _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS... |
souhyeahright
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 12:01:00 -
[843]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 13/11/2010 00:50:21
Quote: Nonsense! If you have learned nothing from this thread, you should have at least discovered that the Drake possesses a special magical quality that bypasses even training time. It is just THAT good.
And naturally, you don't need any missile support skills to make it put out non-lolworthy dps, no sir, you can be in a fully fitted high-damage pwnmobile within 2 weeks of starting this game!
Actually I just made an EVEmon plan of the lowest character I have on here (About 1.7mil SP) - it takes over a month for battlecruiser 4 and t2 heavies alone. To make this even clearer: that's with no fitting skills, no missile support skills, no shield, cap or propulsion mods.
As I'm fairly sure I've stated before: A Drake is easy to train for. A well skilled/fitted Drake is not.
A harbinger or (shield) hurricane without scorch or barrage is worthless. A Drake without furies loses maybe 20% of its nominal DPS against BC-sized targets and above. T2 turrets are essential; T2 launchers are useful but not critical.
|
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 12:12:00 -
[844]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 13/11/2010 12:03:03
Quote: The answer is obvious.
The fact it steamrolls level 3 missions? That's why a few of my corp trained it.
Regardless of why the are so popular the spill on effect is still too many people in them. They could be popular because people like the way they look that still equates to an over-representation of them in EVE.
The solution is obvious. Make them less desirable by removing some of the reasons they are so desirable. Sig ---
Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 12:57:00 -
[845]
Originally by: Infinity Ziona You asked why people cross train Caldari for the Drake.
The same reason so many, and I mean so so many people of all races cross train minmatar. Infact look at any PVP corp and it is a sea of Minmatar ships lead by the ever popular Hurricane.
Who just got top spot on the who kiied the most ship board in CCP's latest Q3 report. Along with 9 other Minmatar ships. And yet despite there being more Drakes in the game, due to everyone and there mother flying them for PVE as well. Hurricane preformance vs loss and preformence vs Drake is much higher. Even then right below it the Vegabond gets more then half the amount of kills over a Drake, a Minmatar ship that cost a lot more. So it seems the Caldari's major contender is jamed between to Minmatar ships.
So for everyone who cross trained Caldari for the Drake there is another who trained Minmatar for the Cane.
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
OT Smithers
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 13:33:00 -
[846]
Originally by: it440 just spoke to Leksi Bar'zuk in game, he found his drake in hanger, he must have been really drunk, lol he should have known better to think anything could have detroyed a drake...
You can be passed out drunk and the Drake will STILL get you home -- then tuck you safely into your clone vat before parking itself in the garage.
CCP NERF THIS IF YOU CAN!!!!
|
Mauricius
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 15:02:00 -
[847]
In my opinion all tier 2 BC should be nerfed. Yes I am serous. I know we all love our harbies drakes and canes but they are just way too OP. Seriously why should you fly a damage boat with insane EHP and and insane DPS for 60 +/- 15 mil totally fully fitted? These days it is hard to win a fight against them even in a decent BS.
You just get 70 percent of BS for 40% of a price. Ridiculous. People don't train BS anymore... Fully fitted Megathron with rigs goes up to 165mil. Hurricane for 75. (insurance included?) There is no way to win against 2 canes if they know what they are doing. Same goes for drakes.
Only ship that is practically different than other gun/launcher BC platforms is Myrmidon witch us virtually useless in large engagements, but still quite dangerous in small fights and good for PVE.
Or simply go for BS boost. Cuz this small difference in usefulness is just way to small!
And dear God, Amarr look much different than before! They still have practically no cruiser and not enough CPU (there comes in the extra low slot very handy). They are absolute power in large engagements. Except when it lags. Then you just put t1 Minmartar guns on your Abbaddon and off you go. Gellenteans have virtually nothing to do in 0.0 except plex in Ishtars or something. Only exception is Megathron which is still a very good ship. Deimos and Astarte are such a total **** in 20+ gangs that you feel like going militia again... Even with rails you can't compare them with Zealots, Munins, and Slepniers. Even a Hurricane out-powers the Astarte in many aspects of blob warfare.
Gallente needs boost, it never has been bosted since 2005. never!
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.11.13 15:09:00 -
[848]
Edited by: Alara IonStorm on 13/11/2010 15:09:18
Originally by: Mauricius In my opinion all tier 2 BC should be nerfed. Yes I am serous. I know we all love our harbies drakes and canes but they are just way too OP. Seriously why should you fly a damage boat with insane EHP and and insane DPS for 60 +/- 15 mil totally fully fitted? These days it is hard to win a fight against them even in a decent BS.
You just get 70 percent of BS for 40% of a price. Ridiculous. People don't train BS anymore... Fully fitted Megathron with rigs goes up to 165mil. Hurricane for 75. (insurance included?) There is no way to win against 2 canes if they know what they are doing. Same goes for drakes.
Only ship that is practically different than other gun/launcher BC platforms is Myrmidon witch us virtually useless in large engagements, but still quite dangerous in small fights and good for PVE.
Or simply go for BS boost. Cuz this small difference in usefulness is just way to small!
And dear God, Amarr look much different than before! They still have practically no cruiser and not enough CPU (there comes in the extra low slot very handy). They are absolute power in large engagements. Except when it lags. Then you just put t1 Minmartar guns on your Abbaddon and off you go. Gellenteans have virtually nothing to do in 0.0 except plex in Ishtars or something. Only exception is Megathron which is still a very good ship. Deimos and Astarte are such a total **** in 20+ gangs that you feel like going militia again... Even with rails you can't compare them with Zealots, Munins, and Slepniers. Even a Hurricane out-powers the Astarte in many aspects of blob warfare.
Gallente needs boost, it never has been bosted since 2005. never!
I don't know what game you play, but I am playing Teir 2 Battlecruisers Online.
Really I would prefer removing the Teir system over that. And buffing the fitting regs and Slots of the lower Teir Cruisers and Frigates. Then Bringing the Teir 2 Battlecruisers more inline with there Teir 1 Associates.
Roles not Teirs!
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
Pinky Starstrider
|
Posted - 2010.11.14 22:59:00 -
[849]
How is this not a sticky yet?
|
it440
Caldari OZ industries and Technology
|
Posted - 2010.11.14 23:43:00 -
[850]
Originally by: Pinky Starstrider How is this not LOCKED yet?
fixed that for you. CCP supports this message. I think. |
|
it440
Caldari OZ industries and Technology
|
Posted - 2010.11.14 23:54:00 -
[851]
Originally by: Mauricius In my opinion all tier 2 BC should be nerfed. Yes I am serous. I know we all love our harbies drakes and canes but they are just way too OP. Seriously why should you fly a damage boat with insane EHP and and insane DPS for 60 +/- 15 mil totally fully fitted? These days it is hard to win a fight against them even in a decent BS.
You just get 70 percent of BS for 40% of a price. Ridiculous. People don't train BS anymore... Fully fitted Megathron with rigs goes up to 165mil. Hurricane for 75. (insurance included?) There is no way to win against 2 canes if they know what they are doing. Same goes for drakes.
are you talking about the isk efficiency ratio battle? why are so many anal about that? eve would be more enjoyable if the isk efficiency stats were removed. |
Mang0o
Caldari Cosmic Fusion
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 00:08:00 -
[852]
Yes nerf the ****ing drake.
Drake gangs are so ****ing boring. serious its sooooo boring.
I love you Mang0o, take a guess why -Eris |
Failgun Owner
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 03:20:00 -
[853]
Passive shield tanking is too good. Passive shield tanking is OP on ships with 25% resist bonus.
|
Markus Reese
Caldari Lorentzian Expeditionaries
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 04:38:00 -
[854]
My 2c
The drake, the problem isn't that it passive tanks, or the missiles, or what have you. The problem is it's base shield recharge before any modules are fitted is much higher than any other shield. Reduce base hp by 15% ish and drake will be fine. As for the roving gangs of bcs, that is what they are for. Larger combat still needs the big ships, bs etc. Cruisers seem like support ships to the bcs to me.
|
Tandarabrocka
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 11:37:00 -
[855]
Originally by: it440
Originally by: Mauricius In my opinion all tier 2 BC should be nerfed. Yes I am serous. I know we all love our harbies drakes and canes but they are just way too OP. Seriously why should you fly a damage boat with insane EHP and and insane DPS for 60 +/- 15 mil totally fully fitted? These days it is hard to win a fight against them even in a decent BS.
You just get 70 percent of BS for 40% of a price. Ridiculous. People don't train BS anymore... Fully fitted Megathron with rigs goes up to 165mil. Hurricane for 75. (insurance included?) There is no way to win against 2 canes if they know what they are doing. Same goes for drakes.
are you talking about the isk efficiency ratio battle? why are so many anal about that? eve would be more enjoyable if the isk efficiency stats were removed.
No I am not talking about isk efficiency only but mainly battle efficiency. Battleships are effectively nerfed with such good hurricanes drakes and harbies (god help Gallente).
In 5 man fights to big blob warfare all BS and all Gallente ships just lost their effectiveness (except maybe the mega).
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar Volition Cult The Volition Cult
|
Posted - 2010.11.15 14:00:00 -
[856]
I think you are playing 'Hello kitty Island adventure' instead of Eve.....
BS will have either: Twice the tank ('cane, haby, bruitx) or Twice the dps (drake)
Myrm is sitting somewhere in the middle. BSes have longer range, larger drone bays e.t.c.
Oh and as far price to effectiveness. T2 ships are only about 30-40% more effective than the T1 versions and cost 10x as much. A much greater imbalance than the supposed BS to BC difference you are quoting. Price isn't meant to have a direct collelation between itself power/usefulness, its an exponential curve and this fits it just right.
I'm not sure about reducing the Drake's buffer size. The thing is the passive recharge is irrelevant in long range fleet fights with logistics as the logis are doing the repping, the passive amount is negligible.
-The sword is only as sharp as the one who wields it. Drenzul (My normal internet tag) |
Taisuke Black
|
Posted - 2010.11.23 23:55:00 -
[857]
This is so ironic.
The reason for the current predicament is the introduction of medium and small rigs. I was so happy to see them when they were introduced, but now I can see they're a mistake. Lowering the rig costs on smaller ships translated into directly making BC's and HAX stronger in comparison to BS's.
With the insurance adjustments, prices are falling all across eve EXCEPT for large rig prices. That's why the BS gang is going extinct in large fleet combat. We need a price increase for medium rigs and a price reduction for large rigs, for starters. Then perhaps heavy launchers could get their damage knocked down 5% or so, that's all it would take.
There are a lot of people in this thread misunderstanding the issue, especially those saying "use better tactics, noob." When two large fleets hit each other, individual actions start to average out and the mass DPS+EHP of the fleets become more prominent. The drake is the only Tier 2 BC whose damage and EHP depend on different slots, which allows it to fit that specific combination MUCH better than any other BC.
|
Korg Leaf
Time Bandits. The 0rphanage
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 08:48:00 -
[858]
Originally by: Markus Reese My 2c
The drake, the problem isn't that it passive tanks, or the missiles, or what have you. The problem is it's base shield recharge before any modules are fitted is much higher than any other shield. Reduce base hp by 15% ish and drake will be fine. As for the roving gangs of bcs, that is what they are for. Larger combat still needs the big ships, bs etc. Cruisers seem like support ships to the bcs to me.
If their shield recharge is a problem lower the recharge time dont reduce their buffer
|
Carniflex
StarHunt R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 12:36:00 -
[859]
It's not the Drake itself that is a 'problem' you can do basically the same thing with Cerberus
5x HML II 10 MN MWD II, 2x Large Extender II, 1x Photon II, 1x Invul II 2x BCU II, RCU II, named DCU 2x Field Extender I rigs ------------------------ About 60k EHP, ~160 km range with Fury and ~360 dps.
More agile and faster, T2 resists, a bit smaller signature and a bit lower dps.
In my opinion this would work roughly the same as Drake blobs - hell it even would work as a counter to Drake blobs, as it can just dictate range to Drakes and nuke away at them outside their lock range. Nighthawk can do roughly the same as well.
|
Darth Pheonix
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 14:04:00 -
[860]
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Yes, idiots bringing their mission ships passive tank them. PVP fit Drakes on the other hand are buffer fitted. (Did you just not know the difference? Either way you shouldn't even be part of this debate.)
Yeah, they actually are mission/general PVE ships. That's what passive tanking is used for, and the only place it's actually impressive. Good PVP fits do not passive tank.
So why don't you educate on the ****ING difference you overconfident A** CLOWN. "Passive tanking is different from buffer tanking, a-durr." It's the same ****ING thing, you worthless piece of human BULL****.
I guess you just roam space with your 1000000000 man drake fleet and don't want to see your FOTM ship nerfed. Well too bad, ****bag. The need a nerf, they're getting nerfed. Stop ****ing whining. |
|
Korg Leaf
Time Bandits. The 0rphanage
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 15:43:00 -
[861]
Originally by: Darth Pheonix
Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington
Yes, idiots bringing their mission ships passive tank them. PVP fit Drakes on the other hand are buffer fitted. (Did you just not know the difference? Either way you shouldn't even be part of this debate.)
Yeah, they actually are mission/general PVE ships. That's what passive tanking is used for, and the only place it's actually impressive. Good PVP fits do not passive tank.
So why don't you educate on the ****ING difference you overconfident A** CLOWN. "Passive tanking is different from buffer tanking, a-durr." It's the same ****ING thing, you worthless piece of human BULL****.
I guess you just roam space with your 1000000000 man drake fleet and don't want to see your FOTM ship nerfed. Well too bad, ****bag. The need a nerf, they're getting nerfed. Stop ****ing whining.
Calm down, passive tank is different from buffer tanks. A passive tank will have purgers and spr's and rely on its shield recharge to tank things, the buffer version relies on its larger ehp to tank. They are completely different.
Once again ill say drakes dont need nerfing, they only seem good in the massive drake blobs of 0.0 with its lag. In small gang and solo its as good as any of the other tier 2 bc's
|
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.24 22:24:00 -
[862]
Originally by: Carniflex It's not the Drake itself that is a 'problem' you can do basically the same thing with Cerberus
5x HML II 10 MN MWD II, 2x Large Extender II, 1x Photon II, 1x Invul II 2x BCU II, RCU II, named DCU 2x Field Extender I rigs ------------------------ About 60k EHP, ~160 km range with Fury and ~360 dps.
More agile and faster, T2 resists, a bit smaller signature and a bit lower dps.
In my opinion this would work roughly the same as Drake blobs - hell it even would work as a counter to Drake blobs, as it can just dictate range to Drakes and nuke away at them outside their lock range. Nighthawk can do roughly the same as well.
Umm.. the Cerberus and the Knighthawk are T2 and require large amounts of training time and isk. I think it says a lot that you almost got the Cerberus to be as good as the T1 Drake.
Now do a comparison of the Cerberus and another T1 battlecruiser. Sig ---
Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
|
Carniflex
StarHunt R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2010.11.26 11:29:00 -
[863]
Originally by: Infinity Ziona
Umm.. the Cerberus and the Knighthawk are T2 and require large amounts of training time and isk. I think it says a lot that you almost got the Cerberus to be as good as the T1 Drake.
Now do a comparison of the Cerberus and another T1 battlecruiser.
In 0.0 warfare skill prerequisites do not stop armor HAC gangs being used as one of the fleet types. Drake blobs in turn are counter to those armor HAC gangs that in turn own fleet battleships that in turn spank Drakes. Isk wise loss of HAC is not a big deal for your regular 0.0 player. It will be replaced with ~3 hours of Anomaly grind. According to latest economic report I have vague memory that 'average' successful player in 0.0 has about 40 mil SP. That is quite enough to fly HAC's and command ships if one so desires.
When tier 2 BC's were introduced there was a lot of lamentation about making HAC's 'obsolete'. As far as Drake itself goes its obvious that one can train for drake a lot faster than to HAC, especially as drake can get away with T1 weapon system while most turret ships need T2 guns to be competitive on the field. So if one wants to do fleets according to one unified doctrine it's easier to sell your members idea that they should train for Drake than it would be to make them all train for Zealot.
|
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.11.26 12:19:00 -
[864]
Originally by: Carniflex
Originally by: Infinity Ziona
Umm.. the Cerberus and the Knighthawk are T2 and require large amounts of training time and isk. I think it says a lot that you almost got the Cerberus to be as good as the T1 Drake.
Now do a comparison of the Cerberus and another T1 battlecruiser.
In 0.0 warfare skill prerequisites do not stop armor HAC gangs being used as one of the fleet types. Drake blobs in turn are counter to those armor HAC gangs that in turn own fleet battleships that in turn spank Drakes. Isk wise loss of HAC is not a big deal for your regular 0.0 player. It will be replaced with ~3 hours of Anomaly grind. According to latest economic report I have vague memory that 'average' successful player in 0.0 has about 40 mil SP. That is quite enough to fly HAC's and command ships if one so desires.
When tier 2 BC's were introduced there was a lot of lamentation about making HAC's 'obsolete'. As far as Drake itself goes its obvious that one can train for drake a lot faster than to HAC, especially as drake can get away with T1 weapon system while most turret ships need T2 guns to be competitive on the field. So if one wants to do fleets according to one unified doctrine it's easier to sell your members idea that they should train for Drake than it would be to make them all train for Zealot.
I understand what your saying. However I think factors that makes the drake so popular is that it is cheap, and has low skillpoint requirements, and also that it is comparable to a much more skill intensive and costly ship. This only really applies to the drake, not the same tier battle cruisers of other races. Considering this I think its reasonable to assume then that the drake is somewhat overpowered. And despite players averaging 40 million skillpoints and having lots of isk, they still go for the cheaper, less skill intensive option.
Possibly one reason is the throw-away-ability of losing a drake. Doesn't look so bad on a killmail compared to losing a HAC or a BS. Sig ---
Quote: Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
|
Kenji Kikuta
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 23:14:00 -
[865]
In my oppinion, the problem with the Drake is that it can project huge damage in the range of 50 to 100 km. Sure, there is a delay until the hurt hits the target, but still, it is comparable to (or better than) a BS fighting in this range. This leads to the conclusion that missile range needs to be balanced.
Is it reasonable that a BC, without any range mods, should be able to project huge damage up 50-100 km? The answer is no.
My proposal is to reduce missile range significantly and introduce a new low slot module that boosts missile range and explosion radius or velocity (very much similar to a tracking enhancers for turret weapons).
This way, missile users have to decide, low dps up to a long distance OR high dps up to a short distance. As it should be, and is for turret weapons.
How the exact balancing should be done, I leave that for CCP.
|
Bobbeh
Minmatar Navy of Xoc Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 01:37:00 -
[866]
Im really sorry if its already been mentioned, as it was TL DR and i tried my best.
But a Possible solution is the fixing of defender missles. As they are one of the only modules in game that are rarely ever used (as far as ive seen.) Few thoughts on the subject are as follows;
Make them target all hostile missles fire by the ship targetted with them instead of only beable to shoot at missles targeted at you. Reduce their range so they are only effective at protecting a group not a grid. They would be the equivalent of tracking disruption, which can greatly reduce if not negate the damage put out by one ship Make their dps negating ability similar to tracking disruptors. a ship with a higher ROF would suffer less from defenders as they have more missles in flight than can be defended. As a ship with Higher Tracking or rot is less effected by reductions in tracking .
Theres alot that would need to be fixed about them but its just a thought.
The other idea is remove defenders from the game, instead give a mid slot ecm mod that effects missles negatively. Maybe it Screws with their targeting reducing their range, or causes early detonation which reduces their explosive velocity. Each could be scripted or the mod could blanket both for less effect. Would essentially give a counter to missles comparable to the counter to turrets that exists already. Maybe give it to falcons as their secondary ECM skill Because Rapiers have webs and painters Arazus Points/scrams and damps Pilgrims Neuts/nos and Tracking disruptors Falcons ecm and nothing
|
Alara IonStorm
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 01:56:00 -
[867]
Originally by: Kenji Kikuta In my oppinion, the problem with the Drake is that it can project huge damage in the range of 50 to 100 km. Sure, there is a delay until the hurt hits the target, but still, it is comparable to (or better than) a BS fighting in this range. This leads to the conclusion that missile range needs to be balanced.
Is it reasonable that a BC, without any range mods, should be able to project huge damage up 50-100 km? The answer is no.
My proposal is to reduce missile range significantly and introduce a new low slot module that boosts missile range and explosion radius or velocity (very much similar to a tracking enhancers for turret weapons).
This way, missile users have to decide, low dps up to a long distance OR high dps up to a short distance. As it should be, and is for turret weapons.
How the exact balancing should be done, I leave that for CCP.
I agree entirely, Drakes them selves are not OP. Harbingers tank near the same and can be Capboosted and run a Med Neut, Hurricanes are fast and have insane DPS with excellent fitting a duel Neuts and the Myrm may not be the best but can fit any gun type, has a mean tank(active and passive) and deals consderable DPS. Fight a HAM Drake with those and it pretty much comes down to SP and player skill.
The problem is Drake Blobs with Projection and DPS. There long range fits are incredible and something should be done. I don't support a Drake Nerf but do support a Heavy Nerf the same way Harbingers can only do similar Dmg with beams if they use Multi gimping range. I would not like to see a change till Caldari and Minmatar sheild battleships have there place and Sheild Carriers can be used effectively with them.
I am glad Caldari have a fleet ship but I would prefer it be the Raven and Rokh.
-- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen!
For Great Justice!
|
Lemmy Kravitz
Minmatar Rebirth.
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 07:58:00 -
[868]
I like the fix defender missles Idea more than anything right now. drake doesn't get touched, we get a module that works everyone wins. ------------------------------------------------- "Vae Victis" -Brennus |
Mirey Finge
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 08:37:00 -
[869]
Originally by: darius mclever uhm ... also the Tier 1 BCs are pretty good when piloted and fitted properly. you might want to take a look on kil2's or garmon's or endless subversion's videos.
and tbh ... in LR BC fleets i would much rather sit in a ferox (resist bonus ftw) than in a brutix or harb. (if there is no drake on sale.)
this
I can't be arsed reading past this. 115km optimal range, enough dps to kill pods, and using the freindly drake blob as a meat shield works for me. Add a target painter and some buffer, ECM drones and possibly a sensor damp to **** with enemy logis and you have a role for the ferox that fits well in a drake blob.
Adjusting the drake because its popular is wrong. Eve will always have a ship thats popular for blobs. I hear NC use titans.
|
Kai Yuen
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 09:53:00 -
[870]
Originally by: Alara IonStorm
I agree entirely, Drakes them selves are not OP. Harbingers tank near the same and can be Capboosted and run a Med Neut, Hurricanes are fast and have insane DPS with excellent fitting a duel Neuts and the Myrm may not be the best but can fit any gun type, has a mean tank(active and passive) and deals consderable DPS. Fight a HAM Drake with those and it pretty much comes down to SP and player skill.
Oh please, HAMs fail. Every other close range high DPS weapon type in the game takes LESS fitting power than its long range cousin, yet missiles are the other way around. Why in the hell? Would should pulses be easy to fit and beams take more fitting power when HAMs take more fitting power than HMLs? Fitting a Drake with HAMs while maintaining the tank of its HML cousin is a *****, if not impossible. Leave the Drake AND heavy missiles alone.
Originally by: Alara IonStorm
The problem is Drake Blobs with Projection and DPS. There long range fits are incredible and something should be done. I don't support a Drake Nerf but do support a Heavy Nerf the same way Harbingers can only do similar Dmg with beams if they use Multi gimping range. I would not like to see a change till Caldari and Minmatar sheild battleships have there place and Sheild Carriers can be used effectively with them.
No, the problem with the Drake blob is battleships fail in every form. Bring them back and they'll start eating Drake's again.
Originally by: Alara IonStorm
I am glad Caldari have a fleet ship but I would prefer it be the Raven and Rokh.
I'd rather see EVERY Caldari ship be fleet viable. Kestrels, Merlins, Griffins, Moas, Caracals, Feroxes, Rokhs, Ravens, Scorpions, AND Drakes, not just the two fail battleships. Face it, the Raven will NEVER be good at sniping. Missile DPS just takes way too long to apply itself, especially at the range cruise missiles are meant to function at. The Drake's case is no different over long distances. The Drake is the best when operating inside of 40km. That way the damage delay in minimized. The projection is only good if your target stands there and lets itself die. Logis have forever to get a lock and start rep cycles and the target itself has forever to get into warp. He'll see red boxes light up before he ever starts taking damage.
Don't touch the Drake. Don't touch its range. Don't touch its lock range. Don't touch its weapons. Don't touch its recharge. Don't touch its tank. DON'T TOUCH THE DRAKE.
So it wins at shield tanking... is not CALDARI? Is Caldari not supposed to win at shield tanking? Is Caldari not supposed to win at shield tanking at range?
|
|
|
|
|
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 |