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 [?]

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)
Sakura Shiro	Posted - 2010.10.20 01:25:00 - [121] Edited by: Sakura Shiro on 20/10/2010 01:33:46 Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington [Yes, it can tank them. Good luck doing them in a remotely sensible time compared to a BS though. This situation is fine. (Also PVE and PVP balance should never be mixed.) This....only run lv 4 in drake if just training for nighthawk or tengu and don't want to train a raven up to get their faster. Unless rats are serps (kinetic bonus of ship and kinetic weakness of the serps does make drake pretty decent)...its painful And tengu kind of replaces NH because lows are all freed up for the usual 3-4 CN BCU damage mod setups and you just speed tank the lv 4 once you kill off frigates with extreme prejudice. Gets us back to the main drake drawback....it tanks, but don't gank well solo or in small numbers. 50 of anything will hurt something. Hell after rocket buff as planned, some caldari frigs (edit: and the worm)in large gangs are gonna hurt more. But this is for a future whine thread lol
Acru Si	Posted - 2010.10.20 03:52:00 - [122] Originally by: Andrea Griffin Killboard listings like that lack something vital: Context. Drakes may be popular in large nullsec fleets because of their cost, damage projection, and overall EHP, but it is incredibly rare that I see a Drake roaming in lowsec, solo or in a gang. The Drake just doesn't have the DPS and versatility in point range that other BCs do. Drakes are also slow, lumbering, and have a large sig radius. Much of what it can catch will run away. Due to the magic of missile implementation, the theoretical 20.3km range for HAMs is really more like 18km. If you're HAM fit and a more agile kiter comes along, the best you can hope for is that you have Javs, and that they deal enough damage to force a stalemate. Most of the time they don't, so you get to die slowly. You can nano it up and use HLs with a long point as a kiting fit, but the speed of your targets means your applied damage is fairly low in that case as well since at range you aren't webbing your target. And, really, you're stuck dealing Kinetic, unless you want to give up that big bonus. Something else you can do with the Drake, which would be suicidal against a gun boat, is to fly directly away from it to pull range as quickly as possible. Oh, and that great big EHP buffer? It's only great and big as long as the invulns are running, unlike the EANMs for armor tankers that cannot be turned off. The Drake doesn't have much cap to begin with; add a MWD, and 2 Invulns, point, web if you have one, and a neut - even a small one - is a serious threat. The Drake has its own set of issues, just like every ship. If it was really a great ship then more people would be flying it - but all I see on my DScan in the BattleCruiser range is the Hurricane, sometimes the Harbinger, and the occasional Myrmidon. I would like to see it get a slight agility and speed boost. That would help it become viable in low sec and not really affect the null sec blobs. +1 Solo or in small gangs drakes are not much of a threat (caldari ship after all). Its when they reach critical mass numbers and get logistics support(in medium-big fleets) that they begin to outperform other battlecruisers.
Nuts Nougat Perkone	Posted - 2010.10.20 08:47:00 - [123] Drakes have been awesome for quite a while now. People have been figuring this out for two years (I think it's been 2 years since QR?) non-shocker. It's pretty much the only ship I will never attack as a minmatar pilot (unless in a tempest/hurricane), because it'll do a ton of damage to me no matter what I do, and probably outtank my dps too. Drakes are fine, it's eagles (or rather, rails) that need fixing. Dunno what to do about cerbs though. I like the ship, but I still wouldn't use it over a muninn... ---
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.10.20 10:45:00 - [124] Ah also, it's just occured to me that if you're talking about nerfing stuff based on its PVE performance - passive tank Ishtar anyone? _________________________________ ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS...
Lemmy Kravitz	Posted - 2010.10.20 10:45:00 - [125] I can't ever remember being killed b a drake. They are everywhere. But atleast in highsec fleet work the drake is an after thought really because it's ridiculous tank and **** poor dps. They make good bait, but that's about as far as it gets out here in highsec. Drakes don't need a nerf. You do that and you get rid of an easy kill, cause no one will fly them no more.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2010.10.20 19:41:00 - [126] The follow up really to this is should it be the only ship that does not have to choose between tank and gank. It is certain the range and buffer plus focused common skill set make it favourable for post-dominion fleet fights. and that as I stated in my original post, the ship in small gangs or scenarios is very much more balanced since this focused setup is less appealing there where fighters are close ranged and in small numbers med slots count more. Talking balance: Fitting any of the other class ships, you are instantly forced into a choice when trying to fit weapons of equivalent range and power. Most will sit at around half the EHP of the drake when trying to do so, whilst the combination of factors (lows for PDU and BCU) and med slots for tank enable it to deliver a pretty awesome package for fleet fights. It is a hot topic internally as the number of drakes present in fleet fights is rising dramatically in the last six months and with this behaviour change we are witnessing a large impact on performance as the missile usage causes high additional load.

darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.20 20:32:00 - [127] Originally by: CCP Chronotis The follow up really to this is should it be the only ship that does not have to choose between tank and gank. It is certain the range and buffer plus focused common skill set make it favourable for post-dominion fleet fights. and that as I stated in my original post, the ship in small gangs or scenarios is very much more balanced since this focused setup is less appealing there where fighters are close ranged and in small numbers med slots count more. Talking balance: Fitting any of the other class ships, you are instantly forced into a choice when trying to fit weapons of equivalent range and power. Most will sit at around half the EHP of the drake when trying to do so, whilst the combination of factors (lows for PDU and BCU) and med slots for tank enable it to deliver a pretty awesome package for fleet fights. It is a hot topic internally as the number of drakes present in fleet fights is rising dramatically in the last six months and with this behaviour change we are witnessing a large impact on performance as the missile usage causes high additional load. i think one thing you want to factor in, drakes are often used to counter armor tanked HACs with AB.
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2010.10.20 20:40:00 - [128] I beleive the CEO of Habitual Euthanasia may cry... if ELISE ****ING RANDOLPH EVER CRIED

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2010.10.20 20:45:00 - [129] Originally by: darius mclever Originally by: CCP Chronotis The follow up really to this is should it be the only ship that does not have to choose between tank and gank. It is certain the range and buffer plus focused common skill set make it favourable for post-dominion fleet fights. and that as I stated in my original post, the ship in small gangs or scenarios is very much more balanced since this focused setup is less appealing there where fighters are close ranged and in small numbers med slots count more. Talking balance: Fitting any of the other class ships, you are instantly forced into a choice when trying to fit weapons of equivalent range and power. Most will sit at around half the EHP of the drake when trying to do so, whilst the combination of factors (lows for PDU and BCU) and med slots for tank enable it to deliver a pretty awesome package for fleet fights. It is a hot topic internally as the number of drakes present in fleet fights is rising dramatically in the last six months and with this behaviour change we are witnessing a large impact on performance as the missile usage causes high additional load. i think one thing you want to factor in, drakes are often used to counter armor tanked HACs with AB. Yeah, I more referred to those in the "emergent strategies" bit of my original reply here. We aren't saying the ship on its own is overpowered beyond the fact it doesn't have to choose as much as the others its fitting. When put in that blob scenario is is very powerful and unfortunately causes far greater load than would be ideal.

darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.20 20:49:00 - [130] Edited by: darius mclever on 20/10/2010 20:51:06 so instead of workaround the missile issue with nerfing drakes so they get less popular ... how about fixing missiles instead? (and yes i use missile boats a lot, in different flavors)

Kaliba Mort Minmatar Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.10.20 20:54:00 - [131] Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: darius mclever Originally by: CCP Chronotis It is a hot topic internally as the number of drakes present in fleet fights is rising dramatically in the last six months and with this behaviour change we are witnessing a large impact on performance as the missile usage causes high additional load. i think one thing you want to factor in, drakes are often used to counter armor tanked HACs with AB. Yeah, I more referred to those in the "emergent strategies" bit of my original reply here. We aren't saying the ship on its own is overpowered beyond the fact it doesn't have to choose as much as the others its fitting. When put in that blob scenario is is very powerful and unfortunately causes far greater load than would be ideal. The obvious idea here is to maybe fix the missiles so they don't cause the load on the servers? Something is apparently done with fighter bombers to that effect for next expansion. I'm hoping you are not alluding to nerfing the drake because missiles cause load.

CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2010.10.20 20:58:00 - [132] Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 20/10/2010 20:51:06 so instead of workaround the missile issue with nerfing drakes so they get less popular ... how about fixing missiles instead? (and yes i use missile boats a lot, in different flavors) All cards are on the table, we are merely analyzing for now with a high degree of concern its rapid rise in popularity and being open about it. The main two balancing points we are looking further at are its shield recharge and its ability to fit both for EHP and damage/damage projection very easily compared to others. The rest is scenario specific and not a fault of the drake. Consider the two issues separate if you will, the balance vs the rest of the class and the load it creates in fleet fight scenarios. We do indeed hope to address all missiles at some point. This is merely a heads up on an early stage investigation where nothing is set in stone.


CCP Chronotis	Posted - 2010.10.20 21:00:00 - [133] Originally by: Kaliba Mort I'm hoping you are not alluding to nerfing the drake because missiles cause load. Nope, not at all, the balancing part as stated above is considered separate discussion which mostly revolves around class comparison and explaining popularity. We would definitely not nerf it because missiles caused load. That is a side effect on its own.

Hatsumi Kobayashi Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2010.10.20 21:15:00 - [134] Originally by: CCP Chronotis (lows for PDU and BCU) I'm sorry, I can not find any mention of a Power Diagnostics Unit or a Ballistic Control Unit in the game. _____
Verlaine Glariant	Posted - 2010.10.20 21:19:00 - [135] Originally by: Mag's No This
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.10.20 21:49:00 - [136] ok ... I have to ask ... you look at the popularity in fleet fights ... since when was the passive recharge in fleet fights enough to save you? i just compared our alliance shield fits. yes the drake can tank 187 dps with passive recharge. but i highly doubt that that causes the 30k EHP difference e.g. to the cane fit (120dps tank from recharge). also ... I would love to fit 3 BCU without any fitting implants, but i'm not sure the 3% cpu implant is worth it, so i stick to a PDS. most of the other fleet BC fits run with 3 dmg mods or 2 dmg mods + 1-2 TE. A bigger problem for most other BCs in fleets, locking range. the drake can easily get 82.5km (75km before bonuses) so it can actually lock at the range of its weapons. cane (61.9km), harb (68.8km), brutix (75,6km) would happy if they could even lock that far. most of the times they have no problem hitting at the same range as the drake, if they can lock. so e.g. a cane, looses another mid or low, just to be able to lock at its combat range. also ... I would be interested ... how does your internal research factor in the dmg difference at close range, where every turrent based BC is far superior to the drake (see post 25) questions over questions.
Blackhorizon Habitual Euthanasia	Posted - 2010.10.21 00:57:00 - [137] Edited by: Blackhorizon on 21/10/2010 01:03:28 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 20/10/2010 20:51:06 so instead of workaround the missile issue with nerfing drakes so they get less popular ... how about fixing missiles instead? (and yes i use missile boats a lot, in different flavors) All cards are on the table, we are merely analyzing for now with a high degree of concern its rapid rise in popularity and being open about it. The main two balancing points we are looking further at are its shield recharge and its ability to fit both for EHP and damage/damage projection very easily compared to others. The rest is scenario specific and not a fault of the drake. Consider the two issues separate if you will, the balance vs the rest of the class and the load it creates in fleet fight scenarios. We do indeed hope to address all missiles at some point. This is merely a heads up on an early stage investigation where nothing is set in stone. The Drake in a HAM configuration is balanced. What's out of line is the HML configuration. Simple balancing changes: - Reduce HML flight time by 33% - Reduce the base CPU on the Drake by 35 tf - Reduce all HAM CPU requirement by 5% This should make Drakes with HML less tanky while HAM Drakes are largely unaffected.
Kabaal S'sylistha Caldari The Technomages	Posted - 2010.10.21 01:08:00 - [138] Not on topic, just wanted to say seeing so many blue posts in a thread here is encouraging and awesome. Seeing more of it would be cool too :)
Admiral Mendel Caldari Haita de lupi ROMANIAN-LEGION	Posted - 2010.10.21 07:31:00 - [139] strange how this is noticed only now, and nobody payed attention when all the caldari were crying foul after the missile deal. nerf A-hacs while you are at it, they overwhelm capital fleets, that's hAx0rZ..... seriously.... passive recharge has nothing to do with the drake in large fleet fights, also, the drake is popular now because of all that lag that has been created, and "insta-damage" is no longer required, when there was no lag, they would send u home if u had missiles...now it's the other way around.... FIX THE BLOODY LAG, and the drake will get fixed all by itself...... 2 old sayings. #1. The nail that sands out gets hammered......strange...the drake didn't stick out for years....only now ppl opened their eyes. #2: DO NOT FIX SOMETHING THAT WORKS!
Korg Leaf Time Bandits. Black Cartel.	Posted - 2010.10.21 07:32:00 - [140] Originally by: Blackhorizon Edited by: Blackhorizon on 21/10/2010 01:03:28 Originally by: CCP Chronotis Originally by: darius mclever Edited by: darius mclever on 20/10/2010 20:51:06 so instead of workaround the missile issue with nerfing drakes so they get less popular ... how about fixing missiles instead? (and yes i use missile boats a lot, in different flavors) All cards are on the table, we are merely analyzing for now with a high degree of concern its rapid rise in popularity and being open about it. The main two balancing points we are looking further at are its shield recharge and its ability to fit both for EHP and damage/damage projection very easily compared to others. The rest is scenario specific and not a fault of the drake. Consider the two issues separate if you will, the balance vs the rest of the class and the load it creates in fleet fight scenarios. We do indeed hope to address all missiles at some point. This is merely a heads up on an early stage investigation where nothing is set in stone. The Drake in a HAM configuration is balanced. What's out of line is the HML configuration. Simple balancing changes: - Reduce HML flight time by 33% - Reduce the base CPU on the Drake by 35 tf - Reduce all HAM CPU requirement by 5% This should make Drakes with HML less tanky while HAM Drakes are largely unaffected. My HAM and HML set ups get exactly the same ehp 83k, so your changes will make the hml set up fairly pointless as you would end up with something with roughly the same ehp as an armor cane, roughly the same align time as the armor cane but 200-300dps less than it

Admiral Mendel Caldari Haita de lupi ROMANIAN-LEGION	Posted - 2010.10.21 07:42:00 - [141] P.S. u want to balance the BCs, give all races the same BC, or give the gunboats 75km targeting and the drake insta damage. O7
Marmios Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.10.21 08:37:00 - [142] Caldari have finally 1 (!) ship to bring to a fleetfight and you are going to nerf it? Seriously? The option to fit gankand dps is the ONLY option to fit a Drake. If you nerf it, Caldari will be completely useless again. Great.
ArmyOfMe Pastry Productions Inc.	Posted - 2010.10.21 08:48:00 - [143] nerf the drake to hell and back while you boost the nighthawk please
Svennig	Posted - 2010.10.21 08:56:00 - [144] Are you kidding me CCP? You're going to nerf the ONLY decent caldari fleet ship in the game!?? Don't even think about it. Don't even go there. Do not even contemplate it.
Korg Leaf Time Bandits. Black Cartel.	Posted - 2010.10.21 09:01:00 - [145] Originally by: Svennig Are you kidding me CCP? You're going to nerf the ONLY decent caldari fleet ship in the game!?? Don't even think about it. Don't even go there. Do not even contemplate it. Wouldnt go that far, i hear ecm is also good in fleets. But yeah ccp are idiots if they do this
Marmios Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.10.21 09:04:00 - [146] Yeah when you count in being primaried most of the time and experiencing 10 secs of the fight until you explode counts as viable tactic, then id agree.
Kireiina	Posted - 2010.10.21 10:38:00 - [147] CCP says: We are concerned there is a ship that someone with under a year of training can fly that is marginally relevant at the strategic level and this is making people fly it. We'll be fixing that so we can return to making the game super-carriers online. Though we're mostly fixing it because we coded missiles as mini-ships whereas we should have coded them just as special effects trails. As for the OP that is one extremely high skill drake. If all of your pilots can fly something like that you should be in A-HAC's.
Whitehound The Whitehound Corporation	Posted - 2010.10.21 10:41:00 - [148] Edited by: Whitehound on 21/10/2010 10:44:52 Originally by: CCP Chronotis All cards are on the table, we are merely analyzing for now with a high degree of concern its rapid rise in popularity and being open about it. The main two balancing points we are looking further at are its shield recharge and its ability to fit both for EHP and damage/damage projection very easily compared to others. The rest is scenario specific and not a fault of the drake. Consider the two issues separate if you will, the balance vs the rest of the class and the load it creates in fleet fight scenarios. We do indeed hope to address all missiles at some point. This is merely a heads up on an early stage investigation where nothing is set in stone. If the ship's versatility is a problem, because it is becoming too popular, then you should increase the requirements that are needed for flying it effectively. A reduction of several of its core attributes in order to make it a generally thinner ship, would be a good price for its versatility. Highly skilled players will still be able to make use of the Drake, rewarding their many skills with this ship, while at the same time it is sorting out many of the newcomers who only want to get quickly on an easy to fly but yet powerful ship and who do not want to invest into a broad skill set at this stage. The biggest change in popularity will then be seen among the Caldari pilots. A reduction of a single attribute will not have this effect. Therefore a very small (1%-3%) reduction in many of its attributes like shield, armour, hull, capacitor, recharge times, speed, etc. could counter its increase in popularity without causing a lot of grief among the skilled players or destroying the ship's versatility. --
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.10.21 11:48:00 - [149] Quote: The follow up really to this is should it be the only ship that does not have to choose between tank and gank. Okay maybe i am really missing something, but i think i can safely burst your bubble here. You just posted pretty much the definition of a shield tanker. Every regular shield tanked ship does not need to trade dps for tank. Which is also the reason quite some ships are often fitted with shield tank while not designed for that (cough brutix and to lesser extend hyperion). So if you want to add that they have to choose between tank and gank then just remove shield tanking from the game. But i thought the entire idea is that armor tankers have to choose between tank and gank, while shield tankers choose between tank and ewar/other mid slot modules. The only reason that the drake is unique in large scale fleet warfare with not havign to choose between tank and gank because it is pretty much the only shield tanker used in large scale combat. So the vibe i am getting from this is that because shield tankers, so the drake, do not need to choose between tank and gank they need to be nerfed away in order to make sure we will not see large shield based fleets. (Yes i know snipe hacs also are usually shield based, but honestly in todays environment they are not that popular).
davet517 M. Corp Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2010.10.21 12:05:00 - [150] Edited by: davet517 on 21/10/2010 12:10:22 Originally by: CCP Chronotis The follow up really to this is should it be the only ship that does not have to choose between tank and gank. It is certain the range and buffer plus focused common skill set make it favourable for post-dominion fleet fights. and as I stated in my original post, the ship in small gangs or similar scenarios is more balanced since this focused setup is less appealing there where fights are close ranged and in smaller numbers where med slots count more. Talking balance: Fitting any of the other class ships, you are instantly forced into a choice when trying to fit weapons of equivalent range and power. Most will sit at around half the EHP of the drake when trying to do so, whilst the combination of factors (lows for PDU and BCU) and med slots for tank enable it to deliver a pretty awesome package for fleet fights. It is a hot topic internally as the number of drakes present in fleet fights is rising dramatically in the last six months and with this behaviour change we are witnessing a large impact on performance as the missile usage causes high additional load. OK, going to try to remain civil here. If this is a ôhot topic of discussion at CCPö the folks having the discussion need to check in and play their own game instead of having hot discussions and listening to whine threads like this one. There are lots of drakes in fleets right now because: 1. TheyÆre a poor manÆs version of AHACs that take less pilot skill and cost less to lose. You need greater numbers of them to be effective, but; 2. Just about ANY RATTER CAN FLY ONE. Anyone who has FCed in this game more than once can tell you that unless youÆre in a ôleet PvP allianceö if you call for drakes you can get 100, whereas if you call for just about anything else (including other BCs) youÆll get half as many. Take a look at the list of commonly used PvP ships that someone posted earlier. You see any other Caldari ships on that list? ThatÆs right, exactly one. The Manticore. Know why? Raven pilots already have most of the needed skills to fly one. As for missiles lagging out your server, if having missiles in the game is a mistake take them the hell out and give me my 14 million skill points back and IÆll apply them to some gunnery skills. When the nano nerf went in you also nerfed missles to uselessness for PvP. IÆd love to be able to fly a cerb in a fleet once in a while. Never called for. Raven by all rights should have its place in some kind of PvP fleet too. DoesnÆt, except for a few comedy setups. Rokh? Weeeeeellll, ok, but canÆt you fly a Tempest or an Apoc? Eagle? LOL, dude, cross train and get a Zealot or a Muninn. There is not a damn thing wrong with the drake that isnÆt wrong with Zealot/Guardian gangs except there are lots of them, for the reasons above. If having missiles in the game is causing you grief, cool, take them out, but give me my skill points back. Leave the Drake alone.



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

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.