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) |
Prof Fail
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 06:10:00 -
[211]
I think its the same issue like it was with nanoships. CCP always acts if a tactic or ship becomes far too popular. In those times the phenomenon of nanogangs occured all over eve. Vagabonds and nanoed Ishtars everywhere. Speed as tactic provided superior advatages in the old days. CCP looked at it and decided to kill off the whole thing.
Now we have a similar situation: Its the Drake. Every large fleetfight consists of boring Drakeblobs. 100 Drakes...200 Drakes and even more. Scroll down killboard-battlereports of some recent fleetfights....Drake-icons everwhere. Drakes in the north, Drakes in the south....in the west and in the east. Just check the numbers someone posted....the Drake is by far the most used ship ingame. By far. Its even worse than it was with Vagabonds & Co.
Imho reasons are:
1. Superior heavy missiles. They have too much range for a medium sized weapon system. Damage projection of heavy missiles is superior to turrets. Missiles deal the same amount of damage at any range. Turrets need skill intensive t2 ammunition to shot long range. Also turrets need alot tracking enhancers/computers to shot this far. Using tech2 range ammo gimps tracking and DMG while missiles always work equally good.
2. Drake has to high fitting ressources. Drakes can easily fit mwd, tank and a full rack of long range weapons. Try this with other BCs. Try to fit a full rack of arties, mwd and shield extenders on a cane..it wont be as easy.
3. Drakes have a rediculous amount of eHP. There is something seriously wrong if a cheap battlecruiser has eHP like a tanked battleship. This resist bonus of 25% is just crazy.
4. Locking range is too high for Drakes. Its the only BC which doesnt need to fit sensorboosters to hit at max range. Skills and simple gangboni are sufficient. Also Drakes dont need to fit tracking stuff to enhance their range. Other BCs have to devote at least 1 midslot for a sensorbooster and up to 3 slots for tracking mods. Finally you have your well tanked drake dishing out max damage @ max range vs. paperthin tanked turret BCs with snipesetup which have to waste 4 slots just to get it working. Also turret ships will do less DMG at medium to long ranges. Its simply not balanced for fleetfights.
5. Also I want to mention you dont need alot skills & skillpoints to max out missile. You need far more skill-requirements and support skills to be an effective gunner. Especially for long range you need alot of skillpoints (tech2 guns + t2 ammo). In case of heavy missiles you simply dont. Just put in your low-skill Caldari Navy whatever heavy missile and perform better than a turret ever can.
To correct the awesomenes' of Drakes in fleet engagements id suggest -60% heavy missile range. As compensation ccp needs to introduce a mod comparable to tracking computers/enhancers...just for missiles. So you can up the range to 70-80 kms. Also the ehp of Drakes should be reduced. Either by removing the 25% resist bonus or by reducing hitpoints itself. Reduce the locking range so the Drake also has to fit a sensor booster. If you do it like this you force the Drakepilots to fit some mods to make the ship long range instead of fitting a crazy buffertank. It might be also useful to reduce Drake's powergrid to prevent this easy cookie-cutter setups. It shouldnt be that easy to fit range, dps, tank and speed at once.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 06:15:00 -
[212]
Edited by: Furb Killer on 22/10/2010 06:16:54
Originally by: Quesa
Originally by: LiMu Bai Facts speak for themselves. Just look at the battlereports of all recent fleet fights. Huge Drakespams everywhere in eve. Its all about Drakes and Scimitars. No BS's anymore, no Snipe Hacs.... I feel its like 80% of fleet warfare is currently dominated by huge Drakeblos. By one single ship. And they seem to beat everything. Imho there are 2 main reasons:
1. huge EHP: Drakes are more like BS in this field. 2. Sexy long range dps, which always hits. They hit everything up to 70-80km without tracking issues. At this range they do more damage than typical turret snipesetups. Also more than BS can do with Spike etc... Another rumor I heard is all missiles @ battlefield can hit the target at the same time in lag situations. Insta-death.
PS: Dont forget, Drakes also can run MWDs a long time....so theyre quite fast to close gaps....or to run away^^
Maybe CCP can look into Drakes ehp numbers and the range of Heavy Missiles compared to other LR medium turrets. Especially to reach that range with turret BC you need quite some slots and tank/dps are usally lol.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is fact-less debating, try to refrain.
I dont think this post forms a problem tbh. The 80% is way overestimated which imo makes it enough factless to be allowed to stay here.
More realistic is saying 40% are drakes, 40% are ahacs, 20% are remaining ones (snipe hacs, BS, etc). Now remove drakes, which are countered for example by pulse BS, and the only thing worth flying will be ahacs. I guess the people who want that are the same ones advocating that new people shouldnt complain since you dont need high SP to be useful in pvp, you only need 20M or so, then you are already allowed to join a gang, isnt that great?
But if we do facts, fact is that many shield tankers dont have to choose between tank and gank, since that is how shield tankers were designed (some have to choose due to limitted PG, but that is mainly turret ships since missile ships barely got anything to choose regarding highs). So the 'problem' that some see now is really simple: There is a shield centered fleet useful in 0.0, lets nerf it since that obviously isnt fair to all different armor based fleets viable.
Something else, fake missile calculations from what we know for now are not even close to an option. They are just turret calculations (so not even assuming an infinitely fast missile that would achieve the same), so it would change missile ships to be exactly like turret ships but with a delayed animation. Funny part, that would probably cause a new ship to be FOTM, the raven. Without much issues 250km range that instantly hits and at that range got plenty of tracking. However then an entire weapon range (missiles) is effectively removed from eve. Since apparently some also just want to remove shield tanking from the game, that doesnt leave much diversity left.
|
Pinky Starstrider
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 06:16:00 -
[213]
Edited by: Pinky Starstrider on 22/10/2010 06:18:33
Quote: Drake is indeed FOTM and way overpowered. It is a good ship that just needs some balancing.
Arrow reduce cpu to 325 Arrow remove shield resistance bonus, remove kinetic bonus and add 2% dmg bonus to all dmg types instead Arrow remove 2 mid slots
this is a fair restructuring and keeps the balance in the BC tier
lolwat? A.
That isn't enough CPU to fit sfa after T2 launchers 41.3 with max skills * 7 = 289.1 I can't even fit a single shield extender to my mids let alone a BCU or even an invul.
B. because a 25% resist to EM is so huge. A 40% resist on thermal is so huge, considering with A. in place we can't fit any Hardeners. (side note don't use Kin and Explosive against a Drake Just saying. I would love to have a 10% boost to all DMG types over being stuck with just one on Kin, personally I think that would help the drake in DPS overall.
C. Why not with A. in place we can't fit any worth while mods at all in lows or mids so they would be empty anyway. Of course without A we would have 8 utility slots, which means a drake would never be able to reliably fit any tackle, and if it did it would have 0 tank. Lows would remain the same.
So summed up your solution is to make the drake no tank, and no gank. Got ya.
From the tasty tears in here it looks to me like the drake is only OP because it is popular right now as a hard counter to one specific style of fleet play. Unless they buffed the drake in the last 9 months I hadn't played (looks the same to me right now.)
Adding variety and composition to fleets is a bad thing though, bring back Armor BS only, please CPP I wasted 3 years training for the Armor BS gang its not fair that people who didn't now out perform me in Shield + Range gangs!.
(request a firefox grammar check)
|
Captain Mung
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 06:22:00 -
[214]
Nerf the drake, and buff the Cerb so that it's actually useful. el oh el
|
I'm Down
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 06:33:00 -
[215]
Edited by: I''m Down on 22/10/2010 06:40:10
The problem with drakes isn't about their damage, it's about their tank. If you don't understand how tanking works, any omni tank shield setup will always naturally have a higher average resist than any omni armor tank, with or with out the additional comp skills. With 0 compensations, an EAN 2 does 20% resist each type, with skills at 5, it does 25%. Compare that with a 0 skill Invul 2 providing 30%. And the ship bonus which doesn't stack with invuls.
What's happened is that when speed got nerfed, and probing got way way better, missiles became more viable in fleets.
So now you have a high average resist ship and a better punch from missiles. Thus the drake boom.
If you are unaware of how Logistics work, let me educate you. Resistances > buffer. Battleships have a huge buffer, but most people omnitank which means lower resistances than a drake. So fewer logistics are needed for equal effect with drakes. The other problem is that battleships cannot work effectively outside of 10km against enemy logistics. Logistics are way to hard to hit with guns beyond that range b/c you can't web them down. But drakes fire cruiser sized missiles. Which means that they can hit and kill enemy logistics way easier.
So you have a ship that can more easily kill enemy logistics, has higher average resistances, average damage, effective range, and the benefits of todays eve environment including easy probing, and no speed.
Then add to it that no other battle cruiser can tank, or do as much damage at range as the drake, and that Hac's have a very small margin of range advantage if you snipe, or lower range and speed than drakes with armor fleets, and you start to run out of options.
I do think there are counters to drakes currently. I do not think that the counters are enough. Remove the resist bonus of the drake....
=====
The easy solution is to change the resist bonus on a drake to a missile velocity bonus or missile flight time bonus just like every tech 1 missile boat. This places it's resist in line with the rest of the BC class which means less effective logistics. And in order for drakes to actually use their new found range, they'd have to choose to lose more tank to fit a sensor booster.
It would also give back the advantage that the old ferox had, and make it relevant again.
|
Admiral Mendel
Caldari Haita de lupi ROMANIAN-LEGION
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 07:02:00 -
[216]
Edited by: Admiral Mendel on 22/10/2010 07:03:50
Originally by: SPACESHIPS LAWYER Drake is indeed FOTM and way overpowered. It is a good ship that just needs some balancing.
reduce cpu to 325 remove shield resistance bonus, remove kinetic bonus and add 2% dmg bonus to all dmg types instead remove 2 mid slots
this is a fair restructuring and keeps the balance in the BC tier
Lord, forgive him...for he is high on something and doesn't know what he is on about... amen
|
Pinky Starstrider
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 07:10:00 -
[217]
Do you fly a drake or just watch others fly them or others play in EFT with them. First off the build here is good for fleet PVP or maybe being a baity rat drake.
Look at the HAM Drake. It must be inide point range to DPS. Meaning it is a slugfest, also requires the use of a point and a web and an MWD. (3/6 slots used up) Leaving room for an LSE or 2 and a Hardener or 2. With slots in the lows for BCU and DC.
Compared to other BC's that Fit MWD Web point + Extra, and 3 Slots in Lows for Tank leaving 3 for DPS bonus. That deals instant damage and is generally more effective under 20K DPS wise. Which is countered by a higher natural resist.
Look at a Nano fit HM drake that survives/kills with 2X webs, MWD, Point, leaving 2 slots for Tank, 2 Nano's in Lows Leaving room for 2 BCU.
Compared again to a similar ship as above under 24K (to keep point) which out DPS's it, with more tank. Which is countered by a high natural resist.
The long range fleet drake carries no tackle and thus can put on a stronger tank, but it is only as effective at killing as the group around it, it can not hold targets only shoot them from 70-80K. This is the only time a Drake is getting High Tank and Gank, but without tackle it is next to useless on its own. If something bumps into one solo they ignore it an move on.
Should the drake get a "nerf" (dunno why it should). The Issue that brought this up (see the long range fit). Is not going to be changed with the above Idea. Adding yet even more range to the long range. 50 Drakes firing a 3K volley each on the same ship is still a 150K Alpha from anywhere on the field. This is usually what happens when you set up 50 ships to do the same thing at the same time.
Adding range only means that 50 Drakes will pick you off 1 by 1 as you burn out to them. But if you destroy all the tackle you can just fly away and leave them there. Hell @ 70K you should be able to Alpha 1-2 Tackle before those missles destroy 1 of your ships.
Simply put, the tactics used to fight this FLEET setup are the ones that should be called into question. A long Range Drake is useless if its tackle is not there. That means you just fly away.
|
Korg Leaf
Time Bandits. Black Cartel.
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 07:58:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Prof Fail I think its the same issue like it was with nanoships. CCP always acts if a tactic or ship becomes far too popular. In those times the phenomenon of nanogangs occured all over eve. Vagabonds and nanoed Ishtars everywhere. Speed as tactic provided superior advatages in the old days. CCP looked at it and decided to kill off the whole thing.
Now we have a similar situation: Its the Drake. Every large fleetfight consists of boring Drakeblobs. 100 Drakes...200 Drakes and even more. Scroll down killboard-battlereports of some recent fleetfights....Drake-icons everwhere. Drakes in the north, Drakes in the south....in the west and in the east. Just check the numbers someone posted....the Drake is by far the most used ship ingame. By far. Its even worse than it was with Vagabonds & Co.
Imho reasons are:
1. Superior heavy missiles. They have too much range for a medium sized weapon system. Damage projection of heavy missiles is superior to turrets. Missiles deal the same amount of damage at any range. Turrets need skill intensive t2 ammunition to shot long range. Also turrets need alot tracking enhancers/computers to shot this far. Using tech2 range ammo gimps tracking and DMG while missiles always work equally good.
2. Drake has to high fitting ressources. Drakes can easily fit mwd, tank and a full rack of long range weapons. Try this with other BCs. Try to fit a full rack of arties, mwd and shield extenders on a cane..it wont be as easy.
3. Drakes have a rediculous amount of eHP. There is something seriously wrong if a cheap battlecruiser has eHP like a tanked battleship. This resist bonus of 25% is just crazy.
4. Locking range is too high for Drakes. Its the only BC which doesnt need to fit sensorboosters to hit at max range. Skills and simple gangboni are sufficient. Also Drakes dont need to fit tracking stuff to enhance their range. Other BCs have to devote at least 1 midslot for a sensorbooster and up to 3 slots for tracking mods. Finally you have your well tanked drake dishing out max damage @ max range vs. paperthin tanked turret BCs with snipesetup which have to waste 4 slots just to get it working. Also turret ships will do less DMG at medium to long ranges. Its simply not balanced for fleetfights.
5. Also I want to mention you dont need alot skills & skillpoints to max out missile. You need far more skill-requirements and support skills to be an effective gunner. Especially for long range you need alot of skillpoints (tech2 guns + t2 ammo). In case of heavy missiles you simply dont. Just put in your low-skill Caldari Navy whatever heavy missile and perform better than a turret ever can.
To correct the awesomenes' of Drakes in fleet engagements id suggest -60% heavy missile range. As compensation ccp needs to introduce a mod comparable to tracking computers/enhancers...just for missiles. So you can up the range to 70-80 kms. Also the ehp of Drakes should be reduced. Either by removing the 25% resist bonus or by reducing hitpoints itself. Reduce the locking range so the Drake also has to fit a sensor booster. If you do it like this you force the Drakepilots to fit some mods to make the ship long range instead of fitting a crazy buffertank. It might be also useful to reduce Drake's powergrid to prevent this easy cookie-cutter setups. It shouldnt be that easy to fit range, dps, tank and speed at once.
The -60% range and introduce missiles versions of tracking enhancers i could get behind but the rest of what you said was garbage and would make the drake useless. The tank is all the drake actually has once you remove the range on heavy missiles and introduce missile tracking mods then they have to choose between tank or range/gank.
All in all though there is absolutely nothing wrong with the drake, just fotm 0.0 blob tactics. Soon there will be a different tactic once someone works the counter to drake blobs out. Same as AHacs.
|
nostramo
Amarr Evoke. Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:08:00 -
[219]
You du realize, why Drakes are so famoud these days? Drakes didn't change, they were absolutely useless for fleet warfare some pre Dominion!
Drake-Fleets is the only means to fight with smaller numbers versus the blob in laggy situations. Coz u can keep range (missiles), u can make range (MWD), u've got buffer and u can conquer logistics. Armor hacs are maybe as effective as drakes but a lot more expensive.
People will always look for a setups they can escape with if **** hits the fan and that are relatively cheap.
The only setup that was better to fight outnumbered was long range battleships. They got entirely killed by bomber boost and scan-speed boost... Bring back the snipers and u'll get back the battleship fights and reduce drakes.
|
Stygian Knight
Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:23:00 -
[220]
Drake strength is in high lag. Drake itself doesn't need change.
Fix lag and you will have multiple counters to everything and player skill will be more important in those situation.
-Bomber fleets will work, -warp outs will work, -targeting will work, -passive regen from drakes will not work like it works now, -non-missile weapons and high dps weapons will work. -more strategies will be invented in lag free environment
One more thing:
It's funny how 10 people need 10 seconds to kill a ship and 300 people need at least 120 seconds.
|
|
Kireiina
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:39:00 -
[221]
In a fleet battle, if you are primary, passive shield regeneration is meaningless noise. You just need enough of a HP pool to get reps and drake does that well. So does a sig-tanking zealot.
1) The drake fleet formed because speed / sig tanking zealots have made all projectile BC's and all BS's obsolete. Maybe you should look at the sig radius stacking modifiers rather? Lots of your combat dynamics still assume the primacy of Battleships but that is not the reality.
2) I would rather see other BC's, EAF's, AF's and all BS's given a role so that drake fleet is just one tactical option. As it is all of these collapse in the face of AHAC fleets.
3) If you nerf the drake you buff the AHAC strategy. If that becomes the default good luck attracting new players when the standard ship of the line is a 1 year train (assuming nothing else is done).
|
Snorre Sturlasson
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:42:00 -
[222]
Why not make all ships equal for tank and weapons? I've trained gallente ships, minatar ships and caldari because each race had an advantage in different situations. Next I'm going to train Amarr. If CCP is going to nerf the Drake, this game isn't needing races at all.
We should be aware, there is no justice in the equality of ship types. CCP is removing strategic aspects from this game.
|
Snorre Sturlasson
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:46:00 -
[223]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis . The drakes tank or specifically its passive tank does concern us where both can be equally affected in a similar way. Food for thought anyway, we rarely intervene with emergent strategies and tactics as a counter usually matures after some time but will keep an eye on this thread to see what the rest of you think.
The passive tank is a matter for PVE not for large scale PVP. Blow up a Drake isn't really a problem.
|
Stygian Knight
Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:54:00 -
[224]
Originally by: Snorre Sturlasson
Originally by: CCP Chronotis . The drakes tank or specifically its passive tank does concern us where both can be equally affected in a similar way. Food for thought anyway, we rarely intervene with emergent strategies and tactics as a counter usually matures after some time but will keep an eye on this thread to see what the rest of you think.
The passive tank is a matter for PVE not for large scale PVP. Blow up a Drake isn't really a problem.
eve is all about %, and every % you can add to your dps/tank is achievement and advantage.
about passive regen, it's not a big deal but just to point you out.
-have you ever been in a 500 vs 500 fight when all are on one grid? -do you know that 300 people in that situation need 2 minutes to kill one ship? -now add some passive regen in those 2 minutes and you have some more ehp overall
every buffered shield ship has that advantage over armor ship with drake on top of the ladder.
|
Sverre Haakonson
Gallente X1983
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 08:56:00 -
[225]
CCP is searching for a good reason to get less PVE and PVP with misilles to reduce lag with a very cheap nerf, instead of invest in better software.
|
Sverre Haakonson
Gallente X1983
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 09:02:00 -
[226]
Originally by: Stygian Knight
Originally by: Snorre Sturlasson
Originally by: CCP Chronotis . -have you ever been in a 500 vs 500 fight when all are on one grid? -do you know that 300 people in that situation need 2 minutes to kill one ship? -now add some passive regen in those 2 minutes and you have some more ehp overall
Passive regen isn't a problem if the poeple going to adapt and they do. I fought with AHAC against Drakes and with Drake against Drake. In both cases they blew up, because there are more factors than regen rate.
|
Stygian Knight
Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 09:09:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Sverre Haakonson
Originally by: Stygian Knight
Originally by: Snorre Sturlasson
Originally by: CCP Chronotis . -have you ever been in a 500 vs 500 fight when all are on one grid? -do you know that 300 people in that situation need 2 minutes to kill one ship? -now add some passive regen in those 2 minutes and you have some more ehp overall
Passive regen isn't a problem if the poeple going to adapt and they do. I fought with AHAC against Drakes and with Drake against Drake. In both cases they blew up, because there are more factors than regen rate.
lag is the problem, nothing else
|
Sverre Haakonson
Gallente X1983
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 10:13:00 -
[228]
Originally by: Stygian Knight
lag is the problem, nothing else
That's the real reason behind this nerf. Misilles in this software design cost to many CPU cycles, as CCP wrote in one Dev blog about SC for some days.
|
Damar Rocarion
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 10:14:00 -
[229]
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.
So, have you actually tested would the lag performance be same with say 100 myrmidons with drones or 100 apocs with lasers? Surely there is more load in calculating transversal, etc. for turret weapons? Missiles only calculate speed/sig in damage.
Damar Rocarion Brigadier General
|
SwissChris1
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 10:52:00 -
[230]
This thread makes me sad...Caldari have it hard enough as it is without one of our best (and fast to get into) ships getting nerfed....where will this end? Do you want to nerf Rifters as well because they are one of the best pvp frigates? Oh wait, if you want to nerf Drakes then you are probably Minmatar and you wouldn't want to loose your precious Rifters. (disclaimer: I don't want to nerf rifters! I am just making a point...every race has a niche, without it we might as well all be the same race)
PS: if drakes are so OP why are all you haters not flying them? Turrets are for ***s (that last sentence is a troll)
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:00:00 -
[231]
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.
|
|
SwissChris1
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:12:00 -
[232]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis 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.
Oh wow, thanks for clearing that up...it was something along those lines that motivated me to post my love for this ship in this thread.
|
Lemmy Kravitz
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:17:00 -
[233]
Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 22/10/2010 11:18:45 Meh... The only thing I can think of with the drake is this
|
Lemmy Kravitz
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:20:00 -
[234]
Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 22/10/2010 11:21:32 If we are hell bent on a nerf then i would suggest 1 of 2 things
a.) reduce 5% resist bonus to 3% or b.) get rid of resist bonus and replace with a 5% missle range or 5% ecm bonus
|
Shade Millith
Caldari Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:36:00 -
[235]
Edited by: Shade Millith on 22/10/2010 11:40:29 No
Caldari have a good ship finally for PVP, you even say yourself that one by itself isn't OP
Quote: Drakes on their own are reasonably balanced
Don't screw over small gang's/soloer that use drakes.
Why don't you go nerf amarr? I mean Amarr BS's are the most popular for BS gangs and zealots are the ship of choice for A-HAC gangs.
Edit: How about you buff raven/rokh so they can fit into BS gangs? ------------------------
|
Korg Leaf
Time Bandits. Black Cartel.
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:39:00 -
[236]
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.
Its not due to imbalance, there sudden popularity is due to it being the fotm 0.0 tactic, soon they will come up with a new fotm tactic as they always do.
|
Sverre Haakonson
Gallente X1983
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 11:45:00 -
[237]
I go for cross train instead of nerfing shiptypes. The different races shouldn't be equal. The difference of shiptypes are so interesting. I'm using the Cane for gatecamps and roamings, Drakes and Zealots for Fleets, Sometimes I'm in a Hyperion and sometimes in a Mael. If CCP is making the ships more and more equal we will missing something in this game. Don't do it.
|
Skyreth
Gallente SOL Combat War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 12:32:00 -
[238]
I warn you, nerfing Drakes will just lead to an increase of smart bombing potatoes...reason for this, with drakes being less effective at both making pretty lights and making people explode...well...we will just have to start parking our potatoes in a trade hub and setting them off (Joking ladies).
Drakes are fine. All you need is to get in close by a scout giving warp-ins or the such and they are doomed. If you want to reduce lag that is caused by missiles, remove them as independent objects and replace them with something similar to the general rounds fired by other weapons *shrugs*.
Note: For all of you who say they need to be nerfed because they are OP, might i suggest doing some training? Of course Drakes are going to own you when you are in a damn newb-ship
Some people are like slinkys....not really good for anything, but they bring |
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 12:32:00 -
[239]
Drakes are no more overpowered in their class than rifters, thrashers, and sabres are in their class.
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2010.10.22 12:37:00 -
[240]
Originally by: X Gallentius Drakes are no more overpowered in their class than rifters, thrashers, and sabres are in their class.
Or Zealots, Apocalypses, Archons or Aeons in theirs...
|
|
|
|
|
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 |