EVE Search - Upcoming drake nerf, train minmitar or amarr?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Upcoming drake nerf, train minmitar or amarr?

» 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 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Carebear Collector	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:01:00 - [1] INCOMING DRAKE NERF drake bound to hit hard as ccp states they do not want missiles in pvp, per thread. should i train to minmitar hurricane or amarr harbinger?
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:07:00 - [2] Chicken little much? Quoted in the post just a few above your latest in that thread: 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. Don't want missiles in PVP. Mmm hmm. The likeliest nerf I saw in that thread is that they'd lengthen he Drake's shield recharge rate for a second time. That seems minor, and more of a nerf to carebears, but I also don't feel any non-Angel ships need nerfing at this point...CCP's attention seems to be in the wrong place. I'll believe it when I see it on Sisi...
Meeko Atari	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:10:00 - [3] Apparently they just want Ammar in 0.0 Lasers and Armor... Train Ammar if you don't want to be nerfed by CCP, They seem to ignore Balance issues when Ammar are concerned
SPACESHIPS LAWYER	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:11:00 - [4] Spacechips Lawyer here with expert analysis. In legal terms when CCP says something is on the table or being reviewed it means minds are already made up. Indeed, looking forward to this. Drake should get the following: Remove resist bonus and heavy/ham missile bonuses Change weapons slot to 5 turret, 2 launcher 5% bonus to rocket dmg per level Add one utility high slot and one low slot, remove 2 mid slots Now we have a fair BC platform for caldari.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:46:00 - [5] They would hardly boost rockets if they didn't want missiles in PVP. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.22 21:59:00 - [6] Originally by: Carebear Collector should i train to minmitar hurricane or amarr harbinger? Drake. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Steve Ni'Wangchong	Posted - 2010.10.22 22:38:00 - [7] My feeling is they'll re-touch the shields in a patch or two that makes active tanking more attractive. Wouldn't hurt it massively, but it would certainly make using all those free mids for ewar/tackle (such as at present, fleet drakes with 3 TPs, mutli-web tackle-killers, etc.) after the mandatory 2-3 slots of tank. How it really ends up is anyone's guess. CCP is not exactly tip-top at the moment so i'm holding my breath and hoping this isn't touched for at least a few months.
ShadowFire15 BOAE INC -Mostly Harmless-	Posted - 2010.10.22 22:45:00 - [8] could someone link the dev blog that supposedly says drakes are getting nerfed please. i have to see it for myself. It is impossible to pod Chuck Norris.
Logical Chaos Reverse Psychology. BAT PHONE	Posted - 2010.10.22 23:37:00 - [9] Originally by: Meeko Atari Apparently they just want Ammar in 0.0 Lasers and Armor... Train Ammar if you don't want to be nerfed by CCP, They seem to ignore Balance issues when Ammar are concerned Lol mate, are you butthurt? Please try to fly Amarr in 0.0 with basically everything Cruiser sized being Shield gang (no ppl don't fly armor hac 24/7).
Psiri	Posted - 2010.10.23 00:00:00 - [10] I have everything to gain from a Drake nerf but I'd be upset if CCP nerfed it. Blobbers are just going to replace it with something just as boring and Caldari pilots can't afford to lose one of their few viable solo PvP ships. We all know CCP doesn't care about solo PvP, but still, I hope they don't do something stupid.
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.23 00:57:00 - [11] Originally by: Psiri I have everything to gain from a Drake nerf but I'd be upset if CCP nerfed it. Blobbers are just going to replace it with something just as boring and Caldari pilots can't afford to lose one of their few viable solo PvP ships. We all know CCP doesn't care about solo PvP, but still, I hope they don't do something stupid. It wont be stupid from their point of view. They damn sure are not nerfing it for BALANCE, but to eliminate missile spam. Their goal is to get people to stop using it. The problem here is that the Drake (and entire BC line) is already very well balanced, so the only way to get people to stop using it is to break it. The OP's question is a great one. If CCP does not want people to use missile boats for PvP, then what is a good race to cross train into.
Herrring Amarr BLAHss	Posted - 2010.10.23 01:24:00 - [12] wait CCP is really nerfing drakes because it causes lag? Is this for real? lol If it is real, where is the dev post regarding this.
Pinky Starstrider	Posted - 2010.10.23 01:30:00 - [13] Missle spam is easy to fix, and would likely be more welcome than a nerf on on of the most popular PVE ships, and current FOTM. Just get rid of missile flight time and make the damage instant, tack the flight time onto launcher duration and call it a day. I made a post last night when it popped into my head that DPS could remain unchanged with missiles becoming instant damage like turrets. Basically Base Duration + Distance/Missile Velocity = Launcher Duration. ex. 10s (Bd) + 70K(D)/5K(Mv) = 24 MLd this cuts out missiles needing to be tracked an keeps the DPS equal to what it was before, as you get closer the rate of fire increases (as in the current state missiles take less time to reach target).
Mfume Apocal Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.23 01:44:00 - [14] Originally by: Herrring If it is real, where is the dev post regarding this. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1394389 I'm just going to cut the choice bits out. "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." "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." "We would definitely not nerf it because missiles caused load. That is a side effect on its own." Make of it what you will.
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.23 02:13:00 - [15] Note too that reducing lag was also one of the stated reasons behind part of the rocket fix.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.23 02:26:00 - [16] Originally by: OT Smithers Note too that reducing lag was also one of the stated reasons behind part of the rocket fix. And that makes sense in light of the 25% ROF reduction... but if it were just about fixing lag they wouldn't have bothered fixing anything else (like the Hawk). -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.23 02:37:00 - [17] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: OT Smithers Note too that reducing lag was also one of the stated reasons behind part of the rocket fix. And that makes sense in light of the 25% ROF reduction... but if it were just about fixing lag they wouldn't have bothered fixing anything else (like the Hawk). -Liang Clearly. One could say that the best way to fix rocket lag would be to leave them broken.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.23 15:17:00 - [18] It would make more sense to nerf drones (again) as EVERYONE uses those and drone spam is da debil, eh?
Blas Phemy	Posted - 2010.10.23 15:35:00 - [19] comon I want to see tears! --------------- Perfect T2 component BPO sets
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.23 15:40:00 - [20] Edited by: Tippia on 23/10/2010 15:45:08 Originally by: Mfume Apocal Originally by: Herrring If it is real, where is the dev post regarding this. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1394389 "We would definitely not nerf it because missiles caused load. That is a side effect on its own." In other words, no. It's not real. Originally by: OT Smithers The OP's question is a great one. If CCP does not want people to use missile boats for PvP, then what is a good race to cross train into. Not really. The OP's question is nonsensical. Sure, if CCP didn't not want people to use missile boats for PvP, you might to want to look for something. But since they do, you don't. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
icecooljon Aliastra	Posted - 2010.10.23 16:21:00 - [21] Edited by: icecooljon on 23/10/2010 16:23:20 Originally by: SPACESHIPS LAWYER Spacechips Lawyer here with expert analysis. In legal terms when CCP says something is on the table or being reviewed it means minds are already made up. Indeed, looking forward to this. Drake should get the following: Remove resist bonus and heavy/ham missile bonuses Change weapons slot to 5 turret, 2 launcher 5% bonus to rocket dmg per level Add one utility high slot and one low slot, remove 2 mid slots Now we have a fair BC platform for caldari. What the hell are you thinking! A well fit PVP drake is totally balanced, if you think its a solo pwnmobile you need to rethink your fittings! I fly a drake doing and what your suggesting would ruin the entire thing and to be honest would ruin my game since its one of my favourite ships and Im skilled towards it. " Change weapons slot to 5 turret, 2 launcher" Screw you.
Cipher Jones Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.23 16:55:00 - [22] Ahh read the post and understand now. The lag is keeping the cap up in fleet fights and missiles can hit for full damage at that speed. Thats a server exploit not a balance issue. If they nerf a ship because of server lag I'll seriously consider letting all my subs run out. I can put up with a lot of **** but that is ridiculous.
Ximano	Posted - 2010.10.23 17:54:00 - [23] CCP will never nerf second most used ship in the game. Never.
Artemis Rose Clandestine Vector	Posted - 2010.10.23 18:52:00 - [24] CCP is going to nerf everything you love, then come to your house and nerf your RL too. Nerf Nerf Nerf! Lets start fear mongering even MOAR. MOAR threads! *** Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine, Self Banstick +2 WTB: +666 E-peen killboard stats
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.10.23 19:13:00 - [25] Quote: What the hell are you thinking! A well fit PVP drake is totally balanced, if you think its a solo pwnmobile you need to rethink your fittings! I fly a drake doing and what your suggesting would ruin the entire thing and to be honest would ruin my game since its one of my favourite ships and Im skilled towards it. "Arrow Change weapons slot to 5 turret, 2 launcher" Screw you. How did I know someone would fall for this troll... _________________________________ ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS...
I likegirls Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.23 20:42:00 - [26] Originally by: SPACESHIPS LAWYER Spacechips Lawyer here with expert analysis. In legal terms when CCP says something is on the table or being reviewed it means minds are already made up. Indeed, looking forward to this. Drake should get the following: Remove resist bonus and heavy/ham missile bonuses Change weapons slot to 5 turret, 2 launcher 5% bonus to rocket dmg per level Add one utility high slot and one low slot, remove 2 mid slots Now we have a fair BC platform for caldari. Apparently spaceships lawyers don't need to be smart.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.23 21:30:00 - [27] what was seen from people with some sense of vision is, the drake was getting a nerf sooner or later. now I don't mind a nerf that would make the ship still ok. but knowing CCP, they will pretty much drop a sledgehammer on it. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Captain Sweatervest	Posted - 2010.10.23 21:36:00 - [28] Originally by: Grimpak what was seen from people with some sense of vision is, the drake was getting a nerf sooner or later. now I don't mind a nerf that would make the ship still ok. but knowing CCP, they will pretty much drop a sledgehammer on it. Needs more bitter and butthurt gallente spice (A brutix reference would have made it perfect). Otherwise 9/10 for feigned remorse.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.23 21:37:00 - [29] Originally by: Captain Sweatervest Needs more bitter and butthurt gallente spice (A brutix reference would have made it perfect). Otherwise 9/10 for feigned remorse. daww... you butthurt? --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.23 22:48:00 - [30] Originally by: Ximano CCP will never nerf second most used ship in the game. Never. It's getting nerfed and nerfed hard. Yeah, it sucks, it's ridiculous, whatever -- CCP does not want missile boats in fleet PvP. If you fly Caldari about all you can hope is that CCP will come up with a way to make your ships good solo while leaving them lacking in fleets -- or, the opposite of what they are today.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.23 23:25:00 - [31] Originally by: OT Smithers CCP does not want missile boats in fleet PvP. Incorrect. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
OT Smithers	Posted - 2010.10.24 01:30:00 - [32] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: OT Smithers CCP does not want missile boats in fleet PvP. Incorrect. You're probably right. I am quite sure that they are ignoring all of the laughably unbalanced ships and weapon systems in the game and instead considering nerfing a ship that they admit is well balanced in everything except fleet play, after openly stating that missile spam is causing them server problems, because they really want MORE of them slogging down their servers. Or perhaps not. Maybe, just maybe, the only sensible reason they offered for wanting to nerf the thing is, in fact, the truth. Two-hundred Drakes spamming each other with missiles could easily add almost 3000 unique server tracked objects for them to handle. It's no wonder lag is such a huge problem.
Captain Sweatervest	Posted - 2010.10.24 01:33:00 - [33] Except server problems post-dominion didn't coincide with the onset of popular drake fleets, they far preceeded the drake fad in-fact. If drakes are ccp's excuse for having nodes die after dominion then they've got a bit more explaining to do.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.24 01:43:00 - [34] Originally by: Captain Sweatervest Except server problems post-dominion didn't coincide with the onset of popular drake fleets, they far preceeded the drake fad in-fact. If drakes are ccp's excuse for having nodes die after dominion then they've got a bit more explaining to do. There have been about a dozen dev blogs explaining the situation. Maybe you should go read them and stop being a pretentious asshat. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Ogogov Gallente Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.10.24 01:51:00 - [35] It seems Drakes are considered overpowered because of the massive tank that they're able to fit, the shield resist bonus likely being the primary cause of their popularity as buffer ships. A blob of shield tanked drakes is in many respects better than a blob of tanked battleships because whilst their damage output is lower, they're also a hella lot cheaper to lose than even the (often useless for fleet PvP) tier one BS - let alone the 80 or 120m required for T2 or T3. The missiles load on the server has already been identified as a HUGE lag problem (see the Dev blog post on fighter bombers and the server load they cause!) because Eve apparently interprets a missile as an entity in space which requires a great deal more server traffic. Obligatory Gallente Butthurt Section A battlecruiser should NOT be able to out-tank a battleship whilst doing respectable dps/support, end of discussion. I see no reason why the Drake shouldn't suffer along with the Brutix and Myrmidon as a gimped active tank cap-dependent failship that will die inside of a minute. A resists bonus to armor or shield is exactly the kind of passive bonus that can't really be worked around. Maybe if the resist bonus only applied to one of the four possible resists.. now there's an idea - what do the Amarr whine squad have to say to that? It'd fix active tanking (sorta) by making the blanket resist bonus less ******edly OP.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.24 02:03:00 - [36] Originally by: Ogogov It seems Drakes are considered overpowered because of the massive tank that they're able to fit, the shield resist bonus likely being the primary cause of their popularity as buffer ships. A blob of shield tanked drakes is in many respects better than a blob of tanked battleships because whilst their damage output is lower, they're also a hella lot cheaper to lose than even the (often useless for fleet PvP) tier one BS - let alone the 80 or 120m required for T2 or T3. The missiles load on the server has already been identified as a HUGE lag problem (see the Dev blog post on fighter bombers and the server load they cause!) because Eve apparently interprets a missile as an entity in space which requires a great deal more server traffic. Obligatory Gallente Butthurt Section A battlecruiser should NOT be able to out-tank a battleship whilst doing respectable dps/support, end of discussion. I see no reason why the Drake shouldn't suffer along with the Brutix and Myrmidon as a gimped active tank cap-dependent failship that will die inside of a minute. A resists bonus to armor or shield is exactly the kind of passive bonus that can't really be worked around. Maybe if the resist bonus only applied to one of the four possible resists.. now there's an idea - what do the Amarr whine squad have to say to that? It'd fix active tanking (sorta) by making the blanket resist bonus less ****edly OP. tbh, the shield resist bonus could be the only thing that needs to be fiddled on. but CCP's track record (AKA "sledgehammer approach") implies that, beyond fiddling with the shield resist bonus they will also: kill recharge rate of shields; decrease shield HP; swap kinetic damage bonus for a +10% missile flight time bonus, AND delete one of the missile slots. so in the end, CCP will nerf the drake so hard that it becomes useless. --- Quote:** The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Captain Sweatervest	Posted - 2010.10.24 02:05:00 - [37] Edited by: Captain Sweatervest on 24/10/2010 02:16:10 Edited by: Captain Sweatervest on 24/10/2010 02:13:45 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Captain Sweatervest Except server problems post-dominion didn't coincide with the onset of popular drake fleets, they far preceeded the drake fad in-fact. If drakes are ccp's excuse for having nodes die after dominion then they've got a bit more explaining to do. There have been about a dozen dev blogs explaining the situation. Maybe you should go read them and stop being a pretentious asshat. -Liang Please enlighten me, fellow pretentious asshat? Or was that post ironic? I've read the "lag" related dev blogs and I haven't noted anything that pointed a finger at any particular ship, weapon system, or uh anything else for that matter. Are you supposing that drakes should take one for the team, or just being a snyde prick about something you assume everyone should understand?
SheriffFruitfly Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.24 04:56:00 - [38] First it was BECAUSE OF FALCON, now it's BECAUSE OF DRAKE. lols __________________________________________________________ Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Kokura Nin	Posted - 2010.10.24 10:07:00 - [39] Edited by: Kokura Nin on 24/10/2010 10:13:43 Originally by: Pinky Starstrider Missle spam is easy to fix, and would likely be more welcome than a nerf on on of the most popular PVE ships, and current FOTM. Just get rid of missile flight time and make the damage instant, tack the flight time onto launcher duration and call it a day. I made a post last night when it popped into my head that DPS could remain unchanged with missiles becoming instant damage like turrets. Basically Base Duration + Distance/Missile Velocity = Launcher Duration. ex. 10s (Bd) + 70K(D)/5K(Mv) = 24 MLd this cuts out missiles needing to be tracked an keeps the DPS equal to what it was before, as you get closer the rate of fire increases (as in the current state missiles take less time to reach target). Strictly speaking the DPS here is lower but its instant, old scheme was higher DPS but it was delayed by flighttime. With the this scheme we'd also get an extra bit of range since now some flighttime is lost by missiles turning. This would open the door for "faster" missiles ( since server doesnt need to track em ). Missile speed would need a looking over tho...with your proposal you can easily cut theoretical dps by over half.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.10.24 11:24:00 - [40] Lower missile ROF, Increase damage, increase missile velocity, lower flight time... voila! less missiles around in space. As for the Battleship comparison, people use Drakes for cost/low sp reasons/:effort:/:lazy Fc'ing: , you can even get a Scorpion, a battleship without ANY damage or tank bonus to MATCH the Drake in DPS/Buffer Tank and still have space for 3 ECM Jammers and 2 Signal Distortion amplifiers, I'm sure the other battleships can do even better..
captain foivos	Posted - 2010.10.24 11:31:00 - [41] Originally by: SheriffFruitfly First it was BECAUSE OF FALCON, now it's BECAUSE OF DRAKE. lols Hide your supercaps, hide your dramiels, and hide your drakes 'cuz they be nerfin' errbody out there. Drakes are the most balanced and noob-friendly ship in the entire game. Hence, why everyone and their mother likes them for fleet PvP. Really, all they need to do to fix missile lag is make the damage an instantaneous occurence, which can be done using suggestions already listed here. Bam. Server lag reduced. In short, nerf my Drake, and I'll just settle for the next best battlecruiser, which happens to be Amarr (at least with my skills, I don't have the 'Cane trained up, so Minmatar dudes don't bother whining). Also posting to support a Ferox buff. -- Warning: sensors indicate an unusually low level of content in this thread.
Kokura Nin	Posted - 2010.10.24 11:35:00 - [42] Originally by: Rastigan Lower missile ROF, Increase damage, increase missile velocity, lower flight time... voila! less missiles around in space. As for the Battleship comparison, people use Drakes for cost/low sp reasons/:effort:/:lazy Fc'ing: , you can even get a Scorpion, a battleship without ANY damage or tank bonus to MATCH the Drake in DPS/Buffer Tank and still have space for 3 ECM Jammers and 2 Signal Distortion amplifiers, I'm sure the other battleships can do even better.. Cost and speed will be lacking tho.
Pinky Starstrider	Posted - 2010.10.24 16:31:00 - [43] Originally by: Kokura Nin Edited by: Kokura Nin on 24/10/2010 10:13:43 Originally by: Pinky Starstrider Missle spam is easy to fix, and would likely be more welcome than a nerf on on of the most popular PVE ships, and current FOTM. Just get rid of missile flight time and make the damage instant, tack the flight time onto launcher duration and call it a day. I made a post last night when it popped into my head that DPS could remain unchanged with missiles becoming instant damage like turrets. Basically Base Duration + Distance/Missile Velocity = Launcher Duration. ex. 10s (Bd) + 70K(D)/5K(Mv) = 24 MLd this cuts out missiles needing to be tracked an keeps the DPS equal to what it was before, as you get closer the rate of fire increases (as in the current state missiles take less time to reach target). Strictly speaking the DPS here is lower but its instant, old scheme was higher DPS but it was delayed by flighttime. With the this scheme we'd also get an extra bit of range since now some flighttime is lost by missiles turning. This would open the door for "faster" missiles ( since server doesnt need to track em ). Missile speed would need a looking over tho...with your proposal you can easily cut theoretical dps by over half. How so? If it takes 14 seconds for a missile to travel from point A to point B how does taking that 14 seconds and adding it to the initial launch change the DPS? You still deal the same damage in the same time frame there for you deal the same DPS. As you get closer and the distance changes your ROF increases to match. It is the exact same function we have now, except instead of giving a silly animation and having an object in space being tracked it is just a fire and hit animation like turrets.
Kokura Nin	Posted - 2010.10.24 16:43:00 - [44] As is : DPS goes up to full after the first missiles hit. Your scheme : DPS will stay lower if target remains @ same range.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.24 19:16:00 - [45] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: OT Smithers CCP does not want missile boats in fleet PvP. incorrect. Correct. It's pretty obvious they don't want missiles prevalent in pvp, or Caldari in general. In before the, but you have ECM! dev alts and fan boys. Cald ECM isnt Op, fit ECCM foo, the others just suck horribly. They nerfed Cruise into general uselessness. No one uses Cruise Ravens for pvp, barring boring ass pos shoots maybe. There is simply no pvp niche for it to fit into that can't be totally wtfpwned by another weapon system. Anything requiring range + tracking + DPS = Amarr BS, or just range = Rokh (lol dps). The expl velocity/radius missile nerf forced torp Ravens to fit painters and webs thus creating a super weak tank. Everyone primaries these first, asuming any are on the field in pvp, there arent mostly now, but you might see one at a gate camp , maybe. Better off in an Amarr BS with great tracking, similar range and no need for 2 painters and triple webbing on the target. The slotting for these ships was created WAY before the massive change the missile nerf brought. It hasnt been fixed, or ever will be. I know this, most pvp'ers know all this, CCP must know this, so it must be what they want. And now they are talking nerfing the Drake, the only decent and inexpensive solo/small gang ship which is no more op than any other top/popular ship of it's respective shipclass; Hell, Chronitis even admitted this. How long has the Drake been like this? Years! And suddenly they are Op? LOL! So to sumarize: Cald got the ECM nerf, the Falcon nerf, the missile nerf which reduced applied dps across the board and took from needed midslots of multiple ships not to mention ruined Cruise for pvp, Raven is meh now, the various shield regen nerfs, rails still suck terribad in all ways except the most useless, and you want to nerf the Drake? Rofl facepalm If it's a matter of tank or gank, you already boned us with the missile nerf once Chronitis. Want to do something constructive? Improve rail dps and/or tracking and look at blasters.
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.24 19:21:00 - [46] Originally by: Soporo So to sumarize: Cald got the ECM nerf, the Falcon nerf, the missile nerf which reduced applied dps across the board and took from needed midslots of multiple ships not to mention ruined Cruise for pvp, Raven is meh now, the various shield regen nerfs, rails still suck terribad in all ways except the most useless, and you want to nerf the Drake? Rofl facepalm tbh the problem is not them ships being nerfed, but the fact that CCP thinks that applying sledgehammer to the ships is the way to go. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Exploited Engineer	Posted - 2010.10.24 19:25:00 - [47] Just change the current "homing" missile system to one where missiles have a turn radius of zero, e.g. missile impacts as soon as (current flight time * missile velocity) >= (distance to target). It won't really make a difference in 99% of all situations and simplify missile flight path calculations immensely, thereby allowing the servers to easily cope with lots of missiles in flight. And for anyone saying that this isn't realistic: Missile damage is based on an absolute velocity. Missing realism starts here, as there's no such thing as an absolute velocity in space.
Kontract Killa	Posted - 2010.10.24 21:45:00 - [48] So does anyone know exactly how or if they are going to nerf the Drake? All I'm seeing is a lot of bickering back and forth about the ship's flaws/strengths. I just want to know if they are going to nerf it, and exactly how they will be doing it. I want stats so I know whether to keep training the skills for the Drake(if it's even worth doing), or start looking into flying another type of Battlecruiser.
Cipher Jones Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.24 22:27:00 - [49] Originally by: Grimpak what was seen from people with some sense of vision is, the drake was getting a nerf sooner or later. now I don't mind a nerf that would make the ship still ok. but knowing CCP, they will pretty much drop a sledgehammer on it. See, that's the thing. they have no sense of vision whatsoever. The (alleged upcoming) balance isn't to nerf the ship, the drake itself. Its to counterbalance the exploit.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.24 22:48:00 - [50] Originally by: Kontract Killa So does anyone know exactly how or if they are going to nerf the Drake? All I'm seeing is a lot of bickering back and forth about the ship's flaws/strengths. I just want to know if they are going to nerf it, and exactly how they will be doing it. I want stats so I know whether to keep training the skills for the Drake(if it's even worth doing), or start looking into flying another type of Battlecruiser. Given that a dev has made three posts on the issue thus far (none too reassuring based on CCP's past), I'd hedge my bets and start training turrets.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.24 22:50:00 - [51] Originally by: Kontract Killa So does anyone know exactly how or if they are going to nerf the Drake? No. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Don Pellegrino Pod Liberation Authority HYDRA RELOADED	Posted - 2010.10.25 02:32:00 - [52] Troll thread rating: 8/10 +2 for the insane number of bites = 10/10. Would read again.
Pinky Starstrider	Posted - 2010.10.25 05:49:00 - [53] Originally by: Cipher Jones Originally by: Grimpak what was seen from people with some sense of vision is, the drake was getting a nerf sooner or later. now I don't mind a nerf that would make the ship still ok. but knowing CCP, they will pretty much drop a sledgehammer on it. See, that's the thing. they have no sense of vision whatsoever. The (alleged upcoming) balance isn't to nerf the ship, the drake itself. Its to counterbalance the exploit. What exploit? A BC shooting from range to counter HAC fleets? How is that any more an exploit than HAC fleets countering BS fleets? or BS fleets countering BC fleets? Or is it because there is actually a use for a non-armor tanked, non Amarr/Minny ship in PVP.
Solid Star	Posted - 2010.10.25 06:20:00 - [54] Edited by: Solid Star on 25/10/2010 06:22:49 What really made the Drake explode in popularity was the huge speed nerf CCP did where fast ships were moving at half the speed. What this essentially did was double the time to get to a (and run away) from a hostile (so they cant hit you twice as long). Couple this with the increase in logistics (which inherently works better with high resist ships) and the drop in drake prices and it is not rocket science to figure out why the Drake is such a popular pvp ship. It is ship with good range, high resists, low sp training, and cheap. If you follow the stats you will see a steady rise after the nano nerf in people flying T1 BCs. Before the great speed nerf I don't think the drake was even in the top 5 in kills (based on the eve kill). Now the drakes kills is about the same as the next 5 pvp boats combined (again, eve kill site). Statistically, no ship has ever even come close to the numbers you see with the drake. Not the falcon nor the Vaga. And if that is not enough, the drake is the only ship that has a whole gang type named after it. If CCP is to nerf the drake I think they should look at the whole line of Caldari though as their pvp options are not all that great. Though, I think Gallente should be looked at before Caldari as drones just don't work (well) in PVP anymore.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 06:37:00 - [55] Originally by: Captain Sweatervest Please enlighten me, fellow pretentious asshat? Or was that post ironic? I've read the "lag" related dev blogs and I haven't noted anything that pointed a finger at any particular ship, weapon system, or uh anything else for that matter. Are you supposing that drakes should take one for the team, or just being a snyde prick about something you assume everyone should understand? I was simply responding to your post in the spirit with which you posted it. The dev blogs have been pretty clear that the majority of the "Dominion Lag" actually originated from a bug written for Apocrypha. However, Dominion also made several changes that increased the popularity of "missile" ships (SCs, Drakes, Bombers, etc). The steady rise of popularity in "missile" ships is quite likely keeping pace with the performance improvements the Devs are making. Furthermore, the Devs are pretty well correct - the Drake is overpowered in that situation. It has spectacular HP, awesome damage projection, and pretty decent mobility. So CCP suggests changing the Drake and you flip out. Smooth move slick. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Mfume Apocal Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.25 06:48:00 - [56] Edited by: Mfume Apocal on 25/10/2010 06:50:31 Originally by: Solid Star Edited by: Solid Star on 25/10/2010 06:22:49 What really made the Drake explode in popularity was the huge speed nerf CCP did... As late as seven months ago, the Drake was considered by everyone I talked to as primarily a PvE ship, with it's only PvP purpose being bait. Of course, back then the armor tanked BS was still considered subcap king of the grid and putting Drakes on the field with those just ends in a lot of dead Drakes. When it's natural predator was hunted to near extinction by afterburning armor HACs, the Drake population exploded. Especially since you can have strong tank and good enough DPS out of a Drake with under 3M SP, allowing everyone and their dog to fly one effectively.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.25 08:45:00 - [57] Edited by: Tippia on 25/10/2010 08:48:02 Originally by: Solid Star What really made the Drake explode in popularity was the huge speed nerf CCP did where fast ships were moving at half the speed. No. Then we would have seen this two years ago. We didn't, mainly because the speed nerf coincided with the missile nerf, making the two come out at almost status quo in the end. What made the Drake explode in popularity was the implosion in popularity of its main predator: the battleship. This coincides with the increase in popularity of the battleship's main predator: the (super)carrier and the HAC, the latter of which, in spite of the speed nerf, was still a viable ship ù the speed nerf just changed out they were set up. Yay for ship ecology! ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.25 13:04:00 - [58] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Captain Sweatervest Please enlighten me, fellow pretentious asshat? Or was that post ironic? I've read the "lag" related dev blogs and I haven't noted anything that pointed a finger at any particular ship, weapon system, or uh anything else for that matter. Are you supposing that drakes should take one for the team, or just being a snyde prick about something you assume everyone should understand? I was simply responding to your post in the spirit with which you posted it. The dev blogs have been pretty clear that the majority of the "Dominion Lag" actually originated from a bug written for Apocrypha. However, Dominion also made several changes that increased the popularity of "missile" ships (SCs, Drakes, Bombers, etc). The steady rise of popularity in "missile" ships is quite likely keeping pace with the performance improvements the Devs are making. Furthermore, the Devs are pretty well correct - the Drake is overpowered in that situation. It has spectacular HP, awesome damage projection, and pretty decent mobility. So CCP suggests changing the Drake and you flip out. Smooth move slick. -Liang I have exactly as much respect for the people whining about drakes now as I had for the people whining about bombers this time last year. None. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Diesel47	Posted - 2010.10.25 13:37:00 - [59] If minmitar want the drake nerfed... Then Caldari want the hurricane and rifter nerfed.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.25 13:52:00 - [60] Originally by: Tippia What made the Drake explode in popularity was the implosion in popularity of its main predator: the battleship. This coincides with the increase in popularity of the battleship's main predator: the (super)carrier and the HAC, the latter of which, in spite of the speed nerf, was still a viable ship ù the speed nerf just changed out they were set up. Yay for ship ecology! This is it, and CCP's attention is in the complete wrong area. The problem with F/Bs hitting BSes is going to be addressed (neat dev blog about it), and if the devs have any traces of intelligence, they'll wait to see how that affects the popularity of the BS class before dinking with the Drake. It may not be big enough of a nerf to SCs, but we'll see. (On a side note, there's plenty of research into EVE because of its economy, I wonder if anyone has been tempted to study its ecology before.)
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.25 14:58:00 - [61] Originally by: Cipher Jones Originally by: Grimpak what was seen from people with some sense of vision is, the drake was getting a nerf sooner or later. now I don't mind a nerf that would make the ship still ok. but knowing CCP, they will pretty much drop a sledgehammer on it. See, that's the thing. they have no sense of vision whatsoever. The (alleged upcoming) balance isn't to nerf the ship, the drake itself. Its to counterbalance the exploit. hey, you're taking this the wrong way. CCP is nerfing the drake because we're saying "OMG DRAKE OP!!11one", but while overpowered, it isn't an exploit. now the problem is, as I said, when CCP decides to nerf something, it hits it with the sledge-nerf-hammer. so yes, did Drake needed a nerf? heck who knows. maybe it's inherent strengths are better used on today's battlefield than yesterday's. Still that doesn't matter, since people are bent on nerfing the drake, because. and as I said, as long as the ship's functionality and usability remains acceptable and on par with it's pairs, it's ok. CCP track record with nerfs however, states otherwise. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 15:21:00 - [62] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/10/2010 15:23:45 Originally by: Malcanis I have exactly as much respect for the people whining about drakes now as I had for the people whining about bombers this time last year. None. Two things: - What the hell does that have to do with my post? I was explaining why Drake fleets really could be causing a significant amount of lag and not have been "The BigCause" back when Dominion launched - and why CCP is looking at changing them now. - Weren't you one of the people that have constantly told me for the last 4 years that Drakes were PVE ships? Well, regardless, I told you (pl) so. -Liang Ed: Originally by: Grimpak now the problem is, as I said, when CCP decides to nerf something, it hits it with the sledge-nerf-hammer. Yeah, I'm a bit worried about that too. I'm hoping they nerf it by changing it instead of actually nerf batting it. I do have to admit that I'd be excited by different damage projection from HML and making range bonuses actually matter. The problem is that ships with missile range bonuses tend to have completely jacked fittings (Hi Cerb!). -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 15:32:00 - [63] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 25/10/2010 15:33:24 Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/10/2010 15:23:45 Originally by: Malcanis I have exactly as much respect for the people whining about drakes now as I had for the people whining about bombers this time last year. None. Two things: - What the hell does that have to do with my post? Hmm, I dunno... Originally by: Liang Nuren Furthermore, the Devs are pretty well correct - the Drake is overpowered in that situation. Look like that part to me.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 15:39:00 - [64] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/10/2010 15:41:11 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 25/10/2010 15:23:45 Originally by: Malcanis I have exactly as much respect for the people whining about drakes now as I had for the people whining about bombers this time last year. None. Two things: - What the hell does that have to do with my post? Hmm, I dunno... Originally by: Liang Nuren Furthermore, the Devs are pretty well correct - the Drake is overpowered in that situation. Look like that part to me. Jackass. Hey, I thought I'd underline the part of his post that you seem to have missed. Idiot. -Liang Ed: I'm not whining... that was a statement of fact. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 15:56:00 - [65] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 25/10/2010 16:01:39 Originally by: Liang Nuren Furthermore, the Devs are pretty well correct - the Drake is overpowered in that situation. Sounds a LOT like whining to me. But please do continue to whine under the guise of authoratative posting. I'm just here to call you on it. Business will be booming if you keep to this thread very long. You've lost touch with reality of you think drakes (or drake fleets) are by any definition overpowered. So pull your head out of your ******* for once eh?
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 16:29:00 - [66] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Sounds a LOT like whining to me. But please do continue to whine under the guise of authoratative posting. I'm just here to call you on it. Business will be booming if you keep to this thread very long. You've lost touch with reality of you think drakes (or drake fleets) are by any definition overpowered. So pull your head out of your ******* for once eh? The simple fact of the matter is that the Drake has far more EHP, damage, and damage projection in that kind of fight than any other BC, and it dovetails extraordinarily nicely with RR (Scims/Basi). One could argue that it's maybe even custom built for that kind of ranged engagement, except that it doesn't even have to spend a bonus on range. I just hope CCP changes the Drake (as they're suggesting they want to do) instead of nerfing the **** out of it (as they're suggesting they don't want to do). I know they've got a reputation for sledge hammer nerfs, but honestly game balance is better than it's ever been.... hopefully things work out for one of my favorite PVP ships. :) -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 16:41:00 - [67] Originally by: Liang Nuren The simple fact of the matter is .... hopefully things work out for one of my favorite PVP ships. :) -Liang Opinions...and total bull****. Funny how those go hand in hand.
Trebor Whettam	Posted - 2010.10.25 16:59:00 - [68] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Liang Nuren The simple fact of the matter is .... hopefully things work out for one of my favorite PVP ships. :) -Liang Opinions...and total bull****. Funny how those go hand in hand. His post wasn't BS. The drake is obviously exceptionally good at this tactic. The real question is whether or not that warrants a retooling. As others have pointed out, a large gang of amarr battleships, which were popular not too long ago (before the popularity of bomber and ahac fleets), destroys these Drake fleets. In theory, this completes a nice cycle of paper-scissors-rock.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:08:00 - [69] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 25/10/2010 17:13:27 Originally by: Trebor Whettam His post wasn't BS. The drake is obviously exceptionally good at this tactic. The real question is whether or not that warrants a retooling. As others have pointed out, a large gang of amarr battleships, which were popular not too long ago (before the popularity of bomber and ahac fleets), destroys these Drake fleets. In theory, this completes a nice cycle of paper-scissors-rock. It's funny because Amarr bs fleets anhillate drake fleets and both are STILL VERY MUCH IN USE. Simply because SOME players are too afriad to undock battleships on a regular basis thanks to "fist" ahac success before doesn't say a thing about drake balance, it says players are still quite afriad of zealots and hotdrops(even when they are not around). We're simply seeing the emergence of a new fleet tactic, one that has weakness, but one that is weak to things that have been made "obsolete" in recent memory (note the quotation marks). Paper covered rock so everyone assumed rock was worthless, then scissors looked OP because everyone was flying paper. When in reality, rock still owned scissors, but with the fallout of the paper scandle, they were afriad to fly rocks again. Liang's post was an opinion and a very uneducated one at that.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:09:00 - [70] Originally by: Trebor Whettam In theory, this completes a nice cycle of paper-scissors-rock. Right. There's just a sledgehammer smashing all the rocks right now, so Scissors is king.
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:12:00 - [71] I believe CCP should nerf the ships I do not regularly fly, and buff the ones I do regularly fly. This is because it would make the game balanced more. If you not agree you are a ******. Good day.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:37:00 - [72] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Liang's post was an opinion and a very uneducated one at that. I find it amusing that you've deliberately chosen to avoid anything I've actually said. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:49:00 - [73] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Liang's post was an opinion and a very uneducated one at that. I find it amusing that you've deliberately chosen to avoid anything I've actually said. -Liang Really, because I've quoted you in every post. Your subliminal messaging system must be broken. You said (paraphrased): Drakes are overpowered in this situation. Drakes should be changed, not nerfed , but they're overpowered so... clearly they need a nerf. PS: I fly drakes, honest, even if my kb says I dont'.
Muad 'dib Caldari Payable on Death	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:54:00 - [74] they cant touch my missiles in pvp, or i'll kill them all (ingame) with my missiles.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.25 17:59:00 - [75] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk PS: I fly drakes, honest, even if my kb says I dont'. I think you of all people should understand how alts work.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:03:00 - [76] Originally by: Seriously Bored Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk PS: I fly drakes, honest, even if my kb says I dont'. I think you of all people should understand how alts work. You're right, I actively pvp on several at the same time. And it is certainly plausible he drake-fleets while roaming in a gallente ship. I mean, what with drakes being essentially an "i win button," and all, jesus can't we just nerf them yet? SO overpowered.
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:08:00 - [77] Nerf the ships I have trouble beating in Pvp! And nerf the ones I don't have trouble beating too! Just for balance's sake!
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:11:00 - [78] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Nerf the ships I have trouble beating in Pvp! QFT Nerf nerf nerf. Liang makes FACTS about ship balance, so I nominate him for the new lead developer. We need a man who's not afriad to make the BAD..er BIG decisions!
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:12:00 - [79] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Really, because I've quoted you in every post. You're quoting something I have said and then addressing something I didn't say. Quote: Drakes are overpowered in this situation. Drakes should be changed, not nerfed , but they're overpowered so... clearly they need a nerf. That's pretty confusing. Let me make a statement of position: - Drake fleets are pretty overpowered in the situation the devs are complaining about. There is no other battlecruiser that can even come close to what it can do. The combination of DPS, damage projection, mobility, and tank is unbelievable. This has historically been counter balanced by delayed damage at extreme ranges and the prevalence of turret ships. - Drakes are easily the best brawling BC, primarily because of the combination of good damage, amazing EHP, and pretty reasonable mobility. Quote: PS: I fly drakes, honest, even if my kb says I dont'. Funny story: I'm the guy that made and popularized the "Standard HAM" Drake fit, and I've been championing Drakes as good PVP ships basically since their release. Noob. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:20:00 - [80] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 25/10/2010 18:26:16 Originally by: Liang Nuren Funny story I agree, that is an accurate descriptor of your posting here. You want to continue on with the standard nerf drake jive or what? The hurricane is the best gtfo bc, does it get a prize too? How about the brutix for being the most cost effective gank ship? You see, we can make up new catergories and place a variety of ships as "best," in their respective groups. We can even debate why one title is worth less than the next. But, what does any of it mean? About **** and squat. Drake fleets are not invincible, ham drakes don't belong in a fleet, and you sir, should stop posting before you loose the last of your credibility.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:22:00 - [81] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk I agree, that is an accurate descriptor of your posting here. You want to continue on with the standard nerf drake jive or what? I hear the Drake eats babies and smashes kittens. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:25:00 - [82] Edited by: Berendas on 25/10/2010 18:27:07 Originally by: Liang Nuren The simple fact of the matter is that the Drake has far more EHP, damage, and damage projection in that kind of fight than any other BC, and it dovetails extraordinarily nicely with RR (Scims/Basi). This. Drakes have WAY more going for them than any other single BC, but it's not just in large fleets. You will be hard pressed to find a combination of ships that can beat an equally sized nano-Drake fleet in small gang skirmishes (~6). I have been trying to think of what can beat a nano-Drake gang of the same sized without faction ships and I haven't come up with anything that comes close. That said, I can't wait for the nerf. The Drake is by FAR the best BC in terms of ease of use, range, and tank -- all this without sacrificing much in the way of damage or speed. Drakes deserve to be nerfed plain and simple. Flame on.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 18:26:00 - [83] O shi, we've been trolled. Ashton is that you?
Naomi Knight Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.25 19:53:00 - [84] Originally by: Berendas Edited by: Berendas on 25/10/2010 18:27:07 Originally by: Liang Nuren The simple fact of the matter is that the Drake has far more EHP, damage, and damage projection in that kind of fight than any other BC, and it dovetails extraordinarily nicely with RR (Scims/Basi). This. Drakes have WAY more going for them than any other single BC, but it's not just in large fleets. You will be hard pressed to find a combination of ships that can beat an equally sized nano-Drake fleet in small gang skirmishes (~6). I have been trying to think of what can beat a nano-Drake gang of the same sized without faction ships and I haven't come up with anything that comes close. That said, I can't wait for the nerf. The Drake is by FAR the best BC in terms of ease of use, range, and tank -- all this without sacrificing much in the way of damage or speed. Drakes deserve to be nerfed plain and simple. Flame on. Lol sure ... drakes need a boost not a nerf come on its cargo space is too small :I so even if drake is the best( which isnt) in bc class that doesnt mean it needs a nerf just like matar op ships
Stinko McCoy	Posted - 2010.10.25 20:03:00 - [85] So basically some dev alt lost a really expensive ship to a drake gang blob and couldn't fight back. Poor cheap Drakes finally get a break into mainstream pvp desire and they get nerfed.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 20:05:00 - [86] Originally by: Stinko McCoy So basically some dev alt lost a really expensive ship to a drake gang blob and couldn't fight back. Poor cheap Drakes finally get a break into mainstream pvp desire and they get nerfed. +1
Rumple Fourskin	Posted - 2010.10.25 20:17:00 - [87] So should I stop maxing out my missile skills? The drake is the only caldari ship (aside from onyx) that make any sense in pvp. If ccp nerfs the drake then we know that they don't want caldari in pvp situations and a ton of us wasted 8 months of training perfecting this ship. I know caldari were the pwnomgbbqwtf for like 5 years but cant we have 1 ship that's viable for pvp?
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.25 21:30:00 - [88] Originally by: Rumple Fourskin So should I stop maxing out my missile skills? The drake is the only caldari ship (aside from onyx) that make any sense in pvp. If ccp nerfs the drake then we know that they don't want caldari in pvp situations and a ton of us wasted 8 months of training perfecting this ship. I know caldari were the pwnomgbbqwtf for like 5 years but cant we have 1 ship that's viable for pvp? Since the explosion of these "OMG WTF NARF!" threads Chronitis hasn't commented in the original thread that he tossed this ball around, and there are no other threads/notes on the Test Server forum. All we have right now is F.U.D. and reading too far into one Dev's musings. I'd keep my original skill plan if I were in your shoes, and I'm not taking missiles off my training list either. On a side note, I'll be royally ****ed if CCP actually does anything about this before/instead of reigning in Angel ships or buffing hybrids...
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.25 21:32:00 - [89] Originally by: Seriously Bored On a side note, I'll be royally ****ed if CCP actually does anything about this before/instead of reigning in Angel ships or buffing hybrids... Definitely agree on that.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.10.25 22:31:00 - [90] Originally by: Seriously Bored On a side note, I'll be royally ***ed if CCP actually does anything about this before/instead of reigning in Angel ships or buffing hybrids... Then again, you have to appreciate the oh so sweet irony here. My money is on the instead* part, anyway, and I like that a lot.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.25 22:35:00 - [91] Originally by: Seriously Bored Since the explosion of these "OMG WTF NARF!" threads Chronitis hasn't commented in the original thread that he tossed this ball around, and there are no other threads/notes on the Test Server forum. What we really have is the Eve community proving, once again, that they can't be trusted to have a responsible "grown up" discussion. The guy says something, and it immediately gets taken out of context. He corrects that context and then threads like this start appearing. I'm frankly amazed that CCP even bothers to to try and communicate with people that always perceive everything as a nerf. "They're boosting rockets. They must not want Rifters in PVP anymore!" -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.26 00:58:00 - [92] Originally by: Liang Nuren "They're boosting rockets. They must not want Rifters in PVP anymore!"-Liang and who is to say that in 6 months time, people will be whining about rockets, saying "OMG WE DON'T SEE RIFTAHRS PEEVEEPEEING ANYMOAR! NARF ROCKETS!" I would be laughing my ass out when that starts to happen --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Solid Star	Posted - 2010.10.26 01:56:00 - [93] Edited by: Solid Star on 26/10/2010 01:58:34 Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 25/10/2010 08:48:02 Originally by: Solid Star What really made the Drake explode in popularity was the huge speed nerf CCP did where fast ships were moving at half the speed. No. Then we would have seen this two years ago. We didn't, mainly because the speed nerf coincided with the missile nerf, making the two come out at almost status quo in the end. We did see it 2 years ago. It started right after the great nano nerf with Tri when they were up north with their sidekick Atlas. This was during the first MAX campaign. Look up Tri stats 2 years ago and you will see the 'Drake Army' (some said Drake Navy) gangs they ran. And it was not just drakes that increased, it was all BCs and RR BSs in general.
Jacob Stov	Posted - 2010.10.26 02:50:00 - [94] I think the issue here ist the server load. They don't care about angel ships cause they don't f*ck up their servers. They "fix" fighterbombers because of the serverload. But in the end, the missile fix may be a good thing. Generic buff to missile speed would be nice. But the argument of "Drake doesn't have to compromise between tank and gank" is just a joke. With that argument we could nerf half the Amarr lineup. And guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work.
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.26 03:02:00 - [95] Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:37 Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:15 Originally by: Jacob Stov IAnd guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Because Amarr hitting out to 25km with Scorch is equal to Caldari hitting out to 84km with HML's Grammar edits.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 03:08:00 - [96] Originally by: Jacob Stov And guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Can you please show me the Harby fit that does 400 DPS at 80km with 80K+ EHP? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Trebor Whettam	Posted - 2010.10.26 03:59:00 - [97] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Jacob Stov And guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Can you please show me the Harby fit that does 400 DPS at 80km with 80K+ EHP? -Liang Be fair. It takes 15 seconds for that dps to get there, and some is likely to be wasted, unless the gang does some really slick and somewhat risky volley management. It would be significantly better coming from a turret ship.
Jacob Stov	Posted - 2010.10.26 04:18:00 - [98] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Jacob Stov And guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Can you please show me the Harby fit that does 400 DPS at 80km with 80K+ EHP? -Liang Apples and oranges. The Harby is one of the two ganky tier 2 bc's. Of course it can't compete in EHP. And missiles have always the DPS advantage at the edge of engagement envelope over their turret counterparts. If that is so great, then the CM Raven is the best sniper BS of eve.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.26 06:36:00 - [99] Originally by: Jacob Stov Apples and oranges. You mean that it's an easy and apt comparison? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Xina Tutor Amarr Black Arrows Sev3rance	Posted - 2010.10.26 08:54:00 - [100] I don't get it. Any character can train for any ship in the game. If you think x ship is 'better' then train it and fly it...
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 09:05:00 - [101] Originally by: Berendas Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:37 Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:15 Originally by: Jacob Stov IAnd guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Because Amarr hitting out to 25km with Scorch is equal to Caldari hitting out to 84km with HML's Grammar edits. Apoc with one TC = 75Km Scorch. Just saying. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 09:27:00 - [102] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Jacob Stov And guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Can you please show me the Harby fit that does 400 DPS at 80km with 80K+ EHP? -Liang Breaking news: the drake can do something that the other tier-2 BCs can't! OH NOES! CATS AND DOGS LIVING TOGETHER! RABBLE RABBLE! Show me the drake fit that can match a gank cane DPS at warp scram range. Show me the drake fit that can lurk at 0 on a gate and instapop frigates burning back to the gate. Show me the drake fit that can fit a full rack of top-tier close range guns and 2 neuts. Show me the drake fit that can go as fast as a vagacane. Show me the drake fit that can switch damage types without losing 20% of its DPS. Well lord o' mercy, it seems there are things the Hurricane can do that the drake cant! Show me the drake fit whose DPS isn't laughed off by our FIREWALL formation... Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 11:16:00 - [103] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Jacob Stov And guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Can you please show me the Harby fit that does 400 DPS at 80km with 80K+ EHP? -Liang Breaking news: the drake can do something that the other tier-2 BCs can't! OH NOES! CATS AND DOGS LIVING TOGETHER! RABBLE RABBLE! Show me the drake fit that can match a gank cane DPS at warp scram range. Show me the drake fit that can lurk at 0 on a gate and instapop frigates burning back to the gate. Show me the drake fit that can fit a full rack of top-tier close range guns and 2 neuts. Show me the drake fit that can go as fast as a vagacane. Show me the drake fit that can switch damage types without losing 20% of its DPS. Well lord o' mercy, it seems there are things the Hurricane can do that the drake cant! Show me the drake fit whose DPS isn't laughed off by our FIREWALL formation... Don't try to reason with him, he's abandoned logic and switched over to being completely butthurt with drakes.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.10.26 13:14:00 - [104] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Don't try to reason with him, he's abandoned logic and switched over to being completely butthurt with drakes. You dont understand, Caldari arent allowed to have a ship that is actually best in its class, thats reserved for Amarr/Minmatar only...
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 13:16:00 - [105] Originally by: Rastigan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Don't try to reason with him, he's abandoned logic and switched over to being completely butthurt with drakes. You dont understand, Caldari arent allowed to have a ship that is actually best in its class, thats reserved for Amarr/Minmatar only... It's about **ing time you noobs admitted the Drake was best in clase, TBQFH. -Liang -- Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 13:43:00 - [106] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Rastigan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Don't try to reason with him, he's abandoned logic and switched over to being completely butthurt with drakes. You dont understand, Caldari arent allowed to have a ship that is actually best in its class, thats reserved for Amarr/Minmatar only... It's about **ing time you noobs admitted the Drake was best in clase, TBQFH. -Liang I dont think anyone's ever denied that the Drake isn't the best fleet BC by a mile. The question is whether that necessarily means that it should be nerfed. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always** to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 13:55:00 - [107] Originally by: Malcanis I dont think anyone's ever denied that the Drake isn't the best fleet BC by a mile. The question is whether that necessarily means that it should be nerfed. Obviously you haven't been reading the same forums I have for the last 5 years. Don't you remember that the Drake is a PVE ship and anyone using it in PVP is a noob? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 14:17:00 - [108] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I dont think anyone's ever denied that the Drake isn't the best fleet BC by a mile. The question is whether that necessarily means that it should be nerfed. Obviously you haven't been reading the same forums I have for the last 5 years. Don't you remember that the Drake is a PVE ship and anyone using it in PVP is a noob? -Liang Indeed I do remember that, and I'm convinced that this is the root cause of the current e-rage about it. Apparently Drake Fleets are just fine when ~elite pro~ alliances used them, but a disgusting abomination when "noob blobber" alliances presume to do so. It's only OK to fly drakes if you're doing it ironically, it seems. But I also remember identical e-rage about sniper HACs, bombers, RR BS, and AHACs - and that's only since the last set of current mechanics were implemented. Remember when each of those made everything else obselete? God, I hope so, it's literally less than a month since people were seriously dismissing the possibility of any sub-cap counter to AHACs That's why I'd like to see a teeny bit more evidence than a few well-publicised engagements against overly entitled ship snobs who are furious that their "proper" PvP ships are getting owned by lolcaldari "PVE ships". So far as I can see, the Drake is doing very well exactly what it's supposed to do. Actually most caldari ships do very well at exactly what they're supposed to do. It's just that the drake is doing something useful. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Tusen Takk Guy Fawkes Trust Fund 31ST Reliables Division	Posted - 2010.10.26 14:20:00 - [109] i want proof that the drake is getting nerfed and then i want an explanation as to why its getting nerfed but the dramiel or the ashimmu or whatever isnt
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.26 14:24:00 - [110] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I dont think anyone's ever denied that the Drake isn't the best fleet BC by a mile. The question is whether that necessarily means that it should be nerfed. Obviously you haven't been reading the same forums I have for the last 5 years. Don't you remember that the Drake is a PVE ship and anyone using it in PVP is a noob? -Liang Indeed I do remember that, and I'm convinced that this is the root cause of the current e-rage about it. Apparently Drake Fleets are just fine when ~elite pro~ alliances used them, but a disgusting abomination when "noob blobber" alliances presume to do so. It's only OK to fly drakes if you're doing it ironically, it seems. But I also remember identical e-rage about sniper HACs, bombers, RR BS, and AHACs - and that's only since the last set of current mechanics were implemented. Remember when each of those made everything else obselete? God, I hope so, it's literally less than a month since people were seriously dismissing the possibility of any sub-cap counter to AHACs That's why I'd like to see a teeny bit more evidence than a few well-publicised engagements against overly entitled ship snobs who are furious that their "proper" PvP ships are getting owned by lolcaldari "PVE ships". So far as I can see, the Drake is doing very well exactly what it's supposed to do. Actually most caldari ships do very well at exactly what they're supposed to do. It's just that the drake is doing something useful. tbh changes or no, the only thing that will suck is CCP's sledge-nerf-hammer. that's all that worries me about drakes. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Indeterminacy THORN Syndicate Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.10.26 14:27:00 - [111] This whole drake nerf is such a joke. More lolCCP. Like EVE needs more minmatar OP ***gotry? Go Go the already well overpowered Hurricane and anyone who has done true PVP knows it (though they may not admit it publicly).
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops	Posted - 2010.10.26 14:46:00 - [112] Originally by: Tusen Takk i want proof that the drake is getting nerfed Good luck with that oneà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki
Tusen Takk Guy Fawkes Trust Fund 31ST Reliables Division	Posted - 2010.10.26 14:57:00 - [113] thats what i thought :)
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 16:43:00 - [114] Originally by: Malcanis Indeed I do remember that, and I'm convinced that this is the root cause of the current e-rage about it. I haven't been seeing this e-rage about Drakes. I'm seeing e-rage about the Drake "nerf". -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Bud Johnson Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.10.26 17:03:00 - [115] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis Indeed I do remember that, and I'm convinced that this is the root cause of the current e-rage about it. I haven't been seeing this e-rage about Drakes. I'm seeing e-rage about the Drake "nerf". -Liang They mad. This has been coming for years, find me another ship that doesn't have to choose between tank and gank. Also the posts claiming that the drake isn't OP and using comparisons to battleships to prove their point are pretty funny.
Gabriel Karade Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.10.26 17:22:00 - [116] Blasters. -------------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 17:32:00 - [117] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis Indeed I do remember that, and I'm convinced that this is the root cause of the current e-rage about it. I haven't been seeing this e-rage about Drakes. I'm seeing e-rage about the Drake "nerf". -Liang See post 115, for instance. Will he show us on the doll where the drake touched him, do you think? Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 17:40:00 - [118] Edited by: Malcanis on 26/10/2010 17:45:13 Originally by: Bud Johnson Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis Indeed I do remember that, and I'm convinced that this is the root cause of the current e-rage about it. I haven't been seeing this e-rage about Drakes. I'm seeing e-rage about the Drake "nerf". -Liang They mad. This has been coming for years, find me another ship that doesn't have to choose between tank and gank. Also the posts claiming that the drake isn't OP and using comparisons to battleships to prove their point are pretty funny. The choice has actually always been between tank, gank and tackle: pick two. if you want tank and tackle, go armour, if you want tank and gank go shield, if you want gank and tackle, go either. Ranged fleet ships dont have to worry about tackle, ergo shield tankers have an inherent advantage in this role. This is why CCP have always balanced ships on the basis that long range is a big advantage. Back in the mythical golden age of ~solo PvP~ (or smaller fleet PvP anyway), this meant LR shield tankers sucked, because people had to tackle. Which is where the "lolcaldari" thing started. For the PvP metagame as it was then, PvP = armour tanking. For the last year or two we've been in the age of shield tanking, and it's really only recently started to sink in. Shield and Armour tanking work exactly as they've always done, but the ~emergent~ change in the metagame has taken a while to work through. I remember all those threads back in the day when Caldari pilots were complaining that it was impossible to fit tank and tackle. And were were told "lol get someone to tackle for you nub". Well now people are tackling for Drakes, and look who's crying? People like you. EDIT: And wait till the Raven fleets start. Then this will get really funny. 600 DPS @ 200Km! I wonder who will be the first to start fielding XLR Raven fleets...? Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 17:59:00 - [119] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2010 18:02:24 Originally by: Malcanis EDIT: And wait till the Raven fleets start. Then this will get really funny. 600 DPS @ 200Km! I wonder who will be the first to start fielding XLR Raven fleets...? Burn Eden. And they work too. -Liang Ed: I 100% agree with Malcanis' post, even if I do contend the Drake is a wee bit overpowered. They better not sledge hammer it though. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 18:09:00 - [120] Edited by: Malcanis on 26/10/2010 18:13:05 Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2010 18:02:24 Originally by: Malcanis EDIT: And wait till the Raven fleets start. Then this will get really funny. 600 DPS @ 200Km! I wonder who will be the first to start fielding XLR Raven fleets...? Burn Eden. And they work too. -Liang Ed: I 100% agree with Malcanis' post, even if I do contend the Drake is a wee bit overpowered. They better not sledge hammer it though. If, for the sake of argument, the Drake is "overpowered" (whatever that means, exactly), then I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages: (1) It's a great logistics killer. BS and AHACs both suck at doing this. (2) It's an easily accessible fleet-viable ship for newer players. BS and AHACs both suck at doing this too. (3) It's the "paper" to the BS scissors and the AHAC rock. (4) It's one of the very few genuinely viable Caldari solo ships. EDIT: Burn Eden have made some good use of Cruise Ravens in the past, but they're not numerous enough to field what most people would call a "Fleet" Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 18:17:00 - [121] Originally by: Bud Johnson This has been coming for years, find me another ship that doesn't have to choose between tank and gank. Geddon with DCU, 1600mm, 2x EANM, 3x Heatsink in the lows. And it can tackle. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 18:21:00 - [122] Originally by: Malcanis I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages 1. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 2. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 3. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 4. Yes, I agree. Re Burn Eden: True. But, I think the proof of concept has certainly been proven. One thing I've been thinking about: People say that there shouldn't be game balance changes just because of lag. You guys know that's complete bull** right? -Liang -- Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 18:26:00 - [123] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages 1. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 2. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 3. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. Wait, are you saying the other battlecruisers all need a buff?
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 18:30:00 - [124] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages 1. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 2. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 3. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. Wait, are you saying the other battlecruisers all need a buff? I was trying saying that he should extend the argument to all battlecruisers if that's the argument he wants to make. Sorry if I was unclear. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 18:36:00 - [125] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: omgfreemoniez Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages 1. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 2. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 3. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. Wait, are you saying the other battlecruisers all need a buff? I was trying saying that he should extend the argument to all battlecruisers if that's the argument he wants to make. Sorry if I was unclear. -Liang Well as far as number 2 goes, I'd say the other battlecruisers are NOT accessible to new players for fleets. They need T2 guns with extreme (for a new player) training times to hit the range and damage a simple Drake can achieve with T1 HMLs.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:11:00 - [126] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages 1. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 2. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 3. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 4. Yes, I agree. Re Burn Eden: True. But, I think the proof of concept has certainly been proven. One thing I've been thinking about: People say that there shouldn't be game balance changes just because of lag. You guys know that's complete bull** right? -Liang Originally by:** Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis I'd say that the advantages of having it as-is in game significantly outweigh the disadvantages 1. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 2. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 3. It should be battlecruisers, not just Drakes. 4. Yes, I agree. Re Burn Eden: True. But, I think the proof of concept has certainly been proven. One thing I've been thinking about: People say that there shouldn't be game balance changes just because of lag. You guys know that's complete bull** right? -Liang Not all battlecruisers have to be good at something the drake does. But I think a Hurricane or a Myrmidon would both be perfectly good at killing Guardians in a low lag environment. Harb maybe not so much. As for low SP, that's a missiles vs gunnery argument really. As for being a viable solo PvP ship, jesus, all the tier 2 BCs can do this just fine. As for the rock/paper/scissors thing... maybe not so much. Again, I think this is a missile vs gunnery thing more than anything else. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always** to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:20:00 - [127] Originally by: Malcanis Not all battlecruisers have to be good at something the drake does Sure, and I agree. The problem is that "only viable fleet ship" is a really broad role, even if you neglect that it's quite possibly the best solo/small gang BC too. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:25:00 - [128] Drake is not THE ONLY VIABLE FLEET SHIP it is simply FOTM. Six months back I was seeing nothing but fleet ads like this: "Snipe HAC Gang, Bring A BC If You're Cheap, NO DRAKES!"
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:29:00 - [129] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Drake is not THE ONLY VIABLE FLEET SHIP it is simply FOTM. it's actually relative. it is the most viable fleet ship under 3mil SP, and I really don't mind that it stays that way. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:33:00 - [130] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Drake is not THE ONLY VIABLE FLEET SHIP it is simply FOTM. Six months back I was seeing nothing but fleet ads like this: "Snipe HAC Gang, Bring A BC If You're Cheap, NO DRAKES!" Currently snipe-HAC gangs are ~out~ As soon as server performance improves a little more, they'll be back ~in~ and you'll be perfectly correct. Drake fleets will once again be getting surprise-sexed by beam zealots, with nanobeamharbs and nanoartycanes tagging along no doubt. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:40:00 - [131] Originally by: Malcanis As soon as server performance improves a little more Amusingly, they might have to nerf Drakes to make that happen. And YES it's fair to nerf a ship or tactic because it's causing server lag problems. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:50:00 - [132] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Malcanis As soon as server performance improves a little more Amusingly, they might have to nerf Drakes to make that happen. And YES it's fair to nerf a ship or tactic because it's causing server lag problems. Is there actually any substantial evidence that Drakes lag the server significantly more than any other ship?
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:52:00 - [133] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Is there actually any substantial evidence that Drakes lag the server significantly more than any other ship? Well: - CCP says there is, and they're in a good position to say. - Players blob with Drakes and start seeing massive amounts of lag - Conceptually, missiles are another object (with tracking!!) that has to be tracked and updated So, yeah.. I'd say it's a really good bet that they cause lag when they blob up. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:52:00 - [134] I'm not sure that would necessarily be a nerf. The simple thing to do would be to calculate the damage delay as DELAY=DISTANCE/MISSILE VELOCITY, then T=DELAY frames later, calculate the damage instantaneously as if a turret were being used. Yes it's a quick-and-dirty solution that would lead to some odd corner-event effects like hits on ships that are out of advertised range when the damage hits, but when you're balancing around lag, you dont get to hold your nose at quick-and-dirty solutions. But there's nothing inherently nerfy in a solution like that. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 19:56:00 - [135] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2010 19:58:57 Originally by: Malcanis I'm not sure that would necessarily be a nerf. The simple thing to do would be to calculate the damage delay as DELAY=DISTANCE/MISSILE VELOCITY, then T=DELAY frames later, calculate the damage instantaneously as if a turret were being used. Yes it's a quick-and-dirty solution that would lead to some odd corner-event effects like hits on ships that are out of advertised range when the damage hits, but when you're balancing around lag, you dont get to hold your nose at quick-and-dirty solutions. But there's nothing inherently nerfy in a solution like that. Two things: - There are a lot of corner cases with that. - Why would you choose to do something "quick and dirty" when you can instead attack the problem in a more correct manner? -Liang Ed: BTW, I underlined the part that's just dead wrong. Attitudes like that will very quickly drive a game or project into the ground. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:06:00 - [136] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Berendas Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:37 Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:15 Originally by: Jacob Stov IAnd guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Because Amarr hitting out to 25km with Scorch is equal to Caldari hitting out to 84km with HML's Grammar edits. Apoc with one TC = 75Km Scorch. Just saying. So let me get this straight: A battleship that gets a range bonus still needs to fit an additional mod to get range thats still ~9km shorter than a Drake? That doesn't make a compelling argument for the Drake not having too great a range. Just saying.
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:10:00 - [137] How do these Drake gangs get around the whole missile flight time issue? Last time I checked that was a real killer for missile fleets.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:12:00 - [138] Originally by: omgfreemoniez How do these Drake gangs get around the whole missile flight time issue? Last time I checked that was a real killer for missile fleets. Well it's really simple. They lag the server so hard that you can't warp out. Also: delayed damage is only a real problem when you're the odd man out in a direct damage fleet. When everyone is using delayed damage it doesn't usually hurt you that much. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:16:00 - [139] Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 20:19:04 Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 20:18:29 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Bud Johnson This has been coming for years, find me another ship that doesn't have to choose between tank and gank. Geddon with DCU, 1600mm, 2x EANM, 3x Heatsink in the lows. And it can tackle. Have you ever fitted, much less flown a Geddon? 3 mid slots =/= tackler. Any plated/trimarked Geddon (ie all of them) will move only about 730 m/s with its MWD on. That is barely enough to tackle anything, including a lot of BS's. If you don't want to use a co-processor then you won't be able to fit something in the 8th high slot OR the third midslot, a web won't even fit (pro tackle amirite). That is also ignoring the fact that at ~730 m/s you will need to keep the MWD on for several cycles to catch anything, and on an Amarr ship that demands a cap booster which you don't have NEARLY enough CPU for. Don't get me wrong, I love the Geddon and it's a great ship but it is not a tackler in any sense and you clearly have 0 experience using it. Edit because I thought I double posted but didn't
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:17:00 - [140] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 20:19:04 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: omgfreemoniez How do these Drake gangs get around the whole missile flight time issue? Last time I checked that was a real killer for missile fleets. Well it's really simple. They lag the server so hard that you can't warp out. Also: delayed damage is only a real problem when you're the odd man out in a direct damage fleet. When everyone is using delayed damage it doesn't usually hurt you that much. -Liang Delayed damage is always an issue, you're just not as PERSONALLY (comparatively) gimped when everyone has delayed damage. And tbqh, your arguemnts about server instability don't hold water. I've had fleet fights in the last two weeks that were very stable with hundreds of ships on grid. And please don't feed us the bull**** line about drakes = lag. You're better than that.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:26:00 - [141] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Delayed damage is always an issue, you're just not as PERSONALLY (comparatively) gimped when everyone has delayed damage. Sure - I can buy that... it basically just offsets your damage graph a bit. The real questions always come from whether or not your target will warp out before your missiles get there - because once they do your DPS curve is really sexy. Quote: And tbqh, your arguemnts about server instability don't hold water. I've had fleet fights in the last two weeks that were very stable with hundreds of ships on grid. And please don't feed us the bull**** line about drakes = lag. You're better than that. I want to be clear here: I am not saying that Drakes = Lag. I'm pointing out that CCP says that the current implementation of missiles creates lag. I've had personal experience that certainly validates it, and I've seen lots of battle reports that would further validate it. But really, no player is in a position to speak authoritatively on what is causing server lag - not you and not me. But the Pros are saying something and I'm very inclined to listen to them on it. Furthermore, if Drake blobs are causing lag (or any other ship/module/tactic) then CCP has every right and responsibility to nerf/change it. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:40:00 - [142] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 20:41:38 Originally by: Liang Nuren Furthermore, if Drake blobs are causing lag (or any other ship/module/tactic) then CCP has every right and responsibility to fix the latency issue without unnecessarily nerfing a ship or module. -Liang FYP Frankly, if they nerf the drake to fix lag, that's the worst possible president to set. What's next? Drones launched from hundreds of ships at once definitely cause lag, remove them? I lag when my carrier goes into triage sometimes, nerf it? Not to be too alarmist, because I think they're more likely to just change/nerf an animation, but really... why gut a perfectly balanced ship in the name of sever stability? And if you ARE going to change the drake or heavy missiles... expect the character bazaar to be FLOODED with cadlari characters, because that essentially removes them from pvp.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 20:47:00 - [143] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk FYP I was hoping someone would bite on that - it's why I've brought the topic up repeatedly. I said exactly what I meant to say. You have no warranty or guarantee of being able to play a game a certain way or with a certain ship. I know that sounds harsh, but ultimately you're looking at a situation where CCP has identified a ship and/or tactic that's causing lag. They can choose to fix it "poorly" (ala Malcanis' idea) and introduce a ton of bugs/exploits, they can choose to fix it "right" (and thus **** up everyone's game for months), or they can simply discourage a tactic with a minor nerf. Really. Think about those options for a minute. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:04:00 - [144] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk FYP I was hoping someone would bite on that - it's why I've brought the topic up repeatedly. I said exactly what I meant to say. You have no warranty or guarantee of being able to play a game a certain way or with a certain ship. I know that sounds harsh, but ultimately you're looking at a situation where CCP has identified a ship and/or tactic that's causing lag. They can choose to fix it "poorly" (ala Malcanis' idea) and introduce a ton of bugs/exploits, they can choose to fix it "right" (and thus **** up everyone's game for months), or they can simply discourage a tactic with a minor nerf. Really. Think about those options for a minute. -Liang For someone who just droned on for days in this very thread about how they think drakes violate the laws of how they want to play, that's a pretty big load of... something. Think about that for a minute.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:07:00 - [145] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2010 21:10:21 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk For someone who just droned on for days in this very thread about how they think drakes violate the laws of how they want to play, that's a pretty big load of... something. Think about that for a minute. I take it the dose of logic was too much for your pea brain. -Liang Ed: I want to be clear here: IMO the Drake is generically overpowered - but it's really noticeable in the corner case that was pointed out. I certainly don't want the Drake to be smashed... and thankfully that's not what the Devs have suggested. They're suggesting a tweak. Which is fine. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:09:00 - [146] Edited by: omgfreemoniez on 26/10/2010 21:10:13 If I had my way CCP would remove all money from the development budget and focus entirely on server upgrades. EVE is at the most balanced it's ever been; nerfs and buffs and new features are simply not required at this time.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:11:00 - [147] Originally by: omgfreemoniez If I had my way CCP would remove all money from the development budget and focus entirely on server upgrades. EVE is at the most balanced it's ever been; nerfs and buffs and new features are simply not required at this time. Funny, CCP just released a dev blog stating why server upgrades are not the answer you're looking for. Yeah, multi core systems and such can help - and maybe even help a lot - but Eve players have shown repeatedly that they're ready, willing, and able to bring as many people as are necessary to crash a software system. The dev blog specifically called out that long term solutions to lag will be with game design changes. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
lil Ghork	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:12:00 - [148] Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Berendas Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:37 Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:15 Originally by: Jacob Stov IAnd guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Because Amarr hitting out to 25km with Scorch is equal to Caldari hitting out to 84km with HML's Grammar edits. Apoc with one TC = 75Km Scorch. Just saying. So let me get this straight: A battleship that gets a range bonus still needs to fit an additional mod to get range thats still ~9km shorter than a Drake? That doesn't make a compelling argument for the Drake not having too great a range. Just saying. Scorch is ammo for pulses, there's no way a ham drake which is the short range missile type has that kind of range, otherwise compare to tachs, and its a different story ^^
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:14:00 - [149] Originally by: lil Ghork Scorch is ammo for pulses, there's no way a ham drake which is the short range missile type has that kind of range, otherwise compare to tachs, and its a different story ^^ The appropriate comparison is for applied damage at range, regardless of which weapons platform it happens to come from. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:15:00 - [150] Originally by: Liang Nuren I take it the dose of logic was too much for your pea brain. -Liang Ed: I want to be clear here: IMO the Drake is generically overpowered - but it's really noticeable in the corner case that was pointed out. I certainly don't want the Drake to be smashed... and thankfully that's not what the Devs have suggested. They're suggesting a tweak. Which is fine. You're talking about logic and your own opinions in tandem again. It's really not healthy. Thankfully, the dev agreed that the drake was pretty balanced and his issue was with it affecting latency. I'm fine with a latency "tweak," but what you're suggesting is gutting the ship out of spite. Which is immature, pathetic, and certainly not logical given the caldari fleet lineup is in pretty sad shape at this juncture.
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:15:00 - [151] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: omgfreemoniez If I had my way CCP would remove all money from the development budget and focus entirely on server upgrades. EVE is at the most balanced it's ever been; nerfs and buffs and new features are simply not required at this time. Funny, CCP just released a dev blog stating why server upgrades are not the answer you're looking for. Yeah, multi core systems and such can help - and maybe even help a lot - but Eve players have shown repeatedly that they're ready, willing, and able to bring as many people as are necessary to crash a software system. The dev blog specifically called out that long term solutions to lag will be with game design changes. -Liang If it's gonna crash it's gonna crash then, Drakes or no Drakes. People will bring 1000 Drakes or 2000 BS, either will crash the server.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:19:00 - [152] Originally by: omgfreemoniez If it's gonna crash it's gonna crash then, Drakes or no Drakes. People will bring 1000 Drakes or 2000 BS, either will crash the server. CCP has the responsibility to do what they can to support server infrastructure and stability. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Amaha Masane Caldari Avalon Advanced Research and Development Eclectic Collective	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:19:00 - [153] Originally by: Liang Nuren I want to be clear here: I am not saying that Drakes = Lag. I'm pointing out that CCP says that the current implementation of missiles creates lag. I've had personal experience that certainly validates it, and I've seen lots of battle reports that would further validate it. But really, no player is in a position to speak authoritatively on what is causing server lag - not you and not me. But the Pros are saying something and I'm very inclined to listen to them on it. Furthermore, if Drake blobs are causing lag (or any other ship/module/tactic) then CCP has every right and responsibility to nerf/change it. -Liang I've been following this thread for a while and been reluctant to post in it since I don't use drakes, but I have seen a increase in use of them (I prefer EWAR). but this one made me want to chime in. I agree with Liang pretty much, they probably see more of the problem than we do, and it wouldn't be the first time CCP would broadly change a game mechanic to increase server performance (remember WTZ? or the Sledgehammer to drones that was bandwith and changes to drone skills?). In some of those cases I could see them tout that it was for balance purposes (particularly with drone changes) but I think most of us read between the lines and saw that server performance was an ulterior motive. What I don't agree with, and what I think majority of the rage I'm reading, is that it is CCP's RIGHT to nerf to fix the problem. If lag is their only concern, not balance, it's their job to fix it on THEIR end before they even CONSIDER changing something that affects how WE play. And by fix, I mean exhaust EVERY. SINGLE. OPTION. Upgrade hardware, pay for more bandwith, Hell; purchase a small tropical island and erect a nuclear plant and move the servers there. But we pay them to deal with that, Not to change our playstyle to make their job easier. Let's put it this way: if I prescribe a good Medicine for a disease, and suddenly half the population gets that disease, I don't tell them "Well, I can't keep up, so I'm gonna switch you guys to a medicine that's not as good, but I can get a hold of easier.". No, I find a way to find more for them, cause that what I'm paid to do. So like I said, I agree with you Liang except for that last part. because the last thing I wanna see develop is a blind acceptance that changing the decreasing the client experience solely to increase the server performance is something that we should expect and moreover be okay with. /Soapbox rant Dons Flameproof raincoat
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:20:00 - [154] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 21:23:44 Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: omgfreemoniez If it's gonna crash it's gonna crash then, Drakes or no Drakes. People will bring 1000 Drakes or 2000 BS, either will crash the server. CCP has the responsibility to do what they can to support server infrastructure and stability. -Liang They could free up more overall bandwidth by nerfing ravens to the ground. They could certainly free up more on grids by removing drones. While that affects more ships than a HML nerf (which just ****s caldari), it's all for server stability so it's ok right?
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:23:00 - [155] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You're talking about logic and your own opinions in tandem again. It's really not healthy. WTF? It's perfectly fine to state logic and opinion - and even to reinforce stated opinion with logic. Quote: but what you're suggesting is gutting the ship out of spite. Which is immature, pathetic, and certainly not logical given the caldari fleet lineup is in pretty sad shape at this juncture. And just what do you think I'm suggesting? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:27:00 - [156] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 21:32:59 Originally by: Liang Nuren And just what do you think I'm suggesting? -Liang You have made it quite clear. You want drakes nerfed to decrease their numbers in fleets in order to indirectly increase server stability. Which is probably the weakest argument you have made thus far. Drakes have weaknesses: A gaping EM hole, lack of manuverability, delayed and fairly mediocre damage, difficulty fitting into a fleet that isn't a homogenous drake/logi gang, and a massive signature radius. You've continued to harp on the strengths of the drake (namely: tank and reliable mid-range projection) without regard to their weakness, but rather than debate their strengths and weaknesses you devolved your arguments to include lag (necssarily caused by drakes, you said) and it's rapidly snowballing into fail.
Rahnim	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:32:00 - [157] Make missiles work less like an object and more like an animation on client side, and same with drones, making damage somehow the same, that should help alot.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 21:43:00 - [158] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 21:46:59 Originally by: CCP Chronotis 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. 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. And this is the primary reason your argument is bunk Liang. Now, literally speaking, i'm sure they'd be more than willing to nerf the drake for just that reason. Lord knows they've nerfed things for less (ie. damps). But, logically, per Chronitis' feedback, there's no reason to assume they would do so.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:13:00 - [159] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2010 22:15:09 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk And this is the primary reason your argument is bunk Liang. Now, literally speaking, i'm sure they'd be more than willing to nerf the drake for just that reason. Lord knows they've nerfed things for less (ie. damps). But, logically, per Chronitis' feedback, there's no reason to assume they would do so. Actually, it doesn't materially affect my argument since it's based on statements from dev blogs and previous dev posts. CCP has a responsibility to maintain the server and provide a fun game environment for us to play. What that quote tells us is how much effort they're willing to spend on the second solution (best effort, properly fixing missiles) and how much time they're willing to **** up everyone's game. And really - it's an admirable trait to want to fix good gameplay instead of removing it. But ultimately they may have to create different good gameplay in order to keep the game fun. -Liang Ed: I am not trying to say that CCP will nerf the Drake or HML expressly because they created lag. I'm saying it would be ok and correct if they did. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:30:00 - [160] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You have made it quite clear. You want drakes nerfed to decrease their numbers in fleets in order to indirectly increase server stability. No, I'm making the argument that it would be ok if CCP nerfed (preferably, changed) the Drake for that purpose. Quote: Drakes have weaknesses: A gaping EM hole, lack of manuverability, delayed and fairly mediocre damage, difficulty fitting into a fleet that isn't a homogenous drake/logi gang, and a massive signature radius. Comments: - Sorry, but resist bonused ships don't really have "gaping" resist holes. - The Drake nanos up pretty well, actually... and can afford to nano up because it doesn't have to fill its lows with TEs. ;-) - Delayed damage, yes. Mediocre, no. It's pretty damn good, especially for the range it can do it at. - Shield gangs, yeah... more rare than perhaps they should be. - MASSIVE sig radius... freaking huge. Myrm has this problem too. Quote: You've continued to harp on the strengths of the drake (namely: tank and reliable mid-range projection) without regard to their weakness, but rather than debate their strengths and weaknesses you devolved your arguments to include lag (necssarily caused by drakes, you said) and it's rapidly snowballing into fail. The lag argument is completely separate from the strengths vs weaknesses of the Drake. The problem here is that you're combining arguments I'm not trying to combine: 1. The Drake has fantastic EHP+Damage+Tackle. It is, hands down, the best brawling BC. 2. The Drake has fantastic EHP+Range+Damage. Also, the Drake's resist bonus dovetails nicely with Scim support. If you can afford the delayed damage, it's hands down the best ranged BC. 3. Resist bonuses are unquestionably more useful than active tanking bonuses. If it makes you happy, we can keep the lag posts to alternating posts. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Quendishir Caldari The Immortal Dawn	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:32:00 - [161] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: omgfreemoniez If it's gonna crash it's gonna crash then, Drakes or no Drakes. People will bring 1000 Drakes or 2000 BS, either will crash the server. CCP has the responsibility to do what they can to support server infrastructure and stability. -Liang CCP has no responsibilities, especially towards you as the consumer. Their own EULA acknowledges this fact. Blizzard Entertainment does the exact same thing. It is common practice to offer customer service and attempt to resolve disputes and server instances, and it's good market practice for maintaining a steady source of revenue. However, CCP could wait until you've paid for your next month of play and then one minute later cancel your account. They have no requirement to inform you of why they have done it.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:33:00 - [162] Originally by: Quendishir CCP has no responsibilities, especially towards you as the consumer. Their own EULA acknowledges this fact. Blizzard Entertainment does the exact same thing. It is common practice to offer customer service and attempt to resolve disputes and server instances, and it's good market practice for maintaining a steady source of revenue. However, CCP could wait until you've paid for your next month of play and then one minute later cancel your account. They have no requirement to inform you of why they have done it. Let's examine what I said: CCP has the responsibility to do what they can to support server infrastructure and stability. Where do you see "me" or "customer" in that? CCP has this responsibility because it's critical to their business. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Quendishir Caldari The Immortal Dawn	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:38:00 - [163] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Quendishir CCP has no responsibilities, especially towards you as the consumer. Their own EULA acknowledges this fact. Blizzard Entertainment does the exact same thing. It is common practice to offer customer service and attempt to resolve disputes and server instances, and it's good market practice for maintaining a steady source of revenue. However, CCP could wait until you've paid for your next month of play and then one minute later cancel your account. They have no requirement to inform you of why they have done it. Let's examine what I said: CCP has the responsibility to do what they can to support server infrastructure and stability. Where do you see "me" or "customer" in that? CCP has this responsibility because it's critical to their business. -Liang And let's look at what I said, in just the first sentence: "CCP has no responsibilities, especially towards you as the consumer." The only legal obligations they have is to protect your personally identifiable information, as well as your method of payment.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:47:00 - [164] Originally by: Quendishir [ And let's look at what I said, in just the first sentence: "CCP has no responsibilities, especially towards you as the consumer." The only legal obligations they have is to protect your personally identifiable information, as well as your method of payment. I would argue that any business (CCP included) has responsibilities to its stakeholders (generally, this is employees and stock holders). Notably its customers are not its stakeholders. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Grog Barrel	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:48:00 - [165] Node crashes should not be fixed by modifing the game play itself, not even as a last resort, in my opinion. It's not only a devolution for the game itself, having to make a ship less attractive in order to get some lag fixed (what is going to be next? or you really thought after doing this, there is no other ship/tool which will be used by those now using drakes, as a node crasher?), but it's also an indirect statment, which says "we couldnt handle this via our engineer's team nor any other of our teams, we failed". Are the coalitions wars really dictating everything of what should and should not be done by DEVs? Are those alliances within the coalitions so efficient at lobbying CCP? ps: am i gay?
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 22:59:00 - [166] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 23:03:06 Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 26/10/2010 23:02:17 Originally by: Liang Nuren Comments: - Sorry, but resist bonused ships don't really have "gaping" resist holes. - The Drake nanos up pretty well, actually... and can afford to nano up because it doesn't have to fill its lows with TEs. ;-) - Delayed damage, yes. Mediocre, no. It's pretty damn good, especially for the range it can do it at. - Shield gangs, yeah... more rare than perhaps they should be. - MASSIVE sig radius... freaking huge. Myrm has this problem too. Comments: -Sorry but without a photon amp or hardener (don't even try to claim this is default for spec) to close it, the resist gap is substantial and easily exploited by amarr and minmatar ships (conincidentally, the most popular non-drake ships in the game). -A drake with more than a single nano is giving up a lot of dps in most fleet fits. How many BCU's are you going to throw out? Do you want to calculate their dps based on 3 bcu's and then list their speed at what they could have with 3 nanos in the lows? -Given a turret ship shoots 2 volleys before a nearly max range missile lands.. i'd say that's fair. And yes, HML damage in a fleet fit is mediocre. -Thanks for conceding that. Shield gangs are nearly non-factors without drake fleets to consider. -You shield tanked myrm is a seperate (and important, I might add) issue with gallente and their own terrible issues (active tank bonuses are just terrible for fleet ships namely and hybrids are undesireable, but that is also a caldari issue, keep in mind). I assume you just felt the need to make another bullet point though (since your argument is borderline at best).
Quendishir Caldari The Immortal Dawn	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:00:00 - [167] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Quendishir [ And let's look at what I said, in just the first sentence: "CCP has no responsibilities, especially towards you as the consumer." The only legal obligations they have is to protect your personally identifiable information, as well as your method of payment. I would argue that any business (CCP included) has responsibilities to its stakeholders (generally, this is employees and stock holders). Notably its customers are not its stakeholders. -Liang These are referred to as "customer service" or "technical support", not "responsibilities". Your argument, while valid on it's face, is null on basis of fact.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:01:00 - [168] Originally by: Grog Barrel Node crashes should not be fixed by modifing the game play itself, not even as a last resort, in my opinion. A noble opinion, but not really grounded in reality. Quote: but it's also an indirect statment, which says "we couldnt handle this via our engineer's team nor any other of our teams, we failed". Sometimes the laws of physics just don't cooperate. That doesn't really fault their engineers. TBH, CCP has pushed Eve much further and harder than many many other distributed computing projects. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:04:00 - [169] Originally by: Quendishir Originally by: Liang Nuren I would argue that any business (CCP included) has responsibilities to its stakeholders (generally, this is employees and stock holders). Notably its customers are not its stakeholders. These are referred to as "customer service" or "technical support", not "responsibilities". Your argument, while valid on it's face, is null on basis of fact. Wait what? What the hell do customer service or technical support have to do with anything? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:13:00 - [170] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk -Sorry but without a photon amp or hardener (don't even try to claim this is default for spec) to close it, the resist gap is substantial and easily exploited by amarr and minmatar ships (conincidentally, the most popular non-drake ships in the game). The Drake does not have a gaping resist hole. Please see the Cyclone or Raven or something for gaping resist holes. Quote: -A drake with more than a single nano is giving up a lot of dps in most fleet fits. How many BCU's are you going to throw out? Do you want to calculate their dps based on 3 bcu's and then list their speed at what they could have with 3 nanos in the lows? You have a real talent for confusing the issue. Let's go back to my original statement, because I said exactly what I wanted to say: - The Drake nanos up pretty well, actually... and can afford to nano up because it doesn't have to fill its lows with TEs. ;-) Quote: -Given a turret ship shoots 2 volleys before a nearly max range missile lands.. i'd say that's fair. And yes, HML damage in a fleet fit is mediocre. Uh, so just how much DPS do you think other BCs do at 85km? Quote: -Thanks for conceding that. Shield gangs are nearly non-factors without drake fleets to consider. Even still, they are something to consider. Quote: -You shield tanked myrm is a seperate (and important, I might add) issue with gallente and their own terrible issues (active tank bonuses are just terrible for fleet ships namely and hybrids are undesireable, but that is also a caldari issue, keep in mind). I assume you just felt the need to make another bullet point though (since your argument is borderline at best). I was agreeing with you, and pointing out that it isn't a problem peculiar to the Drake. BTW, I was referring to armor tanked Myrms having a pretty enormous sig radius. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:28:00 - [171] 1. For a ship that gets a resist bonus, it is a massive hole. For a ship FAMOUS for it's buffer, it can be melted in seconds by an amarr bs. I call that a hole. You may continue to debate the efficacy of my descriptor, but there is a notable reason to use EM against a drake. 2. You have a real nack for making UNIVERSAL issues (homg, missile launchers don't need tracking enhancers!) to be drake issues. The drake doesn't 'nano' up with more than a single nano because it's fitting BCU's or it's doing sub-par dps even by it's own mediocre standards. With that nano it is still one of the slowest t2 bc's without being plated. 3. 85km? So now we're going to use the launcher-rigged variant for comparison? If you're engaging a drake fleet at 85k in another bc fleet, you're a ****ing idiot, end of story. If drakes engaged a bruitx fleet point-blank, the drakes would loose. You're creating a scenario whereby the enemy engages at the drake's MAXIMUM effect. Do drakes move so fast they can just bee-line out of range when an enemy jumps on top of them? No. Do they alpha targets like a hurricane gang at 50km? No. Do they project MEDIOCRE damage across a wide range that punishes other fotm ships? Yes. Note also: at 85km a standard bs fleet will melt the drakes into powder in seconds. Apoc hoooo! 4. What? 5. Ok...
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:41:00 - [172] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk 2. You have a real nack for making UNIVERSAL issues (homg, missile launchers don't need tracking enhancers!) to be drake issues. The drake doesn't 'nano' up with more than a single nano because it's fitting BCU's or it's doing sub-par dps even by it's own mediocre standards. With that nano it is still one of the slowest t2 bc's without being plated. Uhm. Right. Basically you're an idiot, got it. Quote: If you're engaging a drake fleet at 85k in another bc fleet, you're a **ing idiot, end of story. Exactly. Quote: If drakes engaged a bruitx fleet point-blank, the drakes would loose. No they wouldn't. Quote: Do they alpha targets like a hurricane gang at 50km? No. Yes. Quote: Do they project MEDIOCRE damage across a wide range that punishes other fotm ships? Yes. I underlined the part that's an outright lie. Quote: Note also: at 85km a standard bs fleet will melt the drakes into powder in seconds. Apoc hoooo! Just to be clear here: are you telling me that engaging Drakes requires battleships and/or capitals? -Liang -- Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:49:00 - [173] Originally by: Liang Nuren Uhm. Right. Basically you're an idiot, got it. AKA you concede the point, all launchers benefit from this. Thanks. Originally by: Liang Nuren Exactly. Thanks? Originally by: Liang Nuren No they wouldn't. Magic drakes that swap to HAMS when things get close, right? Originally by: Liang Nuren I underlined the part that's an outright lie. Sigh Originally by: Liang Nuren Just to be clear here: are you telling me that engaging Drakes requires battleships and/or capitals? At over 80km you'd be wise to bring a battleship fleet, but that's pretty ****ing obvious don't ya think? I guess every long-range mediocre-dps ship in the game is OP by your logic? Rokh... definitely OP. Eagle? Wow, amazing ship. Cerb? Just say in place for 30 more seconds..... I think you get the point. Don't act like a moron. Fleets engage at appropriate range for their ships. Drake range is not OP with the delay and want of burst damage that you'd otherwise have with a turret ship (inb4youcryaboutTE'sagain).
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:53:00 - [174] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk At over 80km you'd be wise to bring a battleship fleet, but that's pretty ****ing obvious don't ya think? Are you reshipping to BSs before or after you got slaughtered in these mobile bubbles?
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:55:00 - [175] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk At over 80km you'd be wise to bring a battleship fleet, but that's pretty ****ing obvious don't ya think? Are you reshipping to BSs before or after you got slaughtered in these mobile bubbles? Must suck to have no intel/scouts and fly blind with a fail fleet. I feel quite sorry for you. "Oh look drakes, everyone warp to 80km guys, we have to have something to cry about on the forums tonight!"
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.26 23:55:00 - [176] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 26/10/2010 23:56:59 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk AKA you concede the point, all launchers benefit from this. Thanks. Wait what the **** are you talking about man? IIRC this point was all about mobility, and the Drake does nano up well. Quote: Magic drakes that swap to HAMS when things get close, right? Well, two things: - You specified the Drakes engaging at close range. This definitely implies you're talking about brawling Drakes. - Even if a HML Drake fleet engaged the Brutixes, I'm highly skeptical that the Brutixes would even kill a third of the Drakes. It's too easy for the Drakes to pull range and just kill them all. Quote: At over 80km you'd be wise to bring a battleship fleet, but that's pretty **ing obvious don't ya think? And at close range too? Quote: mediocre-dps You need to stop this bull - the Drake most certainly does not have mediocre DPS. -Liang Ed: Formatting -- Eve Forum *** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:00:00 - [177] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:05:11 You specified hml range, we're talkin about hml drakes. Please stop pretending drakes carry 10 loadouts in their cargo hold. Your argument gets sadder by the post Liang. And yes, go take your beloved EFT and call up some battlecruiser fits. The drake with HMLs hits around half of what most other non-fail (ferox, prophecy) battlecruisers can achieve. Granted they gain range for this, BUT that's a tradeoff which is in tandem with delayed damage. You're trying to create a no-win situation for other ships by modifying the drake for every scenario. At close range a drake fleet with HMLs is not rolling anything and will be entirely dependant on logistics to grind out the win (which has a LOT to do with how great scimatars are at this role). I'm not sure if your premise is 'drakes can't loose' or if you're just arguing with the wind here, but you have apparently not been met with succsess when you fought them. I'm sorry that you are not a creative tactician or brilliant strategist that can think outside the box and overcome fotm. Like every other fotm befor it, drake fleets have weaknesses that are exploitable, but players like you would much rather cry than actually take advantage.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:00:00 - [178] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Omara Otawan Are you reshipping to BSs before or after you got slaughtered in these mobile bubbles? Must suck to have no intel/scouts and fly blind with a fail fleet. I feel quite sorry for you. You obviously do not pvp if you assume things always go as planned...
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:04:00 - [179] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Omara Otawan Are you reshipping to BSs before or after you got slaughtered in these mobile bubbles? Must suck to have no intel/scouts and fly blind with a fail fleet. I feel quite sorry for you. You obviously do not pvp if you assume things always go as planned... You obviously don't pvp if you assume things always go as planned for the enemy...
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:08:00 - [180] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You specified hml range, we're talkin about hml drakes. Ok, fine. The Brutixes still lose. Quote: The drake with HMLs hits around half of what most other non-fail (ferox, prophecy) battlecruisers can achieve. Granted they gain range for this, BUT that's a tradeoff which is in tandem with delayed damage. So just how much DPS do you think beam harbies do? I mean, granted they gain range for this but that's a trade off they make... Quote: You're trying to create a no-win situation for other ships by modifying the drake for every scenario. No, I'm not. Quote: but you have apparently not been met with succsess when you fought them. "I flew Drakes before they were popular". -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:16:00 - [181] Leksi, you need to stop posting. Liang's arguments are solid and you are just making yourself look like an even bigger idiot with each new post.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:34:00 - [182] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:45:51 Originally by: Berendas Leksi, you need to stop posting. Liang's arguments are solid and you are just making yourself look like an even bigger idiot with each new post. What are "things to post when I can't contribute to the conversation?" I'll take asshats for 800 Alex! @Liang: It's so pathetic to see you posting this trash. Ignoring delayed damage. Ignoring the fact dps numbers DROP any time the missiles are not kinetic. Ignoring the fact a pdu/dc is standard fitting (nano'd you get 1-0 bcu's.. ok). Proposing a HML fleet, then arguing about HAM damage. You're truly posting some of the most assanine **** i've ever seen you generate while sober. For you sake, I hope you can convince the community you were drunk for all of this.
Grog Barrel	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:37:00 - [183] Originally by: Berendas Leksi, you need to stop posting. Liang's arguments are solid and you are just making yourself look like an even bigger idiot with each new post. "here teacher, i brought an apple for you"
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:45:00 - [184] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Berendas Leksi, you need to stop posting. Liang's arguments are solid and you are just making yourself look like an even bigger idiot with each new post. What are "things to post when I can't contribute to the conversation?" I'll take asshats for 800 Alex! You're one to talk, almost all of your posts thus far are flaming people and referencing arguments that weren't made. P.S. I did post several times, at least read the thread that you are trying to troll.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:45:00 - [185] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 27/10/2010 00:53:20 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You obviously don't pvp if you assume things always go as planned for the enemy... Ironically, thats exactly what a good commander assumes... or rather, has to assume. Even if he doesnt grasp this pretty simple concept, an idiot should be able to see that ability to act if things dont go your way is better than just look dumb and die. To illustrate, take your example of the brutix fleet against drake fleet. The drakes might not succeed enforcing engagement range, but it doesnt matter a lot for them as they can just as well engage at close range. Now, have fun trolling.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:50:00 - [186] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:53:29 Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You obviously don't pvp if you assume things always go as planned for the enemy... Ironically, thats exactly what a good commander assumes... or rather, has to assume. Ironically, this means your commander assumes that things will go as planned... so are you just talking in circles or are you just another moron with nothing to contribute? ps. cup the balls when Liang asks for deepthroat. Berendas, that goes double for you.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:53:00 - [187] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Ironically, this means your commander assumes that things will go as planned... so are you just talking in circles or are you just another moron with nothing to contribute? ROFL, exactly how dumb are you?
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.27 00:58:00 - [188] Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Ironically, this means your commander assumes that things will go as planned... so are you just talking in circles or are you just another moron with nothing to contribute? ROFL, exactly how dumb are you? He's really really dumb.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 01:00:00 - [189] Just doin' mah job ma'am. Calling morons on their bull****. You can thank me with donations if ya like.
Naomi Knight Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.27 08:25:00 - [190] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:50:20 Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:45:51 Originally by: Berendas Leksi, you need to stop posting. Liang's arguments are solid and you are just making yourself look like an even bigger idiot with each new post. What are "things to post when I can't contribute to the conversation?" I'll take asshats for 800 Alex! @Liang: It's so pathetic to see you posting this trash. Ignoring delayed damage. Ignoring the fact dps numbers DROP any time the missiles are not kinetic. Ignoring the fact a pdu/dc is standard fitting (nano'd you get 1-0 bcu's.. ok). Proposing a HML fleet, then arguing about HAM damage. You're truly posting some of the most assanine **** i've ever seen you generate while sober. For you sake, I hope you can convince the community you were drunk for all of this. PS. A beam harby projects more dps (almost 100 more) out to 65km. Instant, turret, damage. Nerf harbs? Oh noes I had to fit a TC, ohmgawd. +1 all the matar hate drake gets now omg 1 ship can outdo matar ships in its intended role lets go nerf it :)
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.27 09:13:00 - [191] Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Berendas Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:37 Edited by: Berendas on 26/10/2010 03:04:15 Originally by: Jacob Stov IAnd guess what, they have good damage projection, too. That is just the way Caldari and Amarr work. Because Amarr hitting out to 25km with Scorch is equal to Caldari hitting out to 84km with HML's Grammar edits. Apoc with one TC = 75Km Scorch. Just saying. So let me get this straight: A battleship that gets a range bonus still needs to fit an additional mod to get range thats still ~9km shorter than a Drake? That doesn't make a compelling argument for the Drake not having too great a range. Just saying. Jesus christ you're dumb. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.27 09:18:00 - [192] Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Ironically, this means your commander assumes that things will go as planned... so are you just talking in circles or are you just another moron with nothing to contribute? ROFL, exactly how dumb are you? He's really really dumb. Much like that guy who whined that the long range weapon of a race devoted to long range combat has the same effective range as the short range weapon of a race that isn't. Wait, that's you. You dont get to call anyone dumb because you are literally the dumbest. And to answer the question above, yes I have used a geddon rather frequently tyvm. In fact it's my favourite battleship. As such I know very well that it can sport both a reasonable tank (ie: more EHP than the drake) and still do very good DPS indeed. Thus it can "tank and gank". If that's not enough for you, the Abaddon can do both even better. As for whining that the geddon isn't as fast as the drake... I dont know what to say to someone who thinks that the fact a battleship is slower than a battlecruiser makes the battlecruiser overpowered. Wait, yes I do: uninstall EVE. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Templar Dane Amarrian Retribution	Posted - 2010.10.27 09:37:00 - [193] Originally by: Malcanis Much like that guy who whined that the long range weapon of a race devoted to long range combat has the same effective range as the short range weapon of a race that isn't. Wait, that's you. You dont get to call anyone dumb because you are literally the dumbest. And to answer the question above, yes I have used a geddon rather frequently tyvm. In fact it's my favourite battleship. As such I know very well that it can sport both a reasonable tank (ie: more EHP than the drake) and still do very good DPS indeed. Thus it can "tank and gank". If that's not enough for you, the Abaddon can do both even better. As for whining that the geddon isn't as fast as the drake... I dont know what to say to someone who thinks that the fact a battleship is slower than a battlecruiser makes the battlecruiser overpowered. Wait, yes I do: uninstall EVE. How DARE a battleship have more dps/ehp than a battlecruiser!
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2010.10.27 17:53:00 - [194] Edited by: Skex Relbore on 27/10/2010 17:55:35 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:53:29 Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You obviously don't pvp if you assume things always go as planned for the enemy... Ironically, thats exactly what a good commander assumes... or rather, has to assume. Ironically, this means your commander assumes that things will go as planned... so are you just talking in circles or are you just another moron with nothing to contribute? ps. cup the balls when Liang asks for deepthroat. Berendas, that goes double for you. A competent commander always assumes that the enemies plan will go off perfectly and his own is the one that will jack up. I'm not going to take a position on whether the drake needs a nerf or what form any nerf should be in but. You people need to get your heads out of your backsides here. In a game system when the use of one particular build/class/item becomes overly pronounced that is an indication of a game imbalance. You can argue til your blue in the face but the fact remains that balance is reflected in use. The cause of the imbalance may not be directly related to that particular item but it is still an imbalance. The easiest and generally most appropriate way to address such imbalances is with a liberal application of the Nerf bat. Why you ask? 1, it's easier and generally less likely to lead to unintended consequences. 2, it's easier to reverse or adjust then to address multiple factors. 3, Boosting rather than Nerfing leads to power inflation with a situation where the FOTM just moves on to what ever the latest thing to get boosted. Performance is relative. If everything sucks equally then you have balance and no one notices. Ideally a game should have a relatively flat distribution in builds/classes/items so that multiple play styles are viable. Game mechanics dictate the meta-game, as such it is perfectly valid to use game mechanics to address imbalances in the meta-game. Further if a particular play style is causing performance issues with the overall product the developers certainly are with in their rights and responsibility to tweak the mechanics in such a way as to discourage said play style. In the end a game developer has the right to do what ever the hell they want with their product. If you don't like that well the cancel button is over there. <=====
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 18:05:00 - [195] Thiny veiled drake rant is thiny veiled. You could honestly have got that rant off with fewer words aswell. Hope you feel better now though. If not, you seem to know where the cancel sub button is located...
Grog Barrel	Posted - 2010.10.27 18:27:00 - [196] Edited by: Grog Barrel on 27/10/2010 18:29:54 Originally by: Skex Relbore Edited by: Skex Relbore on 27/10/2010 17:55:35 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 27/10/2010 00:53:29 Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk You obviously don't pvp if you assume things always go as planned for the enemy... Ironically, thats exactly what a good commander assumes... or rather, has to assume. Ironically, this means your commander assumes that things will go as planned... so are you just talking in circles or are you just another person with nothing to contribute? Trolling removed. Zymurgist A competent commander always assumes that the enemies plan will go off perfectly and his own is the one that will jack up. I'm not going to take a position on whether the drake needs a nerf or what form any nerf should be in but. You people need to get your heads out of your backsides here. In a game system when the use of one particular build/class/item becomes overly pronounced that is an indication of a game imbalance. You can argue til your blue in the face but the fact remains that balance is reflected in use. The cause of the imbalance may not be directly related to that particular item but it is still an imbalance. The easiest and generally most appropriate way to address such imbalances is with a liberal application of the Nerf bat. Why you ask? 1, it's easier and generally less likely to lead to unintended consequences. 2, it's easier to reverse or adjust then to address multiple factors. 3, Boosting rather than Nerfing leads to power inflation with a situation where the FOTM just moves on to what ever the latest thing to get boosted. Performance is relative. If everything sucks equally then you have balance and no one notices. Ideally a game should have a relatively flat distribution in builds/classes/items so that multiple play styles are viable. Game mechanics dictate the meta-game, as such it is perfectly valid to use game mechanics to address imbalances in the meta-game. Further if a particular play style is causing performance issues with the overall product the developers certainly are with in their rights and responsibility to tweak the mechanics in such a way as to discourage said play style. In the end a game developer has the right to do what ever the hell they want with their product. If you don't like that well the cancel button is over there. <===== you most likely refering to the managers intead of the devs when talking about rights. Also, because once the drakes are taken out of business due to being used as node crashers, there is nothing else left for meta gamers to keep crashing said nodes right? Talking is easy when you dont project the possible results in a near future. Also supporting an idea, as it was the cure to all diseases (which reminds me about the legendary coke story), isnt making you better, nor those, who are responsable for these kind of decisions.
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:08:00 - [197] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Thiny veiled drake rant is thiny veiled. You could honestly have got that rant off with fewer words aswell. Hope you feel better now though. If not, you seem to know where the cancel sub button is located... I don't care one way or the other about the Drake. I'm trained to fly it now (though I don't have T2 launchers yet). My point is that Nerfing is generally a perfectly acceptable and frankly generally less troublesome method of dealing with imbalances. The alternative of "buff the weaker thing" just leads to mudflation.
Kara Jorin	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:14:00 - [198] http://sleeplessinspace.blogspot.com/2010/10/nerf-drake-rawr-wait-what.html Interesting take...
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:15:00 - [199] Originally by: Skex Relbore Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Thiny veiled drake rant is thiny veiled. You could honestly have got that rant off with fewer words aswell. Hope you feel better now though. If not, you seem to know where the cancel sub button is located... I don't care one way or the other about the Drake. I'm trained to fly it now (though I don't have T2 launchers yet). My point is that Nerfing is generally a perfectly acceptable and frankly generally less troublesome method of dealing with imbalances. The alternative of "buff the weaker thing" just leads to mudflation. Nerfing has its place, but so does buffing. It helps to have a vision for how you want the game to evolve. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:22:00 - [200] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Skex Relbore Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Thiny veiled drake rant is thiny veiled. You could honestly have got that rant off with fewer words aswell. Hope you feel better now though. If not, you seem to know where the cancel sub button is located... I don't care one way or the other about the Drake. I'm trained to fly it now (though I don't have T2 launchers yet). My point is that Nerfing is generally a perfectly acceptable and frankly generally less troublesome method of dealing with imbalances. The alternative of "buff the weaker thing" just leads to mudflation. Nerfing has its place, but so does buffing. It helps to have a vision for how you want the game to evolve. -Liang Oh I agree it's just that so many people get on the whole "You should never nerf anything" bandwagon that they need to be knocked off occasionally. In general if one thing is fail and everything else ok then that thing could probably use a buff. But if one things happens to just be head and shoulders above the alternatives. Well time to break out the nerf bat.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:23:00 - [201] Originally by: Kara Jorin http://sleeplessinspace.blogspot.com/2010/10/nerf-drake-rawr-wait-what.html Interesting take... It's an interesting take, I agree. I don't agree with its conclusion though. The Myrm was just a terrible choice of ship for making this comparison. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:28:00 - [202] The Drake has been neither nerfed nor buffed for years. The last event that even AFFECTED the Drake was sized rigs, and that was a year ago. So how come the Drake has only recently become overpowered?
Lenda Roush	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:28:00 - [203] Edited by: Lenda Roush on 27/10/2010 19:31:16 Originally by: Skex Relbore The alternative of "buff the weaker thing" just leads to mudflation. Agree with this, seen it in WoW, don't want to see it in EVE! Edit: please don't hate the WoW noobie.
Skex Relbore Gallente Red Federation	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:34:00 - [204] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Kara Jorin http://sleeplessinspace.blogspot.com/2010/10/nerf-drake-rawr-wait-what.html Interesting take... It's an interesting take, I agree. I don't agree with its conclusion though. The Myrm was just a terrible choice of ship for making this comparison. -Liang I pretty much stopped reading it when I saw the fits he was comparing. I'd never fly either of those ships with the setups he was using (least not in PVP).
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.27 19:43:00 - [205] Originally by: omgfreemoniez So how come the Drake has only recently become overpowered? It always was, it's just that PVP 'pros' refused to open their eyes and look. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Zyress	Posted - 2010.10.27 20:23:00 - [206] All you whiners begging for a Drake nerf, we have one best in class T1 ship and you can't stand it. I tell you what, give us the best frigates and cruisers and HACs and the Hurricane can be the best BC, or give us the best Battleships and Recons and the the Harbinger can be the best. I can see where the Gallente could use a little luv but the Minnies and Amarr have no room for complaint.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.27 20:24:00 - [207] Originally by: Zyress All you whiners begging for a Drake nerf, we have one best in class T1 ship and you can't stand it. I tell you what, give us the best frigates and cruisers and HACs and the Hurricane can be the best BC, or give us the best Battleships and Recons and the the Harbinger can be the best. I can see where the Gallente could use a little luv but the Minnies and Amarr have no room for complaint. Hey, what do you call someone that has pretty near max skills in all the races? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.27 20:48:00 - [208] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Zyress All you whiners begging for a Drake nerf, we have one best in class T1 ship and you can't stand it. I tell you what, give us the best frigates and cruisers and HACs and the Hurricane can be the best BC, or give us the best Battleships and Recons and the the Harbinger can be the best. I can see where the Gallente could use a little luv but the Minnies and Amarr have no room for complaint. Hey, what do you call someone that has pretty near max skills in all the races? -Liang Someone who is more interested in making other peoples ships weak than their own ships strong. Still completely biased.
Zyress	Posted - 2010.10.27 21:06:00 - [209] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Zyress All you whiners begging for a Drake nerf, we have one best in class T1 ship and you can't stand it. I tell you what, give us the best frigates and cruisers and HACs and the Hurricane can be the best BC, or give us the best Battleships and Recons and the the Harbinger can be the best. I can see where the Gallente could use a little luv but the Minnies and Amarr have no room for complaint. Hey, what do you call someone that has pretty near max skills in all the races? -Liang Very old
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.27 21:07:00 - [210] Originally by: omgfreemoniez Someone who is more interested in making other peoples ships weak than their own ships strong. Still completely biased. That's...what, no. Use that grey matter up top. If someone has skill for all four race's ships, there's no such thing as "their ships" and "other people's ships." All ships are included in both categories.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.27 21:11:00 - [211] Bitter vets are bitter? In my eve?
Ran Khanon Amarr Swords Horses and Heavy Metal	Posted - 2010.10.27 21:31:00 - [212] Not sure about pvp imbalance at all, but it should be slightly nerfed for pve reasons perhaps. As a frigging drake seems to be the answer to almost everything the game itself throws against players and is definitely over-represented throughout Carebearity. Especially in class 1-3 W-space. Poor/cheap man's tengu. Also it looks like crap to be honest. Now the Ferox .... THAT is a kick ass looking ship. Please buff all tier one BC's as they are almost abandoned by the player base ^_^ Recruiting!
Niclas Solo Amarr Love n Peace Snatch Victory	Posted - 2010.10.28 00:01:00 - [213] Liang and leksi should get a room :P hmm i even started to think you guys are alts :) At the moment the problem with the drake is that most ppl suck at this game and only fly what they heard is good, Or they are in blob sec and like the sheeps they are they bring what the FC heard is good. If their is a problem with missiles causing lag then something must be done about that, make missiles direct dmg just like turrets so the server doesn't have to track them or something. But nerfing the drake is just the easy and wrong way to go, Caldari need a ship to pvp in. But i guess it's cheaper and easier to nerf the drake then to fix the servers or fix the reason why ppl can't afford to fly anything bigger since the SC.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 00:28:00 - [214] Originally by: Niclas Solo Caldari need a ship to pvp I just want to point out that the Drake is not the only PVP ship for Caldari pilots. I also want to point out that there's nothing that says they would stop the Drake from being a good PVP ship. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Niclas Solo Amarr Love n Peace Snatch Victory	Posted - 2010.10.28 00:51:00 - [215] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Niclas Solo Caldari need a ship to pvp I just want to point out that the Drake is not the only PVP ship for Caldari pilots. I also want to point out that there's nothing that says they would stop the Drake from being a good PVP ship. -Liang What other T1 ships do they have? BB? I don't fly Caldari myself, I can but i have never done that so im not trying to defend it because It's something i fly. Drake is a great ship noobs can get in it fast and do L2-L4 missions and low level WH in it and it's very cheap so they can learn to pvp in it also. Drake is OP because CCP removed every other ship in low/blob sec when they gave us SC and since not everyone can afford a SC they fly a drake instead and that mess up the servers. It's a great BC but it's not so good so it need to be nerfed and it sure as hell shouldn't be nerfed because CCP messed up the balance in some other shipclass. "I also want to point out that there's nothing that says they would stop the Drake from being a good PVP ship." If it cause server problem they wouldn't make some minor changes to it they would make sure we don't fly it again. if it was just some minot changes why would they even post here about it?
Kail Storm Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.28 01:08:00 - [216] All they have to do is to make Tier 1 BC`s "Sniper Boats" by making them have huge Bonus to the T2 Long Range Ammo IE Tremor, Aurora, SPike etc but not giving them broad DMG Bonuses. This would make the Tier 1`s have a huge place in Combat since they would out DPS Tier 2`s and command ships at range but the Tier 2`s would kill them upclose. -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 01:12:00 - [217] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Niclas Solo Caldari need a ship to pvp I just want to point out that the Drake is not the only PVP ship for Caldari pilots. I also want to point out that there's nothing that says they would stop the Drake from being a good PVP ship. -Liang What are those other ships, pray tell?
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 01:32:00 - [218] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Niclas Solo Caldari need a ship to pvp I just want to point out that the Drake is not the only PVP ship for Caldari pilots. I also want to point out that there's nothing that says they would stop the Drake from being a good PVP ship. -Liang What are those other ships, pray tell? Kestrel Blackbird Moa (underrated tbh) Drake Scorpion Rokh Crow Onyx Falcon Rook Basilisk
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 01:42:00 - [219] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 28/10/2010 01:45:26 Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 28/10/2010 01:44:27 Originally by: Berendas Kestrel Blackbird Moa (underrated tbh) Scorpion Rokh That's your list of t1 ships. Ofc, the argument necessitates you remove the drake (obviously) so that leaves us with: Kessie- Joke frigate, please don't make me laugh. Moa- Not underrated. Bloated sig, slow, terrible grid, and laughable compared to a rupture. Hell, even a thorax is better. Omen might give this a loss. Rokh- Hands down the worst battleship in the game. You have obviously never flown this piece of ****. Blackbird/Scorp- Good ships, too bad they're pure support, but I guess it's ok for caldari to be the ewar race right? Even thought its NOT OK that they have better ewar? Thats a sad joke. And you t2 ships? More crap, and more ewar. Mmm a pattern begins to emerge.
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 04:15:00 - [220] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Rokh- Hands down the worst battleship in the game. You have obviously never flown this piece of ****. Let's pretend you had some credibility before (lol). You lost all of it and then some with this statement.
Mr Moris	Posted - 2010.10.28 04:24:00 - [221] Ontopic: Drake is OP because everyone uses it. There is no other argument needed. It's sooo easy to counter. It's soooo easy to kill, but everyone uses it so it needs to be changed. I dont want to fly in drakeland. Offtopic for ignoramuses: [Rokh, I'm a SuperBad Ship] Damage Control II Power Diagnostic System II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II X-Large Shield Booster II Shield Boost Amplifier II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800 Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800 Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Neutron Blaster Cannon II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge L Large Ancillary Current Router I Large Core Defence Operational Solidifier I Large Core Defence Operational Solidifier I Hammerhead II x5 Yeah, that ship sux... who wants to have a 1k tank doing 1k dps. [Moa, BadHunkoJunk] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Damage Control II 10MN Afterburner II Warp Disruptor II Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M Small Energy Neutralizer II Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Warrior II x3 Again, what a crappy ship. Crapdari have plenty of options. No ones fault but your own you can't fit a ship
Naomi Knight Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.28 09:34:00 - [222] Originally by: Mr Moris **ty fits omg realy?? those 2 fits you call useable? a blaster bs withouth tackler ,web and mwd with 2 cap boosters , still needs a pg rig and a pg module -->huge fail btw any other solo bs would kill this , its 50m3 drones coulndnt do anything vs smaller targets than bc-->1 ceptor would kill it after it spent his cap charges the moa is a slow **ty ship, it doesnt matter how you fit it with blasters it would be still too slow and cap dependant I bet that fit isnt cap stable without running ab , oh and 2 pg rigs this time what a huge fail the only caldari ships are up to matar or amarr ships are: drake rook onyx (kinda) but broadsword is still better blackbird (support) hmm and thats all , if ccp remove the drake because of QQ, that only leaves the rook as the last dmg dealer useable caldari ship if you want to whine about balance start with fixing blasters/rails, and a nerf for angel ships+make matar ships have much less tank,
Nazriel Caldari Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.10.28 10:06:00 - [223] Originally by: Naomi Knight Originally by: Mr Moris **ty fits a blaster bs withouth tackler ,web and mwd with 2 cap boosters , still needs a pg rig and a pg module -->huge fail btw any other solo bs would kill this , its 50m3 drones coulndnt do anything vs smaller targets than bc-->1 ceptor would kill it after it spent his cap charges the moa is a slow ty ship, it doesnt matter how you fit it with blasters it would be still too slow and cap dependant I bet that fit isnt cap stable without running ab , oh and 2 pg rigs this time what a huge fail Indeed, both fits are slow as hell, with no means of reaching their target to apply that awesome neutron blaster DPS he spent rig slots to fit. Originally by:** Naomi Knight the only caldari ships are up to matar or amarr ships are: drake rook onyx (kinda) but broadsword is still better blackbird (support) You missed Tengu. And, to a lesser degree, Vulture. Still, someone needs to bring those Siege Warfare links, and Vulture is easier to fit those than Tengu without crippling itself. @OP: I'm pretty sure you youself realize, that Minmatar have more versatile ships, so the answer is obvious.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.28 10:14:00 - [224] Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Rokh- Hands down the worst battleship in the game. You have obviously never flown this piece of **. Let's pretend you had some credibility before (lol). You lost all of it and then some with this statement. The Rokh was a decent fleet BS back when anyone cared about Sniper BS. Now no-one cares about sniper BS, and they haven't for over a year... and the few BS fleets that do get deployed are armour tanked. I dont think I've seen a Rokh since I was fighting IRC last summer. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always** to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 10:29:00 - [225] Edited by: Limvala Adur on 28/10/2010 10:32:14 Have to agree with the other folks here. Caldari really are crap for any form of PvP. And since this is an empty statement if it stays like that. Let me tell you exactly why, providing something no one so far has. The "new player" feel. I have trained nothing but Caldari combat ships for the sole intent of using them to PvP and at the same time being able to provide me with the skills I need to make a few ISK once in a while via ratting. I have lived and continue to live only in nullsec so CTA/gangs/camps are somethings I'm used to. I have trained ECM in order to be "needed" in small/medium sized gangs/fleet with low SP (9m) and not a lot of ISK. However, here is the main difference between ECM and the other EWAR types. ECM, as people have told me, has been nerfed almost to the ground, it is currently the only dice based mechanic in the game, I don't see any of that being true for the other races and their EWAR. But let's say that is because ECM is so strong and game breaking, but even that isn't the case. ECM is needed less and less in fleets and it rarely even taken, simply because the ships that carry it provide easy kills for the enemy if by any chance they fail (which happens and no, I don't have crappy skills, all 4s / 5s here). Really, all t1 ECM ships (so far I have experience with them only) are: A) Slow as hell (I really don't know why this is the case) B) Made of glass. (Really now, the Curse is able to tank a hell of a lot damage, while putting it's EWAR where it counts 100% of the time and still sporting good agility) C) Don't pack a punch - Not meant for it? Well, they fail at everything else a fleet ship needs to do, why not at least make them glass cannons instead of .. you know ... glass sculptures. What really, REALLY puzzles me is this: If Caldari are the shield race and the ONLY advantage a shield tanked ship has over everything in the world that armor tanks is the fact that it doesn't slow the ship down. But here is the tricky part, why the hell are Caldari ships made NATURALLY slow/bulky/lacking agility? It's like giving them something with the shield tank and then removing it with the natural bulkiness of the ships. Also, since the Scorpion was mentioned a lot of times now, here are my cents about it, since I fly that ship almost every day. I take it's meant to be a technological marvel, a ship packed full of electronics/sensors and such, not a brawler. Then why the hell does it have such slow locking speed? Really, makes NO sense, what so ever. Also, the ECM rigs, the ones which are made for Caldari ships ONLY to use, because only Caldari ships have bonuses to ECM, give penalty to the SHIELDS? Are you folks nuts? The race has nothing but shield tank ships and their main and only useful feature at the moment is the ECM and yet the rigs for it penalize the ships tank. This results in the scorpion, which is by far the most fragile BS in the game, to sacrifice lows that need to be fitted with more ECM boosting modules in order to fit an armor tank, which makes the SLOW AS HELL SHIP even SLOWER..... Lim
Naomi Knight Amarr	Posted - 2010.10.28 10:38:00 - [226] Originally by: Limvala Adur Edited by: Limvala Adur on 28/10/2010 10:32:14 Have to agree with the other folks here. Caldari really are crap for any form of PvP. And since this is an empty statement if it stays like that. Let me tell you exactly why, providing something no one so far has. The "new player" feel. I have trained nothing but Caldari combat ships for the sole intent of using them to PvP and at the same time being able to provide me with the skills I need to make a few ISK once in a while via ratting. I have lived and continue to live only in nullsec so CTA/gangs/camps are somethings I'm used to. I have trained ECM in order to be "needed" in small/medium sized gangs/fleet with low SP (9m) and not a lot of ISK. However, here is the main difference between ECM and the other EWAR types. ECM, as people have told me, has been nerfed almost to the ground, it is currently the only dice based mechanic in the game, I don't see any of that being true for the other races and their EWAR. But let's say that is because ECM is so strong and game breaking, but even that isn't the case. ECM is needed less and less in fleets and it rarely even taken, simply because the ships that carry it provide easy kills for the enemy if by any chance they fail (which happens and no, I don't have crappy skills, all 4s / 5s here). Really, all t1 ECM ships (so far I have experience with them only) are: A) Slow as hell (I really don't know why this is the case) B) Made of glass. (Really now, the Curse is able to tank a hell of a lot damage, while putting it's EWAR where it counts 100% of the time and still sporting good agility) C) Don't pack a punch - Not meant for it? Well, they fail at everything else a fleet ship needs to do, why not at least make them glass cannons instead of .. you know ... glass sculptures. What really, REALLY puzzles me is this: If Caldari are the shield race and the ONLY advantage a shield tanked ship has over everything in the world that armor tanks is the fact that it doesn't slow the ship down. But here is the tricky part, why the hell are Caldari ships made NATURALLY slow/bulky/lacking agility? It's like giving them something with the shield tank and then removing it with the natural bulkiness of the ships. Also, since the Scorpion was mentioned a lot of times now, here are my cents about it, since I fly that ship almost every day. I take it's meant to be a technological marvel, a ship packed full of electronics/sensors and such, not a brawler. Then why the hell does it have such slow locking speed? Really, makes NO sense, what so ever. Also, the ECM rigs, the ones which are made for Caldari ships ONLY to use, because only Caldari ships have bonuses to ECM, give penalty to the SHIELDS? Are you folks nuts? The race has nothing but shield tank ships and their main and only useful feature at the moment is the ECM and yet the rigs for it penalize the ships tank. This results in the scorpion, which is by far the most fragile BS in the game, to sacrifice lows that need to be fitted with more ECM boosting modules in order to fit an armor tank, which makes the SLOW AS HELL SHIP even SLOWER..... Lim +1 so true caldari ships+fittings+tactics contradict themselves the whole race should be rethought and rebalanced
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 10:42:00 - [227] EDIT : Just to answer the given topic. Nerf the Drake, I don't mind, after that BUFF EVERY SINGLE CALDARI SHIP, because at this point Caldari is identified with one ship - The Drake. And for those of you who have doubts about that, think about this, the Drake Blobs carry logistical ships with them in order to provide reps, one would only assume that as THE SHIELD RACE, an ALL DRAKE BLOB would bring nothing but Basilisks, guess again......
Nazriel Caldari Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:05:00 - [228] Edited by: Nazriel on 28/10/2010 11:07:06 Originally by: Limvala Adur Drake Blobs carry logistical ships with them in order to provide reps, one would only assume that as THE SHIELD RACE, an ALL DRAKE BLOB would bring nothing but Basilisks, guess again...... So sad, Scimitar locks faster, is more agile, has more speed and a superior slot layout. Fits into the Drake gang much better than the Basilisk.
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:14:00 - [229] Originally by: Limvala Adur I have trained ECM in order to be "needed" in small/medium sized gangs/fleet with low SP (9m) and not a lot of ISK. However, here is the main difference between ECM and the other EWAR types. ECM, as people have told me, has been nerfed almost to the ground, it is currently the only dice based mechanic in the game, I don't see any of that being true for the other races and their EWAR. But let's say that is because ECM is so strong and game breaking, but even that isn't the case. ECM is needed less and less in fleets and it rarely even taken, simply because the ships that carry it provide easy kills for the enemy if by any chance they fail (which happens and no, I don't have crappy skills, all 4s / 5s here). Really, all t1 ECM ships (so far I have experience with them only) are: A) Slow as hell (I really don't know why this is the case) B) Made of glass. (Really now, the Curse is able to tank a hell of a lot damage, while putting it's EWAR where it counts 100% of the time and still sporting good agility) C) Don't pack a punch - Not meant for it? Well, they fail at everything else a fleet ship needs to do, why not at least make them glass cannons instead of .. you know ... glass sculptures. ECM has indeed been nerfed a lot, so much so that it's current incarnation is vastly inferior to pre-nerf ECM, but those were nerfs it needed... Badly. The range on ECM ships used to be ludicrious and Faclons could easily jam multiple ships from near max targeting range. As for now-ECM here's my take: My PVP experience is almost entirely Empire/Low Sec -- solo, small/medium gangs, camps, and the like. I have participated in a good few 0.0 'fleet' fights, but I won't pretend to know a whole lot about them. However, when/where I fight ECM is still the king of all ewar. Falcon alts are just as popular as they were a year and a half ago, and Scorpions/Falcons (as well as other ECM ships) are the biggest pain your opponent can throw at you because of the strength of the ewar, and the range is still quite long. This is because in Empire/Low Sec blobs aren't nearly as common and engagements are usually around 20 people per side at most. In fights like this ECM boats have a much greater impact. A Falcon jamming 2-3 ships, effectively removing them from the fight for a cycle, eliminates a greater portion of the enemy's forces. For your A/B/C - A & B: ECM ships' tanks are their ewar, you are probably tired of hearing that, but its true. The pure strength of ECM and its generous range mean ECM boats need to keep the opponents are arms length while doing their job. If you are engaging at max ECM range and still getting shattered like the glass you are, then your gang isn't doing a good enough job of protecting you. C: The punch is the ECM, taking an enemy out of the fight for ~20 seconds is much more valuable than having an extra 300 dps imo. I really think you are underestimating ECM's strength in gang warfare. I know it is substantially less powerful in large fleets, that's the case with most ewar. Trying to balance it's usefulness in both areas is difficult and can never be perfect. I was going to quote and respond to the second half of your post, but I need to make a second one to do that [character limit ]
Tsubutai The Tuskers	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:24:00 - [230] Originally by: Limvala Adur What really, REALLY puzzles me is this: If Caldari are the shield race and the ONLY advantage a shield tanked ship has over everything in the world that armor tanks is the fact that it doesn't slow the ship down. But here is the tricky part, why the hell are Caldari ships made NATURALLY slow/bulky/lacking agility? Fun fact: Caldari ships are uniformly either the most agile or the second most agile in their classes.
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:26:00 - [231] Originally by: Limvala Adur What really, REALLY puzzles me is this: If Caldari are the shield race and the ONLY advantage a shield tanked ship has over everything in the world that armor tanks is the fact that it doesn't slow the ship down. But here is the tricky part, why the hell are Caldari ships made NATURALLY slow/bulky/lacking agility? It's like giving them something with the shield tank and then removing it with the natural bulkiness of the ships. Shield tanking can also be less PG intensive (but isn't always). For the rest of that though, I agree. It's a backasswards way of reasoning, but its the same problem the Gallente currently have. Armor tanks slow you down, so Gallente who are supposed to be armor tankers have naturally faster ships, but this native plus is taken away when you plate up your ship. Where Gallente get it even worse is that they have the closest ranged weapons. Not only can they not run or position well, they can't even hurt you half the time. At least Caldari weapons have a great enough range that their speed isn't as big an issue. Tbqh I have always thought it would make more sense if CCP switched Gallente/Caldari prefeerence around instead of making it what it is now. The tank that doesn't detract from speed should be given to the guys that need the speed. And the high-EHP brick tank should be given to the race that doesn't need to worry so much about weapon range. Originally by: Limvala Adur Also, since the Scorpion was mentioned a lot of times now, here are my cents about it, since I fly that ship almost every day. I take it's meant to be a technological marvel, a ship packed full of electronics/sensors and such, not a brawler. Then why the hell does it have such slow locking speed? Really, makes NO sense, what so ever. Also, the ECM rigs, the ones which are made for Caldari ships ONLY to use, because only Caldari ships have bonuses to ECM, give penalty to the SHIELDS? Are you folks nuts? The race has nothing but shield tank ships and their main and only useful feature at the moment is the ECM and yet the rigs for it penalize the ships tank. This results in the scorpion, which is by far the most fragile BS in the game, to sacrifice lows that need to be fitted with more ECM boosting modules in order to fit an armor tank, which makes the SLOW AS HELL SHIP even SLOWER..... Lim The Scorpion is just one of several ships that is better used with the tanking type not native to it's race. Plate/EANM it up (its jam strength is already strong) and use the freed up mid slots for a sensor booster to help with the lock time and to fit more ECM. This also helps it fit better into RR BS gangs (but thats one of those more-common-in-low-sec things). The Brutix and Hyperion are the same way, they both simply preform better when shield tanked. This type of thing really screws over newer players and I think should be addressed tbh. Also, I do want to thank you for actually stating your points instead of just flaming like half of this thread has chosen to do
Moose Burger	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:39:00 - [232] i just wish they added more CPU to the drake. Who needs tackle or point. If they have numbers, overwhelm them. If they are alone, point it with tacklers. Not battleships.(nor drakes) [Drake, LongRangeDrake] Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Large Shield Extender II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Tracking Disruptor II/Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I, Optimal Range Disruption Sensor Booster II/Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I, Optimal Range Disruption Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Heavy Missile [empty high slot] Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Hobgoblin II x1 Hobgoblin II x1 Hobgoblin II x1 Hobgoblin II x1 Hobgoblin II x1
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 11:50:00 - [233] Berendas - And I thank you for not flaming my noobish attempt to discribe my problem with the line of ships I chose to use. It's just hard not to get a little bit personal when 98% of all ships I fight are mattari, the ship line which is able to put shields to better use. At this moment I have nothing more to add though. Lim
Jacob Stov	Posted - 2010.10.28 14:39:00 - [234] Originally by: Berendas Shield tanking can also be less PG intensive (but isn't always). For the rest of that though, I agree. It's a backasswards way of reasoning, but its the same problem the Gallente currently have. Armor tanks slow you down, so Gallente who are supposed to be armor tankers have naturally faster ships, but this native plus is taken away when you plate up your ship. Where Gallente get it even worse is that they have the closest ranged weapons. Not only can they not run or position well, they can't even hurt you half the time. At least Caldari weapons have a great enough range that their speed isn't as big an issue. Tbqh I have always thought it would make more sense if CCP switched Gallente/Caldari prefeerence around instead of making it what it is now. The tank that doesn't detract from speed should be given to the guys that need the speed. And the high-EHP brick tank should be given to the race that doesn't need to worry so much about weapon range. Gallente are ment for active armor tanking. EANM's and armor reppers don't slow you down. Unfortunatly with the HP buff and the introduction off riggs this concept went down the drain and now everybody just fits buffer. @ Limvala: If you want ships that are fine for PvP and at the same time good for PvE skill for Minmatar. Selectable damage types, acces to armor tanked ships and ships that can actually explore the advantages of beeing shield tanked.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.28 16:46:00 - [235] Edited by: Malcanis on 28/10/2010 16:47:53 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9uVtP7IQ4 Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Kokura Nin	Posted - 2010.10.28 17:18:00 - [236] Edited by: Kokura Nin on 28/10/2010 17:22:25 Edited by: Kokura Nin on 28/10/2010 17:20:36 Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 28/10/2010 16:47:53 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9uVtP7IQ4 Wow so ~130BS + 120 drakes >> 300 drakes ? Who woulda thunk ? I like the innovative tactics to shield against missele damage. Props for that. <s>
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.28 17:20:00 - [237] Edited by: omgfreemoniez on 28/10/2010 17:22:49 Originally by: Jacob Stov Gallente are ment for active armor tanking. EANM's and armor reppers don't slow you down. Unfortunatly with the HP buff and the introduction off riggs this concept went down the drain and now everybody just fits buffer. Plates don't really slow you down either. It's just that any non-Minmatar ship's base speed is horrendously slow.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 17:41:00 - [238] This is still going on? ROFL @ those rokh fits way up there... Some exellent shiptoasting, but nothing (even from the haters) about why drakes are too good or why caldari is a righteous winnar in pvp (obviously not the case) without the drake. Guess they gave into reason and htfu'd?
Sarah Norbulk Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.28 18:24:00 - [239] Originally by: Kokura Nin Edited by: Kokura Nin on 28/10/2010 17:22:25 Edited by: Kokura Nin on 28/10/2010 17:20:36 Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 28/10/2010 16:47:53 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1E9uVtP7IQ4 Wow so ~130BS + 120 drakes >> 300 drakes + 100BS? Who woulda thunk ? I like the innovative tactics to shield against missele damage. Props for that. <s> FYP
Kokura Nin	Posted - 2010.10.28 18:50:00 - [240] Sorry missed the 100 BS on the other side. Still, props for innovative tactics and making this work.
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:04:00 - [241] Originally by: Jacob Stov @ Limvala: If you want ships that are fine for PvP and at the same time good for PvE skill for Minmatar. Selectable damage types, acces to armor tanked ships and ships that can actually explore the advantages of beeing shield tanked. Tell me one thing you wont want to train Minmatar for? (Sub-cap level)
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:07:00 - [242] Originally by: Limvala Adur Originally by: Jacob Stov @ Limvala: If you want ships that are fine for PvP and at the same time good for PvE skill for Minmatar. Selectable damage types, acces to armor tanked ships and ships that can actually explore the advantages of beeing shield tanked. Tell me one thing you wont want to train Minmatar for? (Sub-cap level) Shall we start with Recons? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:11:00 - [243] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Limvala Adur Originally by: Jacob Stov @ Limvala: If you want ships that are fine for PvP and at the same time good for PvE skill for Minmatar. Selectable damage types, acces to armor tanked ships and ships that can actually explore the advantages of beeing shield tanked. Tell me one thing you wont want to train Minmatar for? (Sub-cap level) Shall we start with Recons? -Liang plays the tiny violin for Liang
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:12:00 - [244] Originally by: Liang Nuren Shall we start with Recons? -Liang Hey Liang, off topic but your PvE Raven Guide helped me a lot, thanks. Now, into the fray: Rapier / Huginn - What exactly is wrong with these two? Not to mention that one of the is as common as a dramiel, in null sec at least - The Rapier. Lim
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Final Agony B A N E	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:13:00 - [245] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Limvala Adur Tell me one thing you wont want to train Minmatar for? (Sub-cap level) Shall we start with Recons? -Liang Since when? I wouldnt want to run a hit-and-run gang without 2-3 Huginns tbh. Couldnt imagine a better forward scout than a probing Rapier either. Now, I realize a lot of people whine about the 60% webs, but its simply they have no clue how to fly the ship properly.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:36:00 - [246] Originally by: Limvala Adur Originally by: Liang Nuren Shall we start with Recons? -Liang Hey Liang, off topic but your PvE Raven Guide helped me a lot, thanks. Now, into the fray: Rapier / Huginn - What exactly is wrong with these two? Not to mention that one of the is as common as a dramiel, in null sec at least - The Rapier. Lim Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:40:00 - [247] Personally, I love my Rapier. Worse than the Loki? Definetly but its cheap and a blast to solo in.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:41:00 - [248] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Limvala Adur Originally by: Liang Nuren Shall we start with Recons? -Liang Hey Liang, off topic but your PvE Raven Guide helped me a lot, thanks. Now, into the fray: Rapier / Huginn - What exactly is wrong with these two? Not to mention that one of the is as common as a dramiel, in null sec at least - The Rapier. Lim Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. AHA, yes it's obsoleted b...oh wait that ship is matari too... damn.
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:42:00 - [249] Originally by: Malcanis Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. Аgree I do with you on that theory, however I must ask how exactly did you figure mixing the t3 mattar ship into this will make your statement true in this particular argument? You basically said that the two best ships at this particular EWAR type are only bested by another ship, which is (imagine that), again Minmattat. Lim
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:49:00 - [250] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Some exellent shiptoasting, but nothing (even from the haters) about why drakes are too good or why caldari is a righteous winnar in pvp (obviously not the case) without the drake. Guess they gave into reason and htfu'd? Keep looking, there are plenty of arguments of why the Drake needs to be balanced and why Caldari are good in PVP. You just choose not to bring up counterpoints in favor of mindless flaming
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:56:00 - [251] Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Some exellent shiptoasting, but nothing (even from the haters) about why drakes are too good or why caldari is a righteous winnar in pvp (obviously not the case) without the drake. Guess they gave into reason and htfu'd? Keep looking, there are plenty of arguments of why the Drake needs to be balanced and why Caldari are good in PVP. You just choose not to bring up counterpoints in favor of mindless flaming I humbly have to disagree and add this statement: Caldari ships are excellent support for ships that are good at PvP.
omgfreemoniez	Posted - 2010.10.28 19:57:00 - [252] Meh I trained Minmatar I dont give a **** anymore so NERF CALDARI NERF THE DRAKE! DRAKE IS OVERPOWERED!
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:00:00 - [253] Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Some exellent shiptoasting, but nothing (even from the haters) about why drakes are too good or why caldari is a righteous winnar in pvp (obviously not the case) without the drake. Guess they gave into reason and htfu'd? Keep looking, there are plenty of arguments of why the Drake needs to be balanced and why Caldari are good in PVP. You just choose not to bring up counterpoints in favor of mindless flaming I didn't know that pointing out the obvious flaws in your terrible logic was flaming. My apoligies sir!
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:04:00 - [254] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Some exellent shiptoasting, but nothing (even from the haters) about why drakes are too good or why caldari is a righteous winnar in pvp (obviously not the case) without the drake. Guess they gave into reason and htfu'd? Keep looking, there are plenty of arguments of why the Drake needs to be balanced and why Caldari are good in PVP. You just choose not to bring up counterpoints in favor of mindless flaming I didn't know that pointing out the obvious flaws in your terrible logic was flaming. My apoligies sir! You weren't pointing out anything. You offered no reasons to back your argument. You basically quote people's posts and say "You are wrong," and leave it there, with some random insults mixed in ofc.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:07:00 - [255] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk plays the tiny violin for Liang Try again. A few things: - I fly all sub caps. ALL OF THEM. And quite a few caps. Don't play a violin for me because if there's a FOTM I can fly it. - The Minnie recons are trivially the worst recons. - Minnie is not the only "good" sub cap race by a long shot (Amarr with BS and Caldari with BC, for example) - Anyone that feels Caldari "can't PVP" is deluding themselves. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Berendas Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:09:00 - [256] Originally by: Limvala Adur Originally by: Berendas Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Some exellent shiptoasting, but nothing (even from the haters) about why drakes are too good or why caldari is a righteous winnar in pvp (obviously not the case) without the drake. Guess they gave into reason and htfu'd? Keep looking, there are plenty of arguments of why the Drake needs to be balanced and why Caldari are good in PVP. You just choose not to bring up counterpoints in favor of mindless flaming I humbly have to disagree and add this statement: Caldari ships are excellent support for ships that are good at PvP. I don't disagree with you, Caldari are great support. But support is a part of PVP so I think Caldari can be considered good for PVP, albeit in different situations than the other races.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:15:00 - [257] Originally by: Limvala Adur Originally by: Malcanis Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. Аgree I do with you on that theory, however I must ask how exactly did you figure mixing the t3 mattar ship into this will make your statement true in this particular argument? You basically said that the two best ships at this particular EWAR type are only bested by another ship, which is (imagine that), again Minmattat. Lim I'm not arguing against Minmatar, I'm just saying that the Huginn (and Lachesis) are massively inferior to the Loki (and Proteus). The Curse and the Rook are not similarly overshadowed. Come to that I'm in a Sabre right now. That right there is a good answer to "why Minmatar?". Lovely ship. I ♥ the Hurricane too. One nice thing about having skills to fly every subcap (bar black ops, but those are for alts) is that you get an uncluttered perspective. You get to see the advantages and disadvantages of each race's lineup much more clearly. And also of each ship class. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Limvala Adur	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:17:00 - [258] True at that, but support can only go so far. All races have support, Caldari just feels like it has nothing but support. Lim
bitters much Nekkid Inc.	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:22:00 - [259] To be honest, if missiles are causing the lag spikes why not just swap the missile slots for turret slots ? Railguns are fine anyway and you get insta dps on your target.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:36:00 - [260] Edited by: Seriously Bored on 28/10/2010 20:43:25 Since we've been having such an intelligent discussion...here's the only real meat from a dev on the subject since the whine threads first proliferated: 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. That should stoke the flames a bit. My take away: if you'd like to lessen the possibility of the Drake getting changed/nerfed, tell every Drake pilot/FC in earshot to group their goddamn missiles. ED: LINKAGE. ED2: And if you read the end of it there, CCP is as likely to do a missile buff to fix this problem as they are to do a Drake nerf.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:37:00 - [261] Edited by: Malcanis on 28/10/2010 20:38:32 Originally by: Limvala Adur True at that, but support can only go so far. All races have support, Caldari just feels like it has nothing but support. Lim As far as big fleets go, yep I agree. It's very difficult to bring a Caldari DPS ship to fleets that isn't a Drake right now. The Raven actually does pretty well as a short-range armour RR BS, but not many people recognise that, and even fewer fit it properly to do the job. The Rokh is a superlative shield tanked sniper, which would be good if there were ever any shield tanked or sniper BS fleets. The Scorpion remains, as ever, almost a great ship. As an ECM fleet ship, it's sabotaged down by it's abysmal EHP. Caldari ships can't join AHAC fleets as anything except suicide dictors or probers. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Corporal Punishment08 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.10.28 20:47:00 - [262] Edited by: Corporal Punishment08 on 28/10/2010 20:49:27 Here's your Drake Nerf: http://www.evenews24.com/2010/10/28/video-the-initiative-firewall/ This starts happening more, Drakes will magically disappear from combat. Also, did we all forget defender missiles???
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.28 21:02:00 - [263] Originally by: Corporal Punishment08 Also, did we all forget defender missiles??? Defenders only work on missiles fire at you. Knocking down one or two of 50 missiles fired at you is not productive.
Corporal Punishment08 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.10.28 21:07:00 - [264] Hey, that's a good point. Anyways, I didn't sift through other ppls posts, but someone already beat me to it, I just get my news from a different site. Pretty cool tactic though. Lights up the sky!
Wardeneo Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.28 21:29:00 - [265] Originally by: Liang Nuren They would hardly boost rockets if they didn't want missiles in PVP. -Liang agreed and rockets need a boost... :) . - Wardeneo - - Elite Forum Ninja -
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:14:00 - [266] Originally by: Wardeneo Originally by: Liang Nuren They would hardly boost rockets if they didn't want missiles in PVP. -Liang agreed and rockets need a boost... :) Well, you could start by reading dev blogs or the test server feedback. ;-) -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:15:00 - [267] Originally by: CCP Chronotis 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't wait to see what they nerf next o reduce lag. I find it hard to imagine missiles are the only culprit.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:22:00 - [268] Originally by: Seriously Bored That should stoke the flames a bit. My take away: if you'd like to lessen the possibility of the Drake getting changed/nerfed, tell every Drake pilot/FC in earshot to group their goddamn missiles. ED: LINKAGE. ED2: And if you read the end of it there, CCP is as likely to do a missile buff to fix this problem as they are to do a Drake nerf. Yeah, it sounds like they may just forcibly group everyone's missiles by removing launcher slots and boosting missile damage. That'd be ok in my book too. :) -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:26:00 - [269] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Can't wait to see what they nerf next o reduce lag. I find it hard to imagine missiles are the only culprit. It sounds like ungrouped weapons and manual cycling weapons can cause lag. Changing missiles seems like it causes problems, and from looking at the CPU graphs the act of deploying drones causes a pretty good lag spike. After that I think they may be down to pretty serious algorithmic changes and ensuring that the communication pipelines are clear and well structured. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:35:00 - [270] Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 28/10/2010 22:36:36 Having been witness to recent operations between the russians and the NC, I can see why they're throwing the kitchen sink at the lag issue (though it's certainly been improved from months ago), but i'm not too anxious to see what exactly comes out of this. The root causes (if you are correct) mean tinkering with missiles and drones, which (ironically) only mucks with the primary weapon systems of the (certainly) weaker half of EVEs races. Who knows, maybe they'll stumble over some code while they fix this and buff railguns by accident?
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:36:00 - [271] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Edited by: Leksi Bar''zuk on 28/10/2010 22:36:36 Having been witness to recent operations between the russians and the NC, I can see why they're throwing the kitchen sink at the lag issue (though it's certainly been improved from months ago), but i'm not too anxious to see what exactly comes out of this. The root causes (if you are correct) mean tinkering with missiles and drones, which (ironically) only mucks with the primary weapon systems of the (certainly) weaker half of EVEs races. Who knows, maybe they'll stumble over some code while they fix this and buff railguns by accident? Well one can hope eh? -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Final Agony B A N E	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:39:00 - [272] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Limvala Adur Rapier / Huginn Lim Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. Yea, a 500mill+ faction web Loki can do the job of a 80mill throwaway recon. Who cares, nobody in his right mind uses it for that role. If there is anything the Loki truly obsoletes, its the Claymore...
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:42:00 - [273] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Limvala Adur Rapier / Huginn Lim Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. Yea, a 500mill+ faction web Loki can do the job of a 80mill throwaway recon. Who cares, nobody in his right mind uses it for that role. If there is anything the Loki truly obsoletes, its the Claymore... Well, technically speaking most gang boosting is done by unscannable t3s these days so that's not really unique to the loki or claymore.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Final Agony B A N E	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:47:00 - [274] Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 28/10/2010 22:49:32 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Lilith Velkor If there is anything the Loki truly obsoletes, its the Claymore... Well, technically speaking most gang boosting is done by unscannable t3s these days so that's not really unique to the loki or claymore. And its actually a good idea of using it as a CS replacement. Using it as a combat recon replacement is just flying a space pinata around, with pretty much no benefit that justifies the extra cost. It also does make a better sniper HAC than the Muninn, but that doesnt make it a good idea to use it that way.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:49:00 - [275] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Originally by: Lilith Velkor If there is anything the Loki truly obsoletes, its the Claymore... Well, technically speaking most gang boosting is done by unscannable t3s these days so that's not really unique to the loki or claymore. And its actually a good idea of using it as a CS replacement. Using it as a combat recon replacement is just flying a space pinata around, with pretty much no benefit that justifies the extra cost. I certainly agree with that. But, if you have the isk lying around as some of us do... well you tend to fly pinatas.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:51:00 - [276] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk I certainly agree with that. But, if you have the isk lying around as some of us do... well you tend to fly pinatas. I have a couple of absurdly expensive T3s. Two Tengus and a Proteus... the Proteus tanked 45k DPS from an Ivy blob. I had to dock because they were getting close to straight volleying my armor. Amusingly, they probably would have had a Proteus kill if they hadn't permajammed me with 10 blackbirds. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 22:54:00 - [277] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk I certainly agree with that. But, if you have the isk lying around as some of us do... well you tend to fly pinatas. I have a couple of absurdly expensive T3s. Two Tengus and a Proteus... the Proteus tanked 45k DPS from an Ivy blob. I had to dock because they were getting close to straight volleying my armor. Amusingly, they probably would have had a Proteus kill if they hadn't permajammed me with 10 blackbirds. -Liang I've tried to limit my spending on t3's after re-training various rank 5 subsystem skills... That said, i've got a hero vindicator who still remains untouched. Probably going to make a splendid lossmail the next time i'm drunk off my arse... oh **** haloween is this weekend!
yyyyxorp	Posted - 2010.10.28 23:03:00 - [278] (If the mob crys enough they will get thier way) I personaly wont say the drake is "Not overpowered". Its a intresting ship and when 2 more or more come together it becomes a bother when engaging it. Its always been borderline, in my opinion and not replicated in any other class. The only ship i believe is similiar, may be the Mrymidon, but active tanking is frowned upon; even though its so effective in smaller engagements. If the drake was nerfed, why not fly around in nighthawk blobs? Nighthawks are just a little over the cost of buying and rigging a dominix (claymore cost 100mill). Not to mention you can now insure commandships, which is why i plan on using them. CCP will nerf Drakes, because thats what people want! This is how it happens in eve; it may take time, but they do end up trying to please the player-base. -Proxyyyy
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.28 23:06:00 - [279] I think the intention is to "fix" missiles more so than the drake, so nighthawk isn't going to be spared the fiddling process. I would really hate to be a cladari rookie right now. It's probably going to be a bumpy ride and god help you if you decide to train hybrid turrets instead.
Bomberlocks Minmatar CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.10.28 23:20:00 - [280] Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk I think the intention is to "fix" missiles more so than the drake, so nighthawk isn't going to be spared the fiddling process. I would really hate to be a cladari rookie right now. It's probably going to be a bumpy ride and god help you if you decide to train hybrid turrets instead. I'm pretty sure the next major balancing thing on the block after rockets will be the Hybrids.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.10.28 23:28:00 - [281] Quote: I'm pretty sure the next major balancing thing on the block after rockets will be the Hybrids. Nah, more Minmatar buffs. The Drake is inevitably going to get nerfed (just look how many whining threadnoughts there are) and CCP have hinted at doing the same to scorch while ignoring hybrids completely. Better get training those projectiles guys! _________________________________ ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS...
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.10.28 23:34:00 - [282] Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington Nah, more Minmatar buffs. The Drake is inevitably going to get nerfed (just look how many whining threadnoughts there are) and CCP have hinted at doing the same to scorch while ignoring hybrids completely. Better get training those projectiles guys! I was thinking I'd start training T3 production. Not many subcap PVP skills left to train. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter Blog
Bomberlocks Minmatar CTRL-Q	Posted - 2010.10.28 23:39:00 - [283] Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington Quote: I'm pretty sure the next major balancing thing on the block after rockets will be the Hybrids. Nah, more Minmatar buffs. The Drake is inevitably going to get nerfed (just look how many whining threadnoughts there are) and CCP have hinted at doing the same to scorch while ignoring hybrids completely. Better get training those projectiles guys! You worry too much. I used to do this too, and back until December last year, I used to complain endlessly about how crap Minnie guns were compared to others. Then, lo and behold, CCP finally buffed the guns, the ammo and TEs/TCs. Then Minnies came into their own, and it's been a great year for Minnies. They now compare very favourably to Amarr (faster, more versatile, but less tank and cap and Amarr BS are still king of the hill). Howver, since then there has been a looong period where people have been complaining about Gallente in general and Hybrids in particular, and since if you comlain long enough and hard enough, CCP listens, I'm pretty sure tht Hybrids will get a boost soon. Just look at rockets. All the complaining eventually got through to CCP and next month rocket frigs and AFs will be very good boats again. In other words, don't panic and just keep complaining. Eventually even your favourite ships will get a boost. I'm going to start a new complaint wave over basic fastt1 frigs like the Condor, Slasher, Atron and Executioner. It would be nice if they weren't only used as first day nub ships and glorified shuttles.
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.29 00:16:00 - [284] Do not tease me with talk of hybrid turret buffs. I've got about 30 unfitted rokhs sitting in station waiting for the day.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.10.29 00:48:00 - [285] Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 29/10/2010 00:51:04 Originally by: Leksi Bar'zuk Do not tease me with talk of hybrid turret buffs. I've got about 30 unfitted rokhs sitting in station waiting for the day. Psst, don't tell anyone, but the blaster Rokh is a pretty good ship. (Unless your corp runs nothing but armour RR BS blobs. Then as a Caldari pilot you're probably in the wrong place...) _________________________________ ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS...
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.29 00:51:00 - [286] Originally by: Duchess Starbuckington (Unless your corp runs nothing but armour RR BS blobs.) Guilty.
syntheticG	Posted - 2010.10.29 00:56:00 - [287] THERES A SIMPLE MOTHER**ER WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS ! CCP SHOULD MAKE A MOTHERER OFFICAL POLL THAT LASTS 1 MONTH. LET EVERY MOTHERER VOTE ON WHICH SHIPS IN THE ENTIRE MOTHERING GAME SHOULD BE NERF. THE ONE WITH THE HIGHEST MOTHERING VOTE WILL BE ING NERD TO . HAPPY YOU GOT WHAT YOU WANTED YOU PIECES OF **!
Leksi Bar'zuk	Posted - 2010.10.29 00:57:00 - [288] Originally by: syntheticG THERES A SIMPLE MOTHER**ER WAY TO DEAL WITH THIS ! CCP SHOULD MAKE A MOTHERER OFFICAL POLL THAT LASTS 1 MONTH. LET EVERY MOTHERER VOTE ON WHICH SHIPS IN THE ENTIRE MOTHERING GAME SHOULD BE NERF. THE ONE WITH THE HIGHEST MOTHERING VOTE WILL BE ING NERD TO . HAPPY YOU GOT WHAT YOU WANTED YOU PIECES OF **! Over the top.
Mfume Apocal Minmatar	Posted - 2010.10.31 08:32:00 - [289] Originally by: omgfreemoniez How do these Drake gangs get around the whole missile flight time issue? Last time I checked that was a real killer for missile fleets. Lachesis, fast tackle, cloaky HICs/DICs bubbling the opposing fleets against pros. Overall though, about half the time the person doesn't notice they are being redboxed or they believe in the power of their logis and don't even try to warp out.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.10.31 10:12:00 - [290] Originally by: Lilith Velkor Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Limvala Adur Rapier / Huginn Lim Apart from being utterly obseleted by the Loki, they're as good as they ever were. Yea, a 500mill+ faction web Loki can do the job of a 80mill throwaway recon. Who cares, nobody in his right mind uses it for that role. If there is anything the Loki truly obsoletes, its the Claymore... Please post your 100k+ EHP triple web Huginn fit? The thing that T3s can do that Combat Recons can't is survive. The whole point is that they're actually tough enough that it's worth fitting faction webs on. So they end up with better webs, more of them and after a while they're not even more expensive, because you dont lose them every damb time. 3 extra low slots, an armour resist bonus, an extra rig slot and more than double the power grid, more than double the base raw hitpoints AND superior base resists, plus triple bonused weapons in to the bargain. How is the Huginn not obsoleted? It has better base web range, sure, but the Loki can cheerfully overheat its webs for the whole fight, so even that advantage is mitigated. And that all goes double for the Proteus vs the Lachesis. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
TZeer BURN EDEN	Posted - 2010.11.07 12:14:00 - [291] Ravens used to be good... But CCP nerfed everything that made them good for our use. And btw, cruise missiles sucks!!
Admiral Madbull Minmatar Madbulls Inc	Posted - 2010.11.07 12:59:00 - [292] Has it even been confirmed that the drake will be nerfed?
Lugalzagezi666	Posted - 2010.11.07 13:56:00 - [293] Originally by: Malcanis Please post your 100k+ EHP triple web Huginn fit? I think rapier can get to around 80k for lowsec armor hac gangs when properly boosted and with right implants. I doubt huggin can do 100k with 1 less low. Ofc why would anyone use rapier instead of loki when he flies in properly boosted gang and has hg slaves in head... Btw somehow i still didnt managed to fit sisters probe launcher to it without losing alot of ehp, any ideas? And to the topic, go minmatar, much more interesting ships than amarr /but i like guardian and baddon + zealot is very good ship/.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.11.07 14:10:00 - [294] Originally by: Lugalzagezi666 Originally by: Malcanis Please post your 100k+ EHP triple web Huginn fit? I think rapier can get to around 80k for lowsec armor hac gangs when properly boosted and with right implants. I doubt huggin can do 100k with 1 less low. Ofc why would anyone use rapier instead of loki when he flies in properly boosted gang and has hg slaves in head... Btw somehow i still didnt managed to fit sisters probe launcher to it without losing alot of ehp, any ideas? And to the topic, go minmatar, much more interesting ships than amarr /but i like guardian and baddon + zealot is very good ship/. Well if we're bringing Damnations in to the equation, the Loki I use has just over 174k EHP... (That all level 5 guys gets another 4k) Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.11.07 14:13:00 - [295] Originally by: Admiral Madbull Has it even been confirmed that the drake will be nerfed? No sir it has not, and I think it rather unlikely that it will be directly nerfed. If CCP want to convert it to a double weapon bonus ship like the Hurricane, I personally would not count it as a "nerf" although many here most likely would (People get pretty noisy when their old fits dont work so good. Use EVE-search to look at some of the threads about "how all missiles are useless" when CCP changed them with the Nano-nerf. Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Lilith Velkor Minmatar Heretic Army	Posted - 2010.11.07 18:17:00 - [296] Edited by: Lilith Velkor on 07/11/2010 18:20:41 Originally by: Malcanis Please post your 100k+ EHP triple web Huginn fit? Sure, right after you post your 100k+ EHP triple web Loki fit that can move 3kms unbonused, doesnt align like a snail on tranquilizers, has the sensor strength to stay in business after a griffin looks at it funny and the ability to lock as many targets. Quote: The thing that T3s can do that Combat Recons can't is survive. The whole point is that they're actually tough enough that it's worth fitting faction webs on. You got it a little backwards there, you need the faction webs to even perform properly in the first place. As for survivability, I've lost 16 minmatar recons so far not counting 2 lost in alliance tournaments. I'd say 6 of these are due to my own stupidity and could have been prevented outright, but lets ignore that. Lets pretend the Loki was available all that time, the lost ISK would have gotten me around 2,8 Lokis at current price. The problem is, there are more than 3 losses where I could have had a million EHP and would have still died. So your theory about affordability doesnt hold up there. More so, if I count the countless times I was able to dodge the blob due to nothing else but speed and agility, flying your brick Loki in these types of engagement would have cost me a SCs worth of ships by now. Or I could have fitted faction webs on all my recons. And yes, people actually do that at times, webbing out to 107km is a nasty surprise.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: [one 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.