EVE Search - Petition to fix EOS

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Petition to fix EOS

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Nightwing	Posted - 2010.11.13 16:31:00 - [1] This CBC has been a dead ship for over 3 years. Almost nobody fly's it and it sells for less than build cost on a BPO that is ME 40. Will Incarna see this ship regain some glory? My suggestions would be to increase its damage output with its drones by 20% Other thoughts welcome.
Mysa Mortis Angelus	Posted - 2010.11.13 16:36:00 - [2] Only way to save the eos is to give back the 125m3 bandwith that it had once. Dont need a dmg bonus just the abilty to launch 5 heavies!
Slade Hoo Amarr Retired Gunslingers	Posted - 2010.11.13 16:58:00 - [3] Edited by: Slade Hoo on 13/11/2010 16:59:34 Eos is fine. The only issue I can see at the Eos is the type of ganglinks that are bonused. Info links are too special. But you can simply fit armored warfare links on it (that tiny 3% bonus won't change a fight). 22,5% (unbonused) or 25,88% (lvl 5 command ship) isn't a great difference tbfh. Try a Eos with armored warfare links and you will see that Eos has lots of damage output in relation to a damnation. If i'd go for small gang support i'd choose Eos (cruiser 5 still missin'). Originally by: Mysa Only way to save the eos is to give back the 125m3 bandwith that it had once. Dont need a dmg bonus just the abilty to launch 5 heavies! Eos already is the fleet command ship with most damage output and selectable damage type (huge drone bay) and you want even more damage?
Alara IonStorm Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate	Posted - 2010.11.13 17:11:00 - [4] Edited by: Alara IonStorm on 13/11/2010 17:12:10 I think you got your ships mixed up. Astarte: Damage Dealing Field Command Ship. Eos: Low Damage Fleet Boosting Command Ship. It isn't supposed to put out a lot of damage. It is supposed to boost like the low damage Vulture, Damnation and Claymore. -- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen! For Great Justice!
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2010.11.13 17:44:00 - [5] ... EOS has no issues at all, its just that its ganglinks suck. Imagine, who would fly a Vulture if it had the Informationlinks? No one.
Doctor Mabuse	Posted - 2010.11.13 19:35:00 - [6] The Eos suffers from a number of issues, that make it one of the worst ships in the game. It uses active tanking and blasters, both of which have issues and, as has been said before, its ganglinks are completely useless. Sure, you could put Armour ganglinks on instead and lose the 3% racial bonus of the Damnation, but as shown below why would you bother? Eos Damnation As a final insult, no-one seems to be able to spell its name correctly and keep capitalizing it to EOS, like its an abbreviation for something. A dead ship, though thinking about it, maybe the Celestis is slightly more useless. ------------------------------------ Who's trip-trapping on my bridge?
Slade Hoo Amarr Retired Gunslingers	Posted - 2010.11.13 20:00:00 - [7] Originally by: Doctor Mabuse Eos Damnation Fitting an Eos with dual plates is like shieldtanking a Damnation. You fail at fitting. Eos gets an amazing active tank as a sub-BS ship. Too bad there isn't a crystal set for armor. But which ship has 2k dps tank at all? Active tank ships are designed for small gang- or solo work, get used to it. This is where Eos really shines.
Doctor Mabuse	Posted - 2010.11.13 20:15:00 - [8] Edited by: Doctor Mabuse on 13/11/2010 20:16:38 Eos in a small gang? LOL. What would it do? Boost the Rook? The only use for an Eos is in a large fleet, with a substantive ECM squad, and your dual rep active tank isn't much good there, is it now? ------------------------------------ Who's trip-trapping on my bridge?
Slade Hoo Amarr Retired Gunslingers	Posted - 2010.11.13 21:12:00 - [9] I'm talking about an Eos with Armored warfare links (read my posting above) not with info links. With Info links you are right. Only purpose is boosting EW-Squad in larger fleets...and there active tanking bonuses are ****. Your fitting won't be the worst you can do in this position. But as i meantioned before, the 3% Racial bonus is too small to to be considered a huge factor in your gang. So just use the links that are best for your gang. Eos with armored warfare + small gang, Claymore with siege links...doesnt' matter. I use siege and skirmish links both on Claymore. The Choice of Links depends on your gang and not on your ship. I'd like CCP remove racial bonusses and give fleet commands a flat 3% bonus on any link.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.11.13 21:27:00 - [10] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 13/11/2010 21:28:05 Originally by: Doctor Mabuse Eos in a small gang? LOL. What would it do? Boost the Rook? The only use for an Eos is in a large fleet, with a substantive ECM squad, and your dual rep active tank isn't much good there, is it now? You got it backwards, in a large fleet ECM is of little consequence as its life expectancy is around 2 seconds (give or take locktimes). In a small gang without the option to instakill ECM ships, an Eos definitely makes a difference by passively hardening against hostile ECM as well as boosting friendly ECM. Unfortunately, using the tools at hand was never a strength of the greater EVE community, so nerfing ECM was the best solution for all the whines, which obviously didnt help making the Eos more useful.
Jangizal 0utbreak	Posted - 2010.11.13 21:32:00 - [11] Originally by: fuxinos Imagine, who would fly a Vulture if it had the Informationlinks? No one. This is not true. You'd still find it has the best passive tank of any ship in the game - which makes it a great pve tank boat.
Ogogov Gallente Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.14 03:57:00 - [12] Edited by: Ogogov on 14/11/2010 03:57:53 The Eos is absolutely NOT fine given its status as the least used command ship. "Hey guys - let's give a race that doesn't really use EWAR command ships with info link bonuses! HURP DERP @_@" The Eos is absolutely not fine by any measure, and its other uses are gimped by the terrible state of Gallente weapons systems and the fact active armor tanking is a horrible bonus. As we keep hearing in these threads, fixing hybrids will go a long way to making these ships less terrible.
Alara IonStorm Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate	Posted - 2010.11.14 04:08:00 - [13] Originally by: Jangizal This is not true. You'd still find it has the best passive tank of any ship in the game - which makes it a great pve tank boat. Originally by: Ogogov The Eos is absolutely NOT fine given its status as the least used command ship. "Hey guys - let's give a race that doesn't really use EWAR command ships with info link bonuses! HURP DERP @_@" Few people are saying the Eos is fine. I agree that both it's Tank and Command Link abilities are very poor. But unfortunatly most people who make suggestions to buff the ship focus on it's DPS abilities, despite them being in line for what you would expect from the ship. They want the bonuses to represent combat and as a Fleet Commandship they should be the 2 issues you mentioned. I and most others would immediatly throw support behind a ship who's bonues helped the fleet and increased survivability. Instead they forget the Command role and focus on the one role taken by the Astarte. The Astarte and every other Gallente ship would benefit from better Hybrids but in this case Gallente Ganglinks and tank would be the appropreate buff. It is a shame that this fit fulls through the calls to buff it by people not understanding it's role. -- I am now on a Crusade to Fix the Omen! For Great Justice!
fuxinos Caldari Guys 0f Sarcasm	Posted - 2010.11.14 11:52:00 - [14] Originally by: Jangizal Originally by: fuxinos Imagine, who would fly a Vulture if it had the Informationlinks? No one. This is not true. You'd still find it has the best passive tank of any ship in the game - which makes it a great pve tank boat. If you think tanking in PVE is a role, EOS would be completly fine too, since it can also sport a pretty nice active tank for PVE. That aside, a Vulture tanks only minimaly more dps passivley then a Drake or Nighthawk and doesnt even come close to the Rattlesnacke.
Mashie Saldana Minmatar Veto Corp	Posted - 2010.11.14 13:57:00 - [15] Bring back the old Eos with 5 heavy drones, 3 x nos that acted as neuts and multispec jammer of doom in the spare midslot for epic solo PVP. Unfortuantely that would make the Astarte useless instead.
Doctor Mabuse	Posted - 2010.11.14 14:30:00 - [16] Originally by: Alara IonStorm Few people are saying the Eos is fine. I agree that both it's Tank and Command Link abilities are very poor. But unfortunatly most people who make suggestions to buff the ship focus on it's DPS abilities, despite them being in line for what you would expect from the ship. They want the bonuses to represent combat and as a Fleet Commandship they should be the 2 issues you mentioned. I and most others would immediatly throw support behind a ship who's bonues helped the fleet and increased survivability. Instead they forget the Command role and focus on the one role taken by the Astarte. The Astarte and every other Gallente ship would benefit from better Hybrids but in this case Gallente Ganglinks and tank would be the appropreate buff. It is a shame that this fit fulls through the calls to buff it by people not understanding it's role. This sums it up really. The main problem is that Ganglinks are supposed to add defensive or tanking bonuses to a fleet and unfortunately there isn't really a fourth way of tanking. Shield tanking bonuses are dealt with by the Vulture, Armour by the Damnation, Speed/Sig tanking by the Claymore. What's left for Gallente? I guess CCP used that only other type of damage mitigation available which was EW, although this really doesn't fit well with the Gallente line of ships. The real challenge is to find a fourth type of bonus that isn't DPS related an isn't unbalanced. I've suggested moving the Armour bonuses to Gallente and introduce some Capacitor use bonuses for the Amarr CS, but this has problems when used in Capital fleets and is probably not workable. So what other options are there? ------------------------------------ Who's trip-trapping on my bridge?
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.11.14 14:57:00 - [17] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 14/11/2010 14:58:48 Originally by: Doctor Mabuse So what other options are there? The logical thing would be to tweak the information warfare links a bit. Buff the range boost (could even be considerably), buff the sensor strength boost (very slightly as its already pretty useful), keep the ewar strength boost as is.
Lady Spank Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta	Posted - 2010.11.14 14:57:00 - [18] This came up in a channel last night and it's a poor performer compared to the other Fleet Command ships. Both in usefulness of its links and the reduced bandwidth. It's pretty stupid that an Ishtar can field 5 heavies but an EOS cant. When it was nerfed it had the Nos/drone/ecm/tank combination going for it that made it ridiculously good but after several changes it really is lacking.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.14 15:54:00 - [19] Originally by: Slade Hoo Eos already is the fleet command ship with most damage output and selectable damage type (huge drone bay) and you want even more damage? The Eos is NOT fine, Who cares that it has the most damage output, #1 Its damage output isnt very practical (blasters + a 75m3 odd mix of drones), #2 who cares ? its like saying the Rokh is overpowered since its the best mining BS. Most people asking for an Eos boost want one of the following: Better purpose in a fleet, or 125m3 unbonused drone bay even if you have to take 1 or 2 turrets hard points off to do so. As for its super awesome active armor tank, unfortunately cruiser/BC sized ships have to depend on medium armor repairers which you would need to have atleast 3 of them to be able to field a decent tank, and even then its inferior to the other three command ships. So we have: Damnation: missile boat, with incredible buffer tank and nice armor ganglink bonuses. Claymore: overall good ship with 8 highslots, incredible burst tank and nice skirmish bonuses. Vulture: unique sniper ship with incredible buffer tank and nice shield bonuses. Eos , unbonused Vexor with a slightly better active tank than a Myrmidon (which it will lose a fight too).
Grimpak Gallente The Whitehound Corporation The Chamber of Commerce	Posted - 2010.11.14 16:06:00 - [20] Originally by: Lady Spank This came up in a channel last night and it's a poor performer compared to the other Fleet Command ships. Both in usefulness of its links and the reduced bandwidth. It's pretty stupid that an Ishtar can field 5 heavies but an EOS cant. When it was nerfed it had the Nos/drone/ecm/tank combination going for it that made it ridiculously good but after several changes it really is lacking. going that way is not the right way tho. before it was hit with the sledgehammer, the eos was used as a field command ship, better than the astarte because it tanked better and the firepower could be put farther. now, the bw nerf was the right way to fix the ship back to it's proper role, but CCP, as always, didn't follow through and forgot to compensate for the fact it made a very poor fleet command ship. Fleet command ships are supposed to tank and give out bonuses, the Eos wasn't doing that back then, and even today after the nerf it still sucks for said roles because the info ganglinks are very weak and very situational, and we've saw how awesomely amazingly cool active tanking bonuses are(/sarcasm). fixing the eos, however is very hard to do, because it's very hard to boost the info ganglinks without making them OP, and on the tanking front, the only solution I'm seeing is to replace the drone bay space bonus for a straight armor % bonus. --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Ogogov Gallente Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2010.11.15 16:04:00 - [21] Welp, I'm absolutely fed up with seeing Gallente tech2 hulls made up of "The bonuses that are left over after we did the other ships" just as a red herring, why would a DPS gangmod be a bad idea? it would certainly help roaming blaster gangs get some of their punch back vOv
Nazriel Caldari Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.11.15 18:04:00 - [22] Indeed. It was a very odd thing for Gallente to receive this kind of warfare as their chosen type in the first place. Information Warfare is something contrary to their combat philosophy in general and, as I see it, is the main problem behind the "setbacks" of Eos, not the overnerfed state of it by itself, though one could say it was an overkill. I'd go as far as say that Info Warfare should be remade into something useful, not what it is now - absurdly situational, closely bordering on uselessness. Then Eos could have its triumphant comeback ;) Better suggest what Info Warfare should become.
Suicida1	Posted - 2010.11.15 19:24:00 - [23] What makes it absurd that Gallente's racial EW bonus (Disruptor range - arazu, lachesis, keres etc ) went to minmatar who alredy got great bonuses and great commandship. This is f*cked beyond reason.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.11.15 19:57:00 - [24] Originally by: Suicida1 What makes it absurd that Gallente's racial EW bonus (Disruptor range - arazu, lachesis, keres etc ) went to minmatar who alredy got great bonuses and great commandship. This is f*cked beyond reason. You mean the webifier range bonus, like on the Rapier, Huginn and Hyena?
Nazriel Caldari Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.11.15 20:46:00 - [25] Edited by: Nazriel on 15/11/2010 20:46:22 Originally by: Suicida1 What makes it absurd that Gallente's racial EW bonus (Disruptor range - arazu, lachesis, keres etc ) went to minmatar who alredy got great bonuses and great commandship. This is f*cked beyond reason. Well, one point is that Skirmish Warfare is pretty OP(diverse and top notch for PVP), compared to other kinds, but the other is that "Gallente Warfare" doesn't necessarily have to be about warp jammers. Amarr don't provide gang links for energy destabilizers, neither do Caldari for ECM. On the last part: Gallente do, but the specifics of applying ECM in fleet battles do no good for the ship specialized in providing Information Warfare bonuses. It was already correctly explained in this thread. "Gallente Warfare" should have more diversity, more akin to Skirmish Warfare. +% strength to TP/TD/SD/ECM might be fine as it is, if the percentage would high enough, though neither of these EWAR kinds is popular(except for ECM), nor it is of any use on any non-specialized ship. Specialized ECM-ships are fine with or without that bonus. Overall not as game-changing as increased range on webs/warp disruptors, nor provides a profound effect for the fleet like +% resists on shield or armor. +% optimal range for the aforementioned EWAR is really only good for ECM ships, and even then not by any large margin. I sincerely doubt anyone would bring an Eos for that particular purpose, if only for lulz or as an experiment, or more likely to lose his Eos, that gathering dust for years, in a blaze of glory. Counter-ECM bonus has too narrow of an application and too small of a boost to sensor strength.
Motamiter	Posted - 2010.11.15 21:23:00 - [26] Hmm..Probably introduce a new command bonus that boosts drone speed, Optimal range, and tracking?
Nazriel Caldari Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.11.15 21:33:00 - [27] Originally by: Motamiter Hmm..Probably introduce a new command bonus that boosts drone speed, Optimal range, and tracking? Drones most certainly are a supplementary weapon in any fleet, which fleet command ships are brought to provide bonuses for, so that would be not very productive.
Motamiter	Posted - 2010.11.15 21:48:00 - [28] Originally by: Nazriel Originally by: Motamiter Hmm..Probably introduce a new command bonus that boosts drone speed, Optimal range, and tracking? Drones most certainly are a supplementary weapon in any fleet, which fleet command ships are brought to provide bonuses for, so that would be not very productive. Large fleets or small gangs? I could imagine a drone boosting command ship be of good use in small ishtar/gila gangs. Heck, maybe even throw in a drone damage boost in the mix, then the large carrier fleets prob would LOVE it to death.
Nazriel Caldari Monks of War DarkSide.	Posted - 2010.11.15 22:03:00 - [29] Originally by: Motamiter Large fleets or small gangs? I could imagine a drone boosting command ship be of good use in small ishtar/gila gangs. Heck, maybe even throw in a drone damage boost in the mix, then the large carrier fleets prob would LOVE it to death. I meant that conventional drones are quite clunky still, so they are not used as a main damage source in a fleet fight, fleet large enough that you bring an Eos. And fighters are great on their own(bombers are even OP), doubt that gang bonuses would spread to them too.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.11.15 23:19:00 - [30] Originally by: Nazriel I meant that conventional drones are quite clunky still, so they are not used as a main damage source in a fleet fight, fleet large enough that you bring an Eos. And fighters are great on their own(bombers are even OP), doubt that gang bonuses would spread to them too. There is no reason for not using a ~~command ship~~ strategic cruiser for bonuses even with very small gangs.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.