|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Galphii
Sileo In Pacis
THE SPACE P0LICE
56
   |
Posted - 2012.08.10 02:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
Definitely rename any light (small) modules that have 'medium' in their name, they're confusing.
Loving the change for light missiles, they sorely need that buff. And consider making all the long-range missiles and guns more like artillery, in that they are about volley damage (cruise missiles would really benefit from this, but I disgress).
The Corm desperately needs an 8th turret slot, please consider adding this since it doesn't get a damage bonus. You can make a dedicated missile destroyer later 
I'm not entirely sold on the concept of destroyers still being anti-frigate hulls. Does that mean we will get anti-destroyer cruisers? And anti-cruiser battlecruisers etc? Stick to your ship lines model - what category are destroyers really in? With poor mobility and poor defence, they don't really fit into the combat OR attack lines, and they're not support. They're in a class of their own at the moment.
That destroyer gun-range bonus; are the tier 2 destroyers going to get that too, even if they're missile or drone based? It just doesn't fit.
Consider removing that and folding the range bonus into the regular attributes for the class to normalise them with the upcoming tier 2's. Hell, if you're still planning to release Line Skills (attack, combat etc) attach that range bonus to the attack ship line skill.
The tier 1's are gunboats, meant for damage, and therefore should be in the attack line and should probably have more speed to fit with the category. Or more resilience to fit them into the combat line. Take your pick, but don't leave them swinging in the wind as they are now. Even the tier 3 BC's would be considered attack line ships as they have speed AND damage output. Food for thought. |
Galphii
Sileo In Pacis
THE SPACE P0LICE
56
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 01:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote:CCP Ytterbium,
Destroyers are essentially tier 1 ships that never had improved higher tier vessels introduced. Perhaps the Destroyer buff a way back could arguably put them on tier 2 status.
Anyway, I think you may want to consider across the board buffs, add 1 mid or low, because these guys are right when they complain about losing a mid on the Cormorant or a low on the Coercer.
This is spot-on. The mids and lows are so gimped on the current hulls that their only combat use is really 'suicide gank' at this point. Drop the highs down to six slots if you like, but these hulls really could use 1 or 2 extra mid/low slots. The closest example is the tier 3 BC's - they've got a similar (though larger) role, 8 high slots and 8 slots divided amongst the lows and mids, yet they're hardly considered overpowered on defence.
Destroyers only have 5 slots in low/mid at the moment (FRIGATES GET MORE), consider bumping that up instead of just re-arranging them again. |
Galphii
Sileo In Pacis
THE SPACE P0LICE
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 00:52:00 -
[3] - Quote
Battlecruisers get 5 more slots over cruisers, whereas frigates like the rifter get 11 slots - destroyers currently get 13. Instead of moving slots around, it wouldn't hurt to add one mid or low slot to the current dessies, and that gives more room to move when making the tier 2's. |
Galphii
Sileo In Pacis
THE SPACE P0LICE
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 13:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Galphii wrote:Battlecruisers get 5 more slots over cruisers, whereas frigates like the rifter get 10 slots - destroyers currently get 13. Instead of moving slots around, it wouldn't hurt to add one mid or low slot to the current dessies, and that gives more room to move when making the tier 2's. Remember that cruisers and battlecruisers are in line for rebalancing too though, so the slot ratios that exist now may not be sticking around for ever.
Very good point - but I suspect that balancing may just be bringing the tier 1 and 2 cruisers in line with the tier 3's in terms of slot layout, and tier 1 BC's in line with the tier 2's. |
Galphii
Sileo In Pacis
THE SPACE P0LICE
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.19 02:01:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lili Lu wrote:Takeshi Yamato wrote:Since the Inquisitor is presumably not going to be a missile ship anymore, this means Amarr is going to lack a stepping stone for the Vengeance & Malediction.
How about making the new Amarr Destroyer rocket (instead of drone) based? Might actually make some sense because the Minmatar one could be drone based (--> typhoon). Essentially the Amarr and Minmatar ship classes would have frog jumping progression between missile and drone boats. 
It does seem to be happening that way - typically, Minmatar have had better drone ships than Amarr (arbitrator hulls not withstanding) so this is a very new direction. We might be seeing more Matari missile hulls than drone hulls. |
|
|
| |
|