|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
188
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 00:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Coercer change - great, this is needed.
Thrasher - good as is
Catalyst - will remain subpar since it's got the worst damage projection, and only 2 mids.
Cormorant - This is the dominant sniping platform and will remain so with these changes (tracking computer with script gives the same optimal as a TE). However, you are nerfing its brawling ability - it used to be the shield tanking destroyer with scram, web, prop mod and extender. You could get a variety of fits like the 75mm/ab corm that would dominate a lot of destroyers and frigs if flown correctly.
The removal of one mid to another low really is a nerf, and this is why:
The cormorant has a range bonus, and the extra mids helped it to take full advantage of that bonus. By removing the mid, you have effectively nerfed the cormorant in its brawling role (combat within web/scram range). |

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
188
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 19:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bad Messenger wrote:Zarnak Wulf wrote:I have an open mind to any suggestions or ideas posted here. Having said that, the Thrasher really is the golden standard that all the other dessies get compared to - and come in lacking against. The Thrasher is the only destroyer with a damage bonus. This is huge. If you really wanted to balance the playing field while keeping racial flavour you should:
Coercer: 7 High/ 7 Turrets 2 Mid 4 Low Bonuses - Optimal, Damage, Cap Use(?)
Catalyst: 7 High/ 7 Turrets 3 Mid 3 Low Bonuses - Optimal, Damage, Tracking
Cormorant: 7 High/ 7 Turrets 4 Mid 2 Low Bonuses - Optimal, Optimal, Damage
Thrasher: As is.
This in effect gives each destroyer an effective 8.75 turrets (more DPS then before) and allows them to be competitive in their own right. Losing a turret on the catalyst and coercer frees up alot of grid. Trasher 7 high/ 7 turrets 3 mid 3 low then we have balance ! anyway why not just add one slot for all, all newly rebalanced frigates have enough slots and fitting to make those usable, no need to stick on old with destroyers, ADD ONE SLOT FOR DESTROYERS. Those will not come overpower but usable and easier to fit. You can sure find some good balance by adding one slot and nerfing some other stats.
+1
|

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
191
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 17:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang wrote:Quote: Not sure I agree with this at all.
Artillery is fine. If anything, it's worse than ACs with barrage.
Thrasher is, well, not exactly fine, but certainly not as rediculously OP as you are claiming. I've seen thrashers die to catalysts, rail corms and coercers. The coercers are usually nano/dps fit, and they beat the thrasher (if it doesn't just leave), because the only way for a thrasher to catch a speed coercer is to be shield tanked. And that makes it vulnerable to lasers.
But coercers are mostly bad and need another mid slot Big smile
Then you might explain me when Thrasher isn-Št that much overpowered why I see Thrasher fleets consisting of six up to twelve and more Thrashers every day and never ever saw a catalyst, cormorant or coercer fleet?
I run cormorant fleets regularly because they **** all over thrashers in plexes. |

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
191
|
Posted - 2012.08.15 17:12:00 -
[4] - Quote
iskflakes wrote:Unfortunately some of us don't give a damn about (T1) destroyers. I haven't flown one in the last 3 years and don't intend to ever in the future.
I know why these changes are necessary: You think DUST players will want decent ships within the first 30 seconds of starting EVE, something they can get into a fight with and hope to kill something. While I can see why you want to satisfy them, have you considered that any DUST player that lacks the patience to wait a few weeks to get into decent ship won't become a long term EVE subscriber anyway?
I think you are spending too much time on balancing the beginner ships at the expense of leaving serious gameplay issues that affect older players completely unfixed. In particular, I would rather see a post about giving supercaps proper roles and abilities than about adding 6 CPU to a destroyer.
I use destroyers on an almost daily basis - they are a powerhouse for fw combat. I've probably got at least a thousand kills in a thrasher. |

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
195
|
Posted - 2012.08.21 17:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Hey folks,
Was busy on other stuff, apologies for the late reply.
We are mostly fine with the changes so far I don't want to be harsh, but it really sounds like "sup dawg, I (may) have read the 11 pages, and I think my first idea was the best, I won't change anything, see you later on TQ o/".
That's not really true - looks like they will put the cormorant back at 4 mids thankfully. |

chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate Drunk 'n' Disorderly
241
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 20:32:00 -
[6] - Quote
A cormorant with 3 mids is just a subpar thrasher - the 4 mids is what made the cormorant a good ship, please bring them back!
Yes, it will still fulfill the sniper role fine, but any close range role is greatly nerfed. |
|
|
|