Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Xindi Kraid
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
22
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 07:41:00 -
[361] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: We don't want to add extra slots for the sake of it though, so we'll either keep the current Cormorant layout or give it back it fourth medium slot back at the expense of the low, not decided yet. Like we've been saying, drop the high for a low; with only 7 Turret hardpoints, that 8th high isn't all that useful in the first place, and Caladri don't rely as much on utility highs. |
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel Gank for Profit
18
|
Posted - 2012.09.22 16:39:00 -
[362] - Quote
I agree with the cormie loosing its 8th high for a 4th mid so its 7 4 2 the catalyst is in dire need for more PG 75 with skills is just not enough to fit it properly also the 1 drone it gets is weird |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
576
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 00:56:00 -
[363] - Quote
I was pleasantly surprised by the corm. It was much easier to fit. I could squeeze a light launcher next to a rack of 150mm rails. I also had alot more gank potential. The ship with two MFS pushes over 300 DPS to 23km. |
Lord Distortion
20th Legion
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.23 18:23:00 -
[364] - Quote
As a side note, The other Role destroyers have been fitting is new player easyfit, of which the thrasher is truly king. ( as touched upon earlier in the thread http://i.imgur.com/dKipM.jpg )
You can even create a basic cheapo pvp thrasher fit within 24hours on a new account? shield hesitance rigs & medium shield extender, auto cannons, ab, scram, damage & tracking mods http://www.freewebs.com/szdefault/noskillthrasher.jpg ( I used to do this for lols see whom was daft enough to die. The payoff for skilling & isking up for high level fits on some destoryers seems a gimmik compared to what you can do with other vessels at such sp. )
Trying brawler fits with a destroyer has always been a lost cause, although I did have fun with a small sucker bubble solo camps with very mixed results :s A platedblastercatalyst with scram/web seems to shock numpties in docking games :D ( T2 small hybrid weapons often cost more than medium on the market, making mobile dps catalysts & cormorants silly. just a practicality note )
Good to see many sensible changes in the pipeline, even if theyGÇÖre years late. |
Colman Dietmar
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.25 17:08:00 -
[365] - Quote
The 3 mids on cormorant is not an issue, you can just replace a tracking comp with a tracking enhancer, which would actually improve the fit significantly. And having more lows opens more possibilities for non-sniper fits. So it's a good change in every aspect. |
Cordo Draken
ABOS Industrial Enterprises
17
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 07:16:00 -
[366] - Quote
I don't agree with the Cormorant tweak... It's a Caldari Ship and is supposed to have more Mids. Yeah it sux to only have 1 Low, but would suck waaay more to Lose a Mid! Keep the Mid and Increase the PG. Seriously... do you guys even theory craft this stuff and test it yourselves? The prior buff was the biggest help to destroyers by far... don't destroy the Cormy! eëÆWhomever said, "You only get one shot to make a good impression," was utterly wrong. I've made plenty of great impressions with my AutocannonseëÆ eÉà |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
84
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 14:59:00 -
[367] - Quote
Ok I am coming round to the 125mm cat.
I tried a 400m plate 75mm version thinking the EHP would be better but still found myself being kited under tracking disruption or unable to hit close range frigs even with javelin.
125mm, DCU cat seems to be where it is at, it at least projects damage well enough even under optimal range TD. DonGÇÖt let them get close though.
I still need to fit an ACR rig even though I have no plate as such and do feel the cat deserves a little extra powergrid. I also struggle to fit a T2 disrupter despite not being overly ambitious in module choices.
It needs to be made clear that the blaster cat is not really viable in real PVP unless you like shooting miners though. Maybe just maybe if the FW beacon location change goes through and you can just sit on the warp in with a scram and a AB for range control then the dps will win you some fights before they pull range. You will then need the Drone to kill any NPCGÇÖs as you will have very little DPS projection.
I killed two hookbills in succession in this which is a bit of a record for me. Not really happy with all the meta mods due to CPU.
[Catalyst, 125mm Rail Cat] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Internal Force Field Array I Fourier Transform Tracking Program
Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I Fleeting Warp Disruptor I
125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S 125mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge S
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I Small Ancillary Current Router I
Warrior SW-300 x1
|
Lfod Shi
Lfod's Ratting and Salvage
27
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 15:55:00 -
[368] - Quote
I kinda like the Corm layout the way it is. I've learned to live with 1 low for a long time now. Give her some more speed or agility or sumpthin'. Wooosh! Zoooom! Kapow!
....yeah. GÖ¬ They'll always be bloodclaws to me GÖ½ |
Malice Redeemer
Redeemer Group Joint Venture Conglomerate
128
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 16:51:00 -
[369] - Quote
lordy, its redonk that so much of the winter "balancing" so far is just make them all like the minmatar ship. |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate Wormhole Holders
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.26 17:57:00 -
[370] - Quote
With the total number of slots and fitting resources available destroyers make for an excellent class of utiliy ships which was shown in the AT9 with a number of ECM Cormorants fieled.
Just imagine a logi/tracking link/target painter ship on such platform. Throw in a surviveability bonus in the lines of "-10% to the ship's signature per level" and it would be an interesting toy to complement those "new" tier 3 Battlecruisers.
There's whole field of unused opportunities aprat from the 8 turret doctrine. |
|
Harvey James
Prospero's Sight
28
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 13:48:00 -
[371] - Quote
i think the thrasher optimal range bonus does pin it to arties which doesn't seem very minmatar surely it should be a smaller autocannon bonus caldari are normally the snipers |
Sethimothy
Red Star Trading Corporation Redrum Fleet
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 23:37:00 -
[372] - Quote
I want to make sure I'm understanding this right. How much powergrid is the Catalyst losing? Or is it not that it's losing powergrid, but that other ships are gaining? Mine is so tightly fit as it is... |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
610
|
Posted - 2012.09.30 12:43:00 -
[373] - Quote
The catalyst isn't changing. The Coercer, however, is making out like a bandit. Not only is it getting more pg and CPU, but it's largest tier weapons are becoming much easier to fit. The corn is also aging some PG but losing some CPU. As a mid is moving to a low it actually works pretty well. |
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility Kraken.
70
|
Posted - 2012.09.30 12:59:00 -
[374] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:ColdCutz wrote:Hi CCP Ytterbium. Whatcha thinkin' about? Yay or Nay? Testing out the extra slots on the dev servers? It's great to be able to hash these things out ahead of time on the feedback threads - just curious what your thoughts are on the slots and weapons hardpoint requests. Been busy designing the new ore frigate and destroyers. We definitely like the Coercer second medium slot. The Catalyst and Cormorant changes are still quite up in the air. We don't want to add extra slots for the sake of it though, so we'll either keep the current Cormorant layout or give it back it fourth medium slot back at the expense of the low, not decided yet. We'll definitely have some iteration time on destroyers, this class is tricky to balance, especially with the new hulls coming out.
Whatever your intentions. You DID NERF the Cormorant and If you want to "ballance" destroyers. You may want look more closely @ the Coercer.
Cormorant: 7 High slots (6 turret harpoints), 4 mid slots, 2 Low slots. Damage modules would make up for anything loss from removing 1 turret hard point. Keep everything else the same.
Coercer: slot arrangment is fine, but do NOT increase it's cpu and power grid. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
610
|
Posted - 2012.09.30 13:12:00 -
[375] - Quote
Major Killz wrote:[quote=CCP Ytterbium]
Whatever your intentions. You DID NERF the Cormorant and If you want to "ballance" destroyers. You may want look more closely @ the Coercer.
Cormorant: 7 High slots (6 turret harpoints), 4 mid slots, 2 Low slots. Damage modules would make up for anything loss from removing 1 turret hard point. Keep everything else the same.
Coercer: slot arrangment is fine, but do NOT increase it's cpu and power grid.
Shhhhhhhh... The Thrasher's era is over. It just doesn't realize it yet. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
48
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 18:37:00 -
[376] - Quote
So is the 3 mid cormorant thing definite at this point? Because it's really bad. Sensible alternative is dropping the high for a low, or giving it 8 guns and leaving the slots. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
307
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 19:18:00 -
[377] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:We definitely like the Coercer second medium slot... If your minds are truly made up, then please remove a high and add a low. Seems dubious to have exact same layout as the Gallente and the slowness of the Coercer require that fourth low to add speed/tank/damage as compensation. |
Suki Kasumi
Deninard Industries
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 20:31:00 -
[378] - Quote
Toterra wrote:Can you please change the warp speed of the destroyer to match the frigates. It needs to warp at the same 6au/s as a frigate to keep up with frigate gangs. Sortof like how battlecruisers warp at the same speed as cruisers.
I concur. +1 |
Harvey James
Prospero's Sight
57
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 21:02:00 -
[379] - Quote
Suki Kasumi wrote:Toterra wrote:Can you please change the warp speed of the destroyer to match the frigates. It needs to warp at the same 6au/s as a frigate to keep up with frigate gangs. Sortof like how battlecruisers warp at the same speed as cruisers. I concur. +1
well maybe 4.5 AU makes more sense and they need to drop the sig rad below 60 and increase their speed a fair bit |
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility
78
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 21:56:00 -
[380] - Quote
Suki Kasumi wrote:Toterra wrote:Can you please change the warp speed of the destroyer to match the frigates. It needs to warp at the same 6au/s as a frigate to keep up with frigate gangs. Sortof like how battlecruisers warp at the same speed as cruisers. I concur. +1
Supported! I didn't notice that either. |
|
Luc Chastot
Moira. Villore Accords
26
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 22:09:00 -
[381] - Quote
Again, Catalyst should lose that optimal bonus and gain a falloff one. We want to go all guns blaz(t)ing. |
Sparkus Volundar
Applied Creations The Fendahlian Collective
18
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 09:54:00 -
[382] - Quote
Dear CCP Ytterbium,
I just noticed that the ship mass values were not listed in your first post. Sorry if this has been mentioned before.
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): xxxx / xxxx / -missing value- / xxxx
I guess they are unchanged too?
Regards, Sparks |
Snow Iskold
Arturis Coalition TERRA FIRMA.
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 21:02:00 -
[383] - Quote
Guess What! |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
637
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 14:21:00 -
[384] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium, I'm dying to know what you're doing to the cat. Tell us now! |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
1307
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:20:00 -
[385] - Quote
You wish is my command
After some more internal and external play testings, we are fairly happy with existing destroyers, except for the Catalyst, as mentioned in the new destroyer balancing thread.
We want to increase the fittings on it so it is able to mount neutron blasters, or even have a hope to fit 150mm railguns (with fitting implants / rigs). However, by doing so we are removing its tiny dronebay to make its role more focused on turrets and keep a clear distinction with the new Gallente drone destroyer.
- Powergrid increased from 60 to 70, CPU increased from 170 to 178
- Drone bay and bandwidth removed
Doing so approximately keeps the same damage potential as before, except you have slightly more range as using neutrons instead of ions. It also means you don't have to rely on a destructible damage source (light drone) to compensate for your downgraded guns.
Also, we want to reduce mass on existing destroyers to make them more noticeable against the new hulls. Changes are the most important for the ships that needed the most, while the thrasher was slightly tuned down. For instance, we estimate around 200m/s to be gained on MWD speeds for a Catalyst.
- Coercer: mass decreased from 1665000 to 1650000, agility increased from 2.75 to 2.77 to keep close align time
- Cormorant: mass decreased from 1892000 to 1700000, agility increased from 2.5 to 2.78 to keep close align time
- Catalyst: mass decreased from 1761000 to 1550000, agility increased from 2.45 to 2.76 to keep close align time
- Thrasher: mass increased from 1542000 to 1600000, agility decreased from 2.96 to 2.8 to keep close align time
We also had a look at the Catalyst bonuses, but we find them acceptable as they are right now - swapping turret optimal range to falloff would be detrimental to long range Catalyst setups, especially with the fittings changes, that's why no modifications are planned on that front.
|
|
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
2306
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:23:00 -
[386] - Quote
Hum. Interesting. :) Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Omnathious Deninard
Extrinsic Operations
220
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:29:00 -
[387] - Quote
I like it Ideas for Dorne Improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1658683#post1658683 Updated 9/21/12 |
Sparkus Volundar
Applied Creations The Fendahlian Collective
18
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:34:00 -
[388] - Quote
Thanks for the reply. |
Lili Lu
515
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:40:00 -
[389] - Quote
Well this is better. I still think you have to stop giving 10% optimal bonuses on guns with already the longest optimal. So, I think you should have reduced the optimal on the Corm to 7.5 or 5 percent per level.
The Catalyst will still not excite me, but blaster combat in general is not my thing. At least the new revision will present combat role options for a Gallente pilot and not be so gimped in fittings as compared to the others. And, blasters will still sorta blow with only two mids, and thus only one scram. But the new mass does mean that the Catalyst will have an incentive to fit speed mods and not just damage mods in the lows so that it stands a chance to hold down something long enough to kill it, even if that target has a decent tank and a web.
So overall an improvement. I don't fly blaster boats much. But I suppose this change may make the blaster catalyst more viable. Thanks.
edti - thanks for getting rid of the drone. one drone on any ship is more of a pita than it's worth. Two drones are worth messing with though. So please in the future if you are going to give a small dronebay to anything make it two lights at least. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
105
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:41:00 -
[390] - Quote
The catalyst needs three mids if its supposed to use blasters...
The only reason 2 mids will work on a Coercer is because of lolscorch. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |