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) |
Lili Lu
515
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:47:00 -
[391] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote: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. Maybe. It will need some testing to know. Because the mass reduction and resulting mwd gain will make this thing a rather zippy one winged destroyer i suspect. At least though now it will be able to fit 150s and snipe as an alternate fitting. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
637
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 18:17:00 -
[392] - Quote
Thank you very much CCP Yterrbium!
Nuetron Blaster with a Genolution Implant Set: (I have a few of these saved as I like them so much)
High: Nuetron Blaster II x 8 Mid: Limited MWD Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler Low: DC II TE II x 2 Rigs: Hybrid Collision Hybrid Burst
Null: 342 - 359 DPS depending on implants. 6.1km + 10.8km. Optimal + Falloff x 2 = 27km. Faction AM: 429 - 451 DPS. 2.2km + 7.7km Void: 479 - 503 DPS. 3.3km + 3.8km
OR (if you want more DPS)
New Lows: TE II MFS II Internal Force Field Array
Null: 410 - 430 DPS. 5.4km + 8.5km Faction AM: 514 - 540 DPS. 1.9km + 6.1km Void: 574 - 602 DPS. 2.9k + 3.1km
You can fit 150s on the Catalyst buy I prefer to pimp out the DPS on the 125s that no longer need fitting help AND actually get a point on the thing. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
899
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 21:02:00 -
[393] - Quote
Fitting space at the expense of the dronebay is fine, a single light drone is essentiallly worthless anyway so this represents a pretty straightforward buff.
CCP Ytterbium wrote: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.
There's such a thing as long ranged catalyst setups (I mean ones that people actually, unironicly, fly on TQ)?
Either way, as things stand the optimal and falloff bonuses fit poorly together - whichever weapon type you focus on, you will effectively have a 'wasted' bonus since increases to falloff on rails and optimal on blasters are of little use. All the other three destroyers can use their three bonuses effectively together, why must the Catalyst be hamstrung in this way? Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Jarin Arenos
Card Shark Industries
45
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 22:08:00 -
[394] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
- 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
Can someone enlighten me on just what the mass difference will do if it keeps t he same effective agility? |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
86
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 22:35:00 -
[395] - Quote
Jarin Arenos wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
- 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
Can someone enlighten me on just what the mass difference will do if it keeps t he same effective agility?
Higher top speed I believe.
Speed change is nice; if that extra 200m/s for the cat is correct then this brings them nicely up the new cruiser speeds and with an overdrive/nano will be around assault ship Microwarpdrive speeds
Nice fittings change son the Cat, I like the flexibility of the current bonuses with those fittings.
|
Bouh Revetoile
Barricade.
82
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 22:36:00 -
[396] - Quote
This is christmas before christmas. The new catalyst will be awesome. BTW, there is some catalyst with railguns on TQ, and I even think they are more efective than blaster catalyst for everything else than highsec suicide gank.
Though the mass reduction will make them way faster with MWD/AB, and that was really needed, because cruiser will be as fast as them otherwise.
PS : optimal + falloff bonuses allow the catalyst for both railguns or blasters fit. Optimal and falloff also benefit to both of them, allowing railgun to extend range without downgrading ammo, and blasters to "kite" AC ships with void ammo. |
The VC's
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 00:56:00 -
[397] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:There's such a thing as long ranged catalyst setups (I mean ones that people actually, unironicly, fly on TQ)?
Seriously mate, give the 125mm Rail Cat a go.
Edit. the 150mm version is gonna suprise a few people too.. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
310
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 07:50:00 -
[398] - Quote
The VC's wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:There's such a thing as long ranged catalyst setups (I mean ones that people actually, unironicly, fly on TQ)? Seriously mate, give the 125mm Rail Cat a go. Edit. the 150mm version is gonna suprise a few people too.. With that low a mass they are going to be downright OP .. what is supposed to catch them, one will literally have to start at point blank range to have a chance .. base speed with just MWD is in excess of 2k/s which is more than the current Thrash
Why handle the others with a feather touch and then slap the Cata with the whole damn goose?
Yes, destroyers will be close to the speeds that can be achieved by the revised cruisers, so what? If one chooses to bring a knife to a gun fight one has it bloody well coming .. if you want to run circles around something buy a damn frig! Destroyers are not meant to be able to chase down their prey (frigates), the insane sphere of death they can all produce testifies to this. They are specialized ships and should die horribly if a heavier ship arrives unless they bolt ...
To Ytterbium: Ignore the calls from the Nano-age Reminiscence Country Club and balance them according their intended use .. against frigates and other destroyers. Do not make the mistake of including cruisers+ in the deliberations.
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Random Rule Conform Corpname A Point In Space
56
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 10:34:00 -
[399] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:The VC's wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:There's such a thing as long ranged catalyst setups (I mean ones that people actually, unironicly, fly on TQ)? Seriously mate, give the 125mm Rail Cat a go. Edit. the 150mm version is gonna suprise a few people too.. With that low a mass they are going to be downright OP .. what is supposed to catch them, one will literally have to start at point blank range to have a chance .. base speed with just MWD is in excess of 2k/s which is more than the current Thrash Why handle the others with a feather touch and then slap the Cata with the whole damn goose? Yes, destroyers will be close to the speeds that can be achieved by the revised cruisers, so what? If one chooses to bring a knife to a gun fight one has it bloody well coming .. if you want to run circles around something buy a damn frig! Destroyers are not meant to be able to chase down their prey (frigates), the insane sphere of death they can all produce testifies to this. They are specialized ships and should die horribly if a heavier ship arrives unless they bolt ... To Ytterbium: Ignore the calls from the Nano-age Reminiscence Country Club and balance them according their intended use .. against frigates and other destroyers. Do not make the mistake of including cruisers+ in the deliberations.
no, just give it a try. cat still has only two mids. for once, let the blaster boat be the fastest one and lets see how this turns out. i mean there is still the test phase on buckingham (btw, whats the eta on this, ccp? ).
|
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
310
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 10:43:00 -
[400] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:no, just give it a try. cat still has only two mids. for once, let the blaster boat be the fastest one and lets see how this turns out. i mean there is still the test phase on buckingham (btw, whats the eta on this, ccp? ). Certainly, just doubt you'll see many blaster fits when it has a speed surplus high enough to kite almost everything using rails
|
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Random Rule Conform Corpname A Point In Space
57
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 11:31:00 -
[401] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:no, just give it a try. cat still has only two mids. for once, let the blaster boat be the fastest one and lets see how this turns out. i mean there is still the test phase on buckingham (btw, whats the eta on this, ccp? ). Certainly, just doubt you'll see many blaster fits when it has a speed surplus high enough to kite almost everything using rails
you mean the one which will die horribly to any of the new dessies and any speedy non t1 frig with a web? crucifier, rocket breacher and maybe slasher will also have an easy time shutting a rail cat downor go under the guns and eating it up one by one. don't get me wrong. there is much potential for an awesome ship, but there are also some good counters in the dessy and frig realm, so i am not overly concerned.
|
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
83
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 12:50:00 -
[402] - Quote
We'll see what happens. The most used or effective destroyer's will most likely be Minmatar and Caldari, with some Amarr. However, the Coercer can be kited in overheated warp disruptor range by a Thrasher, Comorant and Catalyst NOW. The alpha from a art-Thrasher is still very powerful. I don't fear the Catalyst now and I won't after these proposed changes.
Most of these ships will still be the pray of certain assault frigates and each other. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
643
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 15:01:00 -
[403] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Veshta Yoshida wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:no, just give it a try. cat still has only two mids. for once, let the blaster boat be the fastest one and lets see how this turns out. i mean there is still the test phase on buckingham (btw, whats the eta on this, ccp? ). Certainly, just doubt you'll see many blaster fits when it has a speed surplus high enough to kite almost everything using rails you mean the one which will die horribly to any of the new dessies and any speedy non t1 frig with a web? crucifier, rocket breacher and maybe slasher will also have an easy time shutting a rail cat downor go under the guns and eating it up one by one. don't get me wrong. there is much potential for an awesome ship, but there are also some good counters in the dessy and frig realm, so i am not overly concerned.
One does not kite in a rail Catalyst. One charges. Pick a point past the target and double click it. Overheat your MWD at the last moment. It is much harder to get under a target's guns if you're approaching eachother at 6km/s then if you're 4km/s frigate is chasing a 2km/s target. Also - if you are fighting a ship famous for TD - load a longer range ammo. Faction lead does 289 DPS at 23 km with 14km falloff. Lastly, 125mm rail cat shoots every 1.53 seconds. The impetus is on the frigate to get under the guns rather then in the destroyer to kill it before you get there. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
108
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 15:13:00 -
[404] - Quote
Major Killz wrote:We'll see what happens. The most used or effective destroyer's will most likely be Minmatar and Caldari, with some Amarr. However, the Coercer can be kited in overheated warp disruptor range by a Thrasher, Comorant and Catalyst NOW. The alpha from a art-Thrasher is still very powerful. I don't fear the Catalyst now and I won't after these proposed changes.
Most of these ships will still be the pray of certain assault frigates and each other.
Coercer will be king. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
899
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 15:40:00 -
[405] - Quote
Bouh Revetoile wrote:PS : optimal + falloff bonuses allow the catalyst for both railguns or blasters fit. Optimal and falloff also benefit to both of them, allowing railgun to extend range without downgrading ammo, and blasters to "kite" AC ships with void ammo.
The role bonus only gives 3.5km extra falloff to a Catalyst with 150mm rails, and the benefit of optimal bonuses to blasters is typically measured in metres rather than kilometres. These are marginal benefits, and to all practical purposes the hull will always be effectively losing a bonus except in one-in-a-thousand fringe cases.
None of the other three existing destroyer hulls are hamstrung in this way and there's no reason why the Catalyst should be. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Lavitakus Bromier
The Scope Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 15:43:00 -
[406] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:Major Killz wrote:We'll see what happens. The most used or effective destroyer's will most likely be Minmatar and Caldari, with some Amarr. However, the Coercer can be kited in overheated warp disruptor range by a Thrasher, Comorant and Catalyst NOW. The alpha from a art-Thrasher is still very powerful. I don't fear the Catalyst now and I won't after these proposed changes.
Most of these ships will still be the pray of certain assault frigates and each other. Coercer will be king.
+1 |
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
83
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 16:16:00 -
[407] - Quote
Lavitakus Bromier wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:Major Killz wrote:We'll see what happens. The most used or effective destroyer's will most likely be Minmatar and Caldari, with some Amarr. However, the Coercer can be kited in overheated warp disruptor range by a Thrasher, Comorant and Catalyst NOW. The alpha from a art-Thrasher is still very powerful. I don't fear the Catalyst now and I won't after these proposed changes.
Most of these ships will still be the pray of certain assault frigates and each other. Coercer will be king. +1
Kinda like a Slicer > Harpy, right? Yes indeed.
Don't get me wrong. I've flown and been in love with Coercer's since early 2008, but I'm not delusional. I've been defeated in a Coercer by some who know how to exploit a Coercer's weaknesses and I've done so myself to others.
Now! In null (0.0) there will be r3t@rds esploded to them like they are now but more so. In factional warfare, because of the widespread use of tracking disruptors; a Coercer losses it's effectiveness and I only use a Coercer almost exclusively against large groups of frigates.
With a rail-Harpy or art-Jaguar I have no issues. I just switch to long range ammunition and watch them try to bring my range down from 70,000m (70km). Same can be said with art-Thrasher and rail-Cormorant as they are now. All of the aforementioned use @tleast 1 stasis webifier.
- Boss mode erry day = / Always adapting to the eviroment like a BEAST = / |
The VC's
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 16:18:00 -
[408] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:One does not kite in a rail Catalyst. One charges.
+1
It's a strafer, not a kiter. A long point and good falloff means you keep your tackle and damage while slingshoting around.
|
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
644
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 16:41:00 -
[409] - Quote
Do not underestimate the Beam Coercer. It will be able to lock and hit out to 60km. It has instant ammo swap ability and it's tracking is roughly 30% better then the other rail and artillery platforms. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
644
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 17:41:00 -
[410] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:PS : optimal + falloff bonuses allow the catalyst for both railguns or blasters fit. Optimal and falloff also benefit to both of them, allowing railgun to extend range without downgrading ammo, and blasters to "kite" AC ships with void ammo. The role bonus only gives 3.5km extra falloff to a Catalyst with 150mm rails, and the benefit of optimal bonuses to blasters is typically measured in metres rather than kilometres. These are marginal benefits, and to all practical purposes the hull will always be effectively losing a bonus except in one-in-a-thousand fringe cases. None of the other three existing destroyer hulls are hamstrung in this way and there's no reason why the Catalyst should be.
One TE and the falloff for that 150mm II is 14.6 km. The falloff for an unbonused 150 is 7.5km or 9.875km with a TE. 15.3km optimal + 14.6 falloff on a small rail for antimatter is more then significant.
As for blasters - TE again for the win. And a blaster cat pimp slaps an AC Thrasher so hard in terms of damage projection it isn't even funny. |
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
899
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 19:41:00 -
[411] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Bouh Revetoile wrote:PS : optimal + falloff bonuses allow the catalyst for both railguns or blasters fit. Optimal and falloff also benefit to both of them, allowing railgun to extend range without downgrading ammo, and blasters to "kite" AC ships with void ammo. The role bonus only gives 3.5km extra falloff to a Catalyst with 150mm rails, and the benefit of optimal bonuses to blasters is typically measured in metres rather than kilometres. These are marginal benefits, and to all practical purposes the hull will always be effectively losing a bonus except in one-in-a-thousand fringe cases. None of the other three existing destroyer hulls are hamstrung in this way and there's no reason why the Catalyst should be. One TE and the falloff for that 150mm II is 14.6 km. The falloff for an unbonused 150 is 7.5km or 9.875km with a TE. Or you could use a Cormorant, which isn't hamstrung with split-range bonuses and so all that falloff is still optimal. And which, you know, can fit a tracking enhancer too.
Quote:As for blasters - TE again for the win. And a blaster cat pimp slaps an AC Thrasher so hard in terms of damage projection it isn't even funny. Are you somehow reading into my post that if catalysts had a decent set of non-clashing bonuses they would also be banned from using tracking enhancers? "Its ok for the catalyst to have a stupid set of bonuses because you can mitigate the stupidity a little by using a precious lowslot for a tracking enhancer" isn't exactly a compelling argument. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
644
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 20:43:00 -
[412] - Quote
I'll tell all the tornado pilots fitting arty that they're doing it wrong then. I'll also stop using my Harpy with 9.6km optimal on Null because obviously optimal bonuses don't help blasters at all. |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
109
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 20:58:00 -
[413] - Quote
Major Killz wrote:Lavitakus Bromier wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:Major Killz wrote:We'll see what happens. The most used or effective destroyer's will most likely be Minmatar and Caldari, with some Amarr. However, the Coercer can be kited in overheated warp disruptor range by a Thrasher, Comorant and Catalyst NOW. The alpha from a art-Thrasher is still very powerful. I don't fear the Catalyst now and I won't after these proposed changes.
Most of these ships will still be the pray of certain assault frigates and each other. Coercer will be king. +1 Kinda like a Slicer > Harpy, right? Yes indeed. Don't get me wrong. I've flown and been in love with Coercer's since early 2008, but I'm not delusional. I've been defeated in a Coercer by some who know how to exploit a Coercer's weaknesses and I've done so myself to others. Now! In null (0.0) there will be r3t@rds esploded to them like they are now but more so. In factional warfare, because of the widespread use of tracking disruptors; a Coercer losses it's effectiveness and I only use a Coercer almost exclusively against large groups of frigates. With a rail-Harpy or art-Jaguar I have no issues. I just switch to long range ammunition and watch them try to bring my range down from 70,000m (70km). Same can be said with art-Thrasher and rail-Cormorant as they are now. All of the aforementioned use @tleast 1 stasis webifier. - Boss mode erry day = / Always adapting to the eviroment like a BEAST = /
No kind of like it will kill anything that gets within 20km of it with pulse
And kill anything that comes within 40 with beams.
It will be hilariously powerful.
(The new Caldari dessie will be better though) |
Randy Wray
BLOOM. Bloomswarm
2
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 22:14:00 -
[414] - Quote
I really dont see the logic behind giving the cormorant a second low, how is it going to benefit from it?
The ship is pretty much built around rails, the rail fitting needs midslots for webs if youre a middle range soloer or sensor boosters and tracking computers if youre long range fit.
Now both a sebo and a TC can be replaced by a lowslot module, but not webs. Dual web rail corm is a very viable fit and as a caldari ship it needs all the mids it can get.
Compare the post-change corm to a thrasher, lets say we fit blasters, a rocket launcher, MSE, scram and mwd in mids(generic lows) The corm will be slower, have worse damage projection, similar dps and similar tank. It would just get slaughtered by a thrasher in the approach since the thrasher can start dealing damage from outside scram range even with EMP, the corm will have to load null to get out to similar range and if it does the thrasher can just go up close and then the corm will have to choose between dealing worse dps up close or losing 5 seconds of damage application to reload close range ammo. This is just against the thrasher, the catalyst will just roflstomp a blaster corm and a post-change coercer would be even worse. A rail fit with 3 mids isnt viable because any frig will just get under your tracking, I know this because even if you web your target 75mm railguns have difficulty tracking a frigate orbiting at 500 |
Ark Anhammar
EVE University Ivy League
24
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 23:09:00 -
[415] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: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. Oh thank you SO much CCP Ytterbium!! This is an excellent first step toward clearly-defined (and bonused) Gallente ships!
Now, let's apply this same logic across the board and start giving Gallente solely-bonused drone boats (or maybe tank+drones) OR solely-bonused Gunboats and stop all that split dps, split damage garbage. Nobody likes split dps, because the ship can't shine at one thing when it's trying to do two things at once.
Ships like the Myrmidon, having a tank+drone bonus allows is to fit whatever appropriate turret weapon system we need, and this affords us much more flexibility in both fittings and turret-damage application (drone damage is always gonna be Therm or Expl, since Caldari and Amarr drones are broken)...
Great job, though! I'm so excited to see design iteration in this direction! |
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
83
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 00:14:00 -
[416] - Quote
Yes beam Coercer All powerfull and p overpowered... I'll leave that notion to those who've used a beam-Coercer solo. However, its uses are more for fleets, but then Cormorant and even a Catalyst will be and is currently superior with long range turrets = /
All powerfull indeed.
Even though the propose Coercer has 1 less low slot. Which means etheir less damage or range compared to what it is now. You know! A well deserved damage NERF since it's receiving a mid slot.
However, If the Coercer still had all its current slots and was given an extra mid slot it would be overpowered, but CCP didn't. Infact I was saying as much long ago, that if CCP did give a Coercer a mid slot. They would have to NERF it's damage or else OP.
If you look @ what CCP is proposing to do with a Catalyst. Using railguns a Catalyst will out damage and out range any Coercer setup. It's somewhat the same story with a Cormorant. Which will be on par damage wise to all Coercer setups.
CCP brought everthing else up to a Thrasher or Coercer level, in terms of damage or more with regard to the Catalyst. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
123
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 00:30:00 -
[417] - Quote
Why is the thrasher getting a speed nerf? Did CCP hear that people were armor-tanking them and decide this was unacceptable? |
Luc Chastot
Moira. Villore Accords
32
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 01:50:00 -
[418] - Quote
Very interesting changes. Blasters don't benefit much from a bonus to optimal range, but I guess the agility buff will help, more so considering I now have 1 (or 2, haven't run the numbers yet) free rig slot to increase range even more. This opens new posibilities for the Cat, which is something I approve of. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
899
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 06:40:00 -
[419] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:I'll tell all the tornado pilots fitting arty that they're doing it wrong then. I'll also stop using my Harpy with 9.6km optimal on Null because obviously optimal bonuses don't help blasters at all. Please don't tell me you're seriously arguing that the Tornado wouldn't be a superior artillery platform if it had an optimal bonus, or the blaster Harpy wouldn't work better with falloff. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Rayner Vanguard
EVE University Ivy League
1
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 09:38:00 -
[420] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:You wish is my command
- 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
Everything looks good except for the speed Remember that Coercer and Catalyst is using armor tank, which is making them slower
Both of them already have slower speed than the shield destroyer, then armor tank them will make them more difficult Also, with less shield and less mid, we can't shield tank it
|
|
|
|
|
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 |