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) |
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
881
|
Posted - 2012.10.28 17:01:00 -
[451] - Quote
I appreciate trying to make it so all of the destroyers aren't the same, but realistically you need to have a web in order to be able to kill a frigate, particularly when you're in a hull with a lower base speed than a frigate and particularly considering that most frigates nowadays can fit their own web. |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club Transmission Lost
190
|
Posted - 2012.10.28 18:57:00 -
[452] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:I appreciate trying to make it so all of the destroyers aren't the same, but realistically you need to have a web in order to be able to kill a frigate, particularly when you're in a hull with a lower base speed than a frigate and particularly considering that most frigates nowadays can fit their own web.
Precisely, the gallente destroyer needs another mid to be any good, its supposed to be a blaster boat but it only has two mids for MWD and scram, no way can it hold anything down to blast them. |
Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
673
|
Posted - 2012.10.28 19:34:00 -
[453] - Quote
Does an AC MSE Thrasher get roundly criticized for a lack of a web? The future Catalyst trades places with it as the fastest destroyer. It will also be able to fit Nuetrons. Add a TE and your optimal plus falloff is 6.3km + 7.2 km with Null compared to 1km + 9km for barrage with the Thrasher. More DPS farther. |
Xuixien
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
165
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 19:09:00 -
[454] - Quote
The problem here is that not every ship should be viable in solo PvP. Giving every Destroyer the ability to fit a 1MN MWD, a fat tank, enough guns to do 200 DPS, and a scram/web to "pin down" Frigates... all at the same time... is just stupid.
There should be trade offs between tackle, speed, tank, DPS, etc. Not every Destroyer should have all of them at the same time. For example: Your Catalyst has 3-4 LowSlots and only 2 mids? Cool, you get to choose between damage/tracking or armor tank. Alternately, you could fit damage mods and go for a shield tank, but lose your ability to tackle anything. Trade offs.
Every Destroyer should have at least two midslots for better gang support; prop mod + point/web. You're either an auxiliary point or you can web down drones and blap them. But I certainly don't think that armor-tanking destroyers need to fit both a scram and a web. And I don't think that shield-tanking destroyers need to have a lot of lowslots, either. There should be more consequences for choosing to fit a certain way over another, not making all the destroyers perform the same with different tools. Everyone vs Everyone Xuixien - Space Cat, Queen of Rens |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
7
|
Posted - 2012.11.11 14:18:00 -
[455] - Quote
Vimsy Vortis wrote:I appreciate trying to make it so all of the destroyers aren't the same, but realistically you need to have a web in order to be able to kill a frigate, particularly when you're in a hull with a lower base speed than a frigate and particularly considering that most frigates nowadays can fit their own web. MSE Thrasher disagrees. |
Aliventi
Southern Cross Trilogy Flying Dangerous
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.14 16:02:00 -
[456] - Quote
idk if this is the best place for this, nor do i know if I will ever get a response. However....
Why does the Corax (Caldari destroyer's name) have a kinetic missile damage bonus? Let's take a look at the 4 main weapon systems:
- Lasers only do EM and THM because they are essentially focusing light. It makes sense that EM and THM is the damage type lasers do.
- Hybrids: afaik only does THM and KIN damage. but that makes sense because it is essentially a insanely hot plasma hitting you.
- Projectiles: Does all types of damage. This makes sense because you can make bullets burst out light, explode, catch fire, actually hit the targets.
- Missiles: All 4 damage types. Again with the projectiles you can make a missile do a lot of things.
I though Caldari was getting away from this Kenetic missiles damage bonus during the rebalancing. The kestrel lost the bonus. The Caracal lost the bonus. I had hopes the Drake would lose it also. I am so filled with joy because of the option of doing actual DPS with other damage types for the penalty of having to take 10 seconds to reload. But this kinetic bonus just pigeon holes caldari pilots to one predictable damage type.
IMO there is no good reason I can think of why a ship would even care what type of missile are loaded. All the ship does is fire the missile. It makes so much more sense for a ship to get an ROF bonus than a damage type bonus.
We have these wonderful flavors of missiles. I want choices. I want to use these other damage types. I want to adapt to situations like projectiles can. My Raven is awesome because I can adapt to to those changing situations. It feels great doing a useful damage type to a target. I am sure the Caracal and kestrel will have the same level of greatness.
My question is why is the bonus still popping up after other ships were just bonused away from it? It just doesn't make sense. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
88
|
Posted - 2012.11.15 00:47:00 -
[457] - Quote
RIP cormorant
seriously though these utility highs on long-range ships have got to go, they're totally useless. |
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate Drunk 'n' Disorderly
241
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 20:32:00 -
[458] - 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. |
Michael Harari
The Hatchery Team Liquid
353
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 20:41:00 -
[459] - Quote
chatgris wrote: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.
Thats exactly what I told fozzie earlier in the thread. However, the new caldari destroyer has 4 mids, and is superior for everything but super long range sniping |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
116
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 21:07:00 -
[460] - Quote
It seems to me that CCP Ytterbium already has his mind set on the current setups and doesn't seem to listen and interact like our fave dev fozzie all these dessies in this page suffer from having to have 8 highs unlike the new dessies which rather limits them to certain roles. The catalyst which really ought to have a more flexible slot layout as a blaster boat 2 mids is really not good. coercer should have another low. Cormorant is too obsessed with sniper role and ought to have more opportunity to be a blaster boat with less optimal range bonus and more damage and extra mid. Thrasher why isn't this a traditional fast falloff ship? extra low He still hasn't updated the OP why? Drone improvements/ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=133767 Electronic Attack Frigate ideas for improvement https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1986048#post1986048 |
|
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
126
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 22:07:00 -
[461] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:It seems to me that CCP Ytterbium already has his mind set on the current setups and doesn't seem to listen and interact like our fave dev fozzie all these dessies in this page suffer from having to have 8 highs unlike the new dessies which rather limits them to certain roles. The catalyst which really ought to have a more flexible slot layout as a blaster boat 2 mids is really not good. coercer should have another low. Cormorant is too obsessed with sniper role and ought to have more opportunity to be a blaster boat with less optimal range bonus and more damage and extra mid. Thrasher why isn't this a traditional fast falloff ship? extra low He still hasn't updated the OP why?
From that list, only the Coercer might have issues. The others are fine, especially Thrasher and Catalyst. |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
648
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 22:22:00 -
[462] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:chatgris wrote: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. Thats exactly what I told CCP earlier in the thread. However, the new caldari destroyer has 4 mids, and is superior for everything but super long range sniping
Its a missile ship. So for close range you will likely need to put a web on it if you want to do damage to an ab frigate. So I would say its really different. And in any event there is no need to make the corm an inferior thrasher. Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
126
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 23:24:00 -
[463] - Quote
Cearain wrote:Michael Harari wrote:chatgris wrote: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. Thats exactly what I told CCP earlier in the thread. However, the new caldari destroyer has 4 mids, and is superior for everything but super long range sniping Its a missile ship. So for close range you will likely need to put a web on it if you want to do damage to an ab frigate. So I would say its really different. And in any event there is no need to make the corm an inferior thrasher.
With the recent missile changes and its bonus to explosion velocity it will still hit an AB rifter for about 80% damage and any (non overheating) AB-Incursus for full damage with navy rockets. Also precision light missiles on the other hand will hit almost anything for full damage.
Not to lessen any concerns about the new niche of the Cormorant though. |
Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
23
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 11:26:00 -
[464] - Quote
I don't like the new destroyer names (assuming they are final), they don't follow racial naming theme and don't seem to have meaning (as opposed to tier 3 BC names which were very good). Especially The Dragoon...Congregator would be much better name for a drone boat and would fit with standard religious theme of Amarr ships. |
Aurelius Vicci
Effblock Materials Limited
2
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 16:40:00 -
[465] - Quote
Luscius Uta wrote:I don't like the new destroyer names (assuming they are final), they don't follow racial naming theme and don't seem to have meaning (as opposed to tier 3 BC names which were very good). Especially The Dragoon...Congregator would be much better name for a drone boat and would fit with standard religious theme of Amarr ships.
a rose by any other name..
edit: also, wrong thread |
Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
27
|
Posted - 2012.11.18 23:02:00 -
[466] - Quote
Aurelius Vicci wrote:
edit: also, wrong thread
LOL I am fail
|
Major Killz
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
108
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 23:31:00 -
[467] - Quote
Shopping List
1. Thrasher (still win!) 2. Coercer x 4 (1 setup, beam-fleet) [SMUG]-áSORRY for party rocking! v0v
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
1351
|
Posted - 2012.12.04 10:40:00 -
[468] - Quote
Unsticking, let's make some space for future threads. |
|
|
|
|
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 |