| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rimsky
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
0
   |
Posted - 2012.08.09 22:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
Started up this thread about drone's and ship fitting mainly.
1. I think the Proteus should have 1 more offensive subsystem or at least a slightly edited one. As with the 2 main gun subsystems 1(Dissonic encoding platform) gives you full gun bonuses and no drone slots for that subsystem.
2. (hybrid propulsion armature) with 5 guns and gives 100% (in terms of bonuses) to guns. But sacrifices 1 extra bonus for 2 drones.
3. I personally would like a new remake of the drone synthesis projector which could give you at least 1 more drone (making 5 drones like the Ishtar) and 1 more bonus. and getting rid of any guns from that subsystem. giving the player more drone options and more spaces for drone link augmenters and other kits like that. (personal kitting in my opinion)
And then finally making the hybrid propulsion armature a compromise between the both.
Now about the advanced drone commands.
this is an interesting topic i and many others i knew were thinking about.
i was thinking of better drone settings and command options. because at the moment the drones are lacking in terms of intelligence. i sat there getting shot (could take it fine with my tank) and my drones just sat there. i was jammed so i couldn't target anything. so this is what i was thinking the new drone command tag should include.
1. If Shield/Armour/Hull damage = x% return to bay
2. if owner is under attack automatically engage aggressor. (unless the drones were jammed too/or another target was provided)
3.when no specified target is given (as i frequently let my drone slowly destroy everything) go for priority targets (player can set. for example ( target aggressor when 1st priority is jamming 2nd if aggressor is webbing 3rd if aggressor is disrupting tracking )) and so on.
4 (could be another option group for remote repair drones.) if any fleet member has x% of Shield/Armour/Hull repair
5 apply for different drone repair type. (Armour amount will only apply to fleet members with Armour damage.)
now my personal input (doesn't have anything to do with above) cargo hauling drones not for between systems but between ships in drone control range. they carry something like 250-1000 m3 and are slow and not well armored. s oi can put ore into the orca without breaking a lock or even stop mining. so as well as guard and assist there will be (only for special hauler drones.) a transfer. could only be used for ore or objects of the same type.
i know its a really long post but i look forward for some feedback. i could be wrong and make ships overpowered and stuff but is my opinions and observations.
thanks for reading and i look forward for your reply's. |
Nicaragua
Dark-Rising
15
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 09:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades. |
eneman81
Caucasian Culture Club
Transmission Lost
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 09:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
to be fair the proteus already steps all over the deimos toes already... |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
Dead On Arrival Alliance
1033
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rather hard to make sense of the Proteus suggestions, and you don't really give many reasons as to why these changes are required.
Proteus currently sits in between the Myrm and Ishtar in the drone config, and I feel that is an appropriate position for a T3. If anything, one extra midslot would make it more viable as a sentry boat.
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
Wuxi Wuxilla
The Tuskers
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Quote:
this is an interesting topic i and many others i knew were thinking about.
i was thinking of better drone settings and command options. because at the moment the drones are lacking in terms of intelligence. i sat there getting shot (could take it fine with my tank) and my drones just sat there. i was jammed so i couldn't target anything. so this is what i was thinking the new drone command tag should include.
1. If Shield/Armour/Hull damage = x% return to bay
2. if owner is under attack automatically engage aggressor. (unless the drones were jammed too/or another target was provided)
3.when no specified target is given (as i frequently let my drone slowly destroy everything) go for priority targets (player can set. for example ( target aggressor when 1st priority is jamming 2nd if aggressor is webbing 3rd if aggressor is disrupting tracking )) and so on.
4 (could be another option group for remote repair drones.) if any fleet member has x% of Shield/Armour/Hull repair
5 apply for different drone repair type. (Armour amount will only apply to fleet members with Armour damage.)
Don't agree one bit. Drones need micromanagement and that's good. If anything, I'd rather completely remove the Aggressive setting.
The only thing I'd like to see are keybinds to specific drone-groups, so you don't have to click around in your drone interface. |
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Proteus does not need a drone buff. T3 ships are supposed to be general purpose, but even with a bastardized single-module gang support build the Proteus stomps all over the eos. While part of that is the fault of the eos being kind of sucky ever since it lost two turrets and only getting 75mb bandwidth a large chunk of it lays in just how good the proteus is.
[Proteus, Multi-Support Minimal Tank]
Corpum A-Type Medium Armor Repairer
Corpii A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Republic Fleet 10MN Afterburner
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link
250mm Railgun II, Spike M
250mm Railgun II, Spike M
250mm Railgun II, Spike M
Mining Foreman Link - Laser Optimization II
Medium Shield Transporter II
Medium 'Solace' Remote Bulwark Reconstruction
[empty high slot]
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I
Medium Capacitor Control Circuit I
Proteus Defensive - Warfare Processor
Proteus Electronics - CPU Efficiency Gate
Proteus Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
Proteus Offensive - Drone Synthesis Projector
Proteus Propulsion - Localized Injectors
Garde II x4
Ogre II x3
Hammerhead II x2
Only thing an eos does better than that build is survive, and if it's supposed to avoid aggro (IOW PvE) then survival is irrelevant. |
nahjustwarpin
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades.
so if T3 shouldn't be able to do what HAC does, what with tengu and cerberus? |
Kasutra
Tailor Company
IMPERIAL LEGI0N
59
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades.
There are other ways to make it not a better drone boat than the Ishtar. Like simply reducing the drone damage bonus and/or making it only apply to drone thermal damage.
The odd bandwidth is just a pain in the butt. If you use normal drones, you end up with a mix of heavies and mediums, flying at different speeds. If you use sentries... well, then you just have to skip that last one or launch some random drone, because there are no medium sentries.
If it's not supposed to out-damage the Ishtar, fine. Make it not out-damage the Ishtar. But if it's supposed to be using drones as a primary weapon, I think it should have 125 bandwidth. |
Eternal Error
Exitus Acta Probant
116
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:11:00 -
[9] - Quote
You're not going to see changes to T3s until they rebalance them across the board. They're currently too good and superior to far too many T2 ships. |
Nicaragua
Dark-Rising
17
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:25:00 -
[10] - Quote
nahjustwarpin wrote:Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades. so if T3 shouldn't be able to do what HAC does, what with tengu and cerberus?
the relationship between cerb and tengu is clearly broken - whats your point ?
Honestly its futile to argue this point, devs have already commented on this and stated that T3's should not out perform HACS at HAC specialisations - those that do will be rebalanced.
|
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
630
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 22:39:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
Agree on the Drone stuff but thing is that if my Deimos could ever be close to how good my Proteus is at dealing dmg and tanking stuff...
Quote:I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades.
So, a ship requiring as much lvl5 skills as Strategic Cruisers should just be subpar of every T2 hull in whatever field ?
Your reasoning is wrong, it's plain wrong probably because of myths created by silly people not being able to make a difference in between a T2 fitted T3 and a 3+ BILLIONS T3 fit.
The biggest problem of T3's after 2 of them with better command subs than command ships is how much silly people can be, and Eve players excel in this matter.
brb |
Nicaragua
Dark-Rising
17
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 06:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Agree on the Drone stuff but thing is that if my Deimos could ever be close to how good my Proteus is at dealing dmg and tanking stuff...
You need to finish this sentence because i don't know what point you are trying to make.
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
So, a ship requiring as much lvl5 skills as Strategic Cruisers should just be subpar of every T2 hull in whatever field ?
The difference in level 5 skill requirements between a HAC and a T3 are miniscule so this isn't a very good quantifier of why you think T3's should be better.
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Your reasoning is wrong,
Its not just my reasoning, its also CCP's reasoning so you should probably get over it. |
Vilnius Zar
Ordo Ardish
113
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 18:24:00 -
[13] - Quote
Lets see:
- Legion can be fit to be a "super Zealot"
- 700 dps loki has no minnie HAC counter part at all
- tengu...
- blaster prot vs deimos is not even a contest
Yet *somehow* you stick to the "amagad T3 shouldn't replace HAC so Drone sub Prot shouldn't have 125m3!" because some clown at CCP (who are clueless as fck) stated this once?
Amat victoria curam. |
Nicaragua
Dark-Rising
17
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 21:45:00 -
[14] - Quote
Vilnius Zar wrote:Lets see:
- Legion can be fit to be a "super Zealot"
- 700 dps loki has no minnie HAC counter part at all
- tengu...
- blaster prot vs deimos is not even a contest
Yet *somehow* you stick to the "amagad T3 shouldn't replace HAC so Drone sub Prot shouldn't have 125m3!" because some clown at CCP (who are clueless as fck) stated this once?
Yup thats pretty much it, thanks for clarifying. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Toxic Waste Industries
136
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 03:09:00 -
[15] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
So, a ship requiring as much lvl5 skills as Strategic Cruisers should just be subpar of every T2 hull in whatever field ?
Then why do t3s generally out perform their racial field command ships? Command ships are bigger, slower, slower AND require more SP yet other than the loki to sleipnir comparison are generally worse at brawling while retaining sig/speed advantages a cruiser has over a bc. T3s are over powered atm, CCP has already chimed in on this and intends to address this by a combination of nerfs to t3s and buffs to hacs and commands.
|
Lin-Young Borovskova
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
640
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 14:28:00 -
[16] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
So, a ship requiring as much lvl5 skills as Strategic Cruisers should just be subpar of every T2 hull in whatever field ?
Then why do t3s generally out perform their racial field command ships? Command ships are bigger, slower, slower AND require more SP yet other than the loki to sleipnir comparison are generally worse at brawling while retaining sig/speed disavantages a bc has over a cruiser. T3s are over powered atm, CCP has already chimed in on this and intends to address this by a combination of nerfs to t3s and buffs to hacs and commands.
This has already been debated and over debated, some (2 in fact) T3 command subs make those better than Command ships, it's not a news flash and will be changed soon enough so there's no point on beating the same thing over and over and over again, nothing new will come out.
T3's are not OP, some people are still arguing how OP a 3billion fit ship is vs a simple T2/meta 4 specialised one can be witch is...silly as discussion.
Fix T1/T2 hulls with primordial bonus/capacitors whatever ship/gun stat then let's talk about T3's, but for the sake of a decent discussion CCP should already clearly state what are T3's vs other spec hulls.
Does versatility means weaker from your point of view?
What's the point spending time training for something 3x expensive than spec hull (for T2 fits), making you loose SP when you get killed, and requiring 5 sub skills on top of a lot of 5's to get the most out of it?
If it doesn't bring anything superior than T2 hull other than do the same thing but worst, more expensive and SP cost, then it's a failure/trolling/bad as design.
If you don't want to waste time training for those ships I can understand but why in hell because you don't want to, should those who spend that time training for be penalised or get nothing in change of that sup training time?
brb |
Red zeon
Sacred Templars
RED.OverLord
4
|
Posted - 2012.08.13 22:42:00 -
[17] - Quote
nahjustwarpin wrote:Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades. so if T3 shouldn't be able to do what HAC does, what with tengu and cerberus?
dude, the tengu can suck to if u dont know how to fit one :P |
nahjustwarpin
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
34
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 17:16:00 -
[18] - Quote
Red zeon wrote:nahjustwarpin wrote:Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades. so if T3 shouldn't be able to do what HAC does, what with tengu and cerberus? dude, the tengu can suck to if u dont know how to fit one :P
crappy tengu fit is still better than crappy cerberus fit. |
XxRTEKxX
Fenrir's Dogs of War
Union 0f Revolution
8
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 17:41:00 -
[19] - Quote
ecm should sever the ships connection with its drones like what happened to the drone boats in Stargate Universe when Eli jammed their signal. If a drone ships sensors are jammed, so should its communication with its drones. |
Airto TLA
Puppeteers of Doom
Real Life Rejects
23
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 18:56:00 -
[20] - Quote
Just my opinion, but the problem with certain drone ships is that there is a Huge gap between medium drones and Heavy/Sentry DronJust my opinion, but the problem with certain drone ships is that there is a Huge gap between medium drones and Heavy/Sentry Drones and drone sizes do no mix well. So basically, 50 bandwith thorugh 100 bandwith is pretty close in usefulness. at 125 bandwith, boom you are golden. This causes a really weird progression.
One fix might be to make heavies into "assualt" drones and make a smaller class using similar skills and a bandwith in the 15-20 range. YOu could also add light sentry drones with similar bandwith. This would give a place for the 'tweener drone boats, especially if for example you set "light"sentries at 15 m/b (so a Myrm could use 5) and the small assualts at 20 mb (so 5 drones at 100 bandwith), this would help differentiate the drone ships.es and drone sizes do no mix well. .
|
Zicon Shak'ra
Vacuo Anomalia
42
|
Posted - 2012.08.16 19:01:00 -
[21] - Quote
Any Proteus that is not fitted for epic blaster DPS is a bad Proteus.
Wormholes are cool, m'kay? |
Maeltstome
Caldari Deep Space Ventures
Intrepid Crossing
53
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 13:13:00 -
[22] - Quote
Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does.
I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades.
loki is better than the vagabond in all area's except speed. It's just plain better than a muninn.
tengu is better than the cerberus full stop. I haven't checked, but the eagle is so terrible that it probably is better than that too.
Legion is better than the Zealot in every way. I haven't flown it with HAM config to compare to the sacrilidge... but i'd wager is as good as it if not better.
Proteus is better than the deimos in every way. It's so far behind the ishtar in terms of drones though uts not funny.
So either you nerf every other T3, Buff the proteus drone setup or buff other HAC's
Im for the buff other HAC's... since the ishtar is the shining example of a ship you'd want to fly over a T3... the other HAC's are just a poor-mans T3. |
Roderick Grey
House Of Serenity.
Unprovoked Aggression
28
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 14:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
Zicon Shak'ra wrote:Any Proteus that is not fitted for epic blaster DPS is a bad Proteus.
Except fleet Proteuses, y'know, the ones everyone use? |
Nicaragua
SkREW CREW
Local Down
18
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 15:20:00 -
[24] - Quote
Maeltstome wrote:So either you nerf every other T3, Buff the proteus drone setup or buff other HAC's
I'd be happy with every other T3 being nerfed. A jack of all trades should not outperform a specialist ship. |
Syrias Bizniz
Flawless-Industries
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 16:53:00 -
[25] - Quote
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:Nicaragua wrote:Proteus should not be able to field 5 heavy drones, thats the ishtars territory and no T3 should be able to do what a HAC does. Agree on the Drone stuff but thing is that if my Deimos could ever be close to how good my Proteus is at dealing dmg and tanking stuff... Quote:I know that this is not the current state of play but devs have already said that HAC's are the specialist ships and should therefore be the best at what they do. T3's are verstaile jack of all trades. So, a ship requiring as much lvl5 skills as Strategic Cruisers should just be subpar of every T2 hull in whatever field ? Your reasoning is wrong, it's plain wrong probably because of myths created by silly people not being able to make a difference in between a T2 fitted T3 and a 3+ BILLIONS T3 fit. The biggest problem of T3's after 2 of them with better command subs than command ships is how much silly people can be, and Eve players excel in this matter.
Basically you're saying, that a Tech 2 Fitted Strategic Cruiser is balanced and doesn't overshine a Tech 2 Fitted HAC. You are also stating that dishing a few billion of ISK into a shiphull makes the ship good and has nothing to do with balancing. Is that correct?
If you answered this with YES, then please put 2-3 billion ISK into a HAC of your choice and tell me how it is on par with a Strategic Cruiser of your choice, equally pimpfitted.
Also, please note that HACs have very similar skill requirements to Strategic Cruisers. Please also note, that skilling all 5 Subsystem skills to 5 takes LESS time than skilling HAC from 1 to 5. Furthermore note, that a HAC can only exceed in one or maybe two different areas, whereas a Strategic Cruiser will be able to perform several Tasks once fully skilled (Of COURSE you will have to skill such things as Leadership or Astrometics, but you will NOT have to learn other tech 2 skills to perform these professions at top level!) .
What if you take away some of a T3's strenghts and make a Tech 2 perform better at this tasks? Will it make a T3 obsolete? No. You have one hull, easily adaptable to almost every situation. Dock up, change fit, undock. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
67
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 22:00:00 -
[26] - Quote
To the OP. I used to feel the same but the drone damage mods make the Drone Proteus much more viable.
If anything the Ishtar, Proteus comparison is exactly how these ships should be balanced with the Ishtar more pure drone boat with higher drone dps without the flexibility and other benefits the Proteus is capable off.
Honestly there are so many polarised views on this balancing issue I fear EVE civil war when CCP gets round to this, fortunately CCP seem to have put the nerf bat away and tiericide seems to mean buffs all round.
Ultimately it comes down to how widely you perceive a ships role.
The Proteus is a better combat ship than the Deimos, but what role does the Deimos have? Fast Crusier Sized DPS platform? its role is not to tank; it is faster, has a higher Hybrid weapon damage multiplier, a smaller sig, a utility high (yes the Proteus can have six turrets but there is more to combat than EFT DPS) and ultimately despite many peopleGÇÖs beliefs that it should not affect balancing it is a lot cheaper and more expendable. Now I do think HACGÇÖs in general need something extra but this is mainly due to Battlecruiser strengths rather than T3 and there are some particularly bad HACS such as the Eagle. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
303
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 22:28:00 -
[27] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote: a utility high (yes the Proteus can have six turrets but there is more to combat than EFT DPS)
Ok, just a nitpick, because I never understand this reasoning.
Yes the Deimos has 6 highs, 5 turret.
The proteus can have 6 turret slots.
But the last time I checked I can still fit a utility mode (such as a Neut) in a turret slot. So I don't understand how that is a negative for the Proteus. I can choose to put a turret or a utility mod there, whereas a Deimos I can ONLY put a utility mod there. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
67
|
Posted - 2012.08.17 23:27:00 -
[28] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Alticus C Bear wrote: a utility high (yes the Proteus can have six turrets but there is more to combat than EFT DPS) Ok, just a nitpick, because I never understand this reasoning. Yes the Deimos has 6 highs, 5 turret. The proteus can have 6 turret slots. But the last time I checked I can still fit a utility mode (such as a Neut) in a turret slot. So I don't understand how that is a negative for the Proteus. I can choose to put a turret or a utility mod there, whereas a Deimos I can ONLY put a utility mod there.
You can yes but then you will need 1 extra mag stab over the number the Deimos fits to get equal or greater DPS (the stacking of two 5% bonus is just slightly higher than one 10%). Proteus is clearly a beast of a DPS/EHP combo ship, my point is that roles could be quite narrow in definition and that the Deimos does not need to compete on all the levels the Proteus does to be seen as effective in it's role. HACS do need a little something extra, I still feel that is a battlecruiser issue rather than a one due to T3's.
Look at the astarte it is possibly an even higher DPS platform pretty much as tanky (active wise especially if they change all the rep bonuses to 10%), but it is slower than the Proteus, how much of a factor is the speed in defiining it's role and it being classed as worse than the Proteus. |
TomyLobo
Posthuman Society
Elysian Empire
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 03:56:00 -
[29] - Quote
Wait, T3s ACTUALLY need to be re-balanced with T2 counterparts?  |
Nicaragua
SkREW CREW
Local Down
18
|
Posted - 2012.08.18 10:14:00 -
[30] - Quote
TomyLobo wrote:Wait, T3s ACTUALLY need to be re-balanced with T2 counterparts?
Yes thats exactly right.
Every ship needs to have a role in the game otherwise there is no point in using them and everyone would just fly the same thing .
Cost in no way should impact whether or not something is better or than another ship. A battleship is not better than a frigate simply on the virtue that it costs more, in fact it isn't better at all - just different, this is what balance is.
T3's are currently better in pretty much any way than any other cruiser or (in some cases) battlecruiser and this is bullshit.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |