EVE Search - Sticky:[Winter] Attack Cruisers

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Winter] Attack Cruisers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 200	Posted - 2012.09.18 21:57:00 - [1] - Quote Wivabel wrote: Connall Tara wrote: wivabel: [Thorax, New Setup 1] Damage Control II 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Electron Blaster II, Void M Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Medium Trimark Armor Pump I Hammerhead II x5 this is now... I think we'll be fine with the new layout with 30 extra cpu for MOAR WEBBING! considering the overall preformance the single PG rig isn't exactly a crippling weakness ^_^ it is dumb to need a fitting mod to fit the smallest guns Does that include putting an XL booster on a cruiser? because thats basically what youre doing here with the 1600 plate. Thats a battleship sized module and youre putting it on a cruiser . . . try that with basically any other cruiser. The LSE on the other hand is actually a cruiser module given its PG/CPU requirements.
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 200	Posted - 2012.09.20 07:49:00 - [2] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: CCP Fozzie, Can you look at the following T2 charges for winter too Hail -50% Range 0.7x tracking Void -25% range 0.75x tracking Conflagration -50% range 0.7x tracking These are all close range charges and they all have a penalty to tracking as well as range, any chance the tracking penalty could be adjusted to a tracking bonus? no please; there should be a reason to use the navy ammo over the T2. T2 adds additional damage at the cost of tracking, faction ammo adds less damage and doesnt take away from your tracking . . . problem?
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 200	Posted - 2012.09.20 07:53:00 - [3] - Quote Soon Shin wrote: Reduce the mass on the caracal as well, I don't see why it should be heavier than gallente ship. blaster optimal = 3.6 km heavy missile optimal = 63 km Caracal = Range bonus questions?
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 200	Posted - 2012.09.20 09:08:00 - [4] - Quote Tomcio FromFarAway wrote: Sigras wrote: questions? Yes, one. What is your favourite colour? blue . . . wait i mean yellooOOOOoooooooo . . .
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 202	Posted - 2012.09.23 09:43:00 - [5] - Quote Hagika wrote: Considering the short range and crappy drawbacks of HAMS.. Have you ever tried to fit them on a caracal? Obviously not, considering that with all LVL 5 skills they leave you 105 pg left over to tank,prop and fit other mods.. Really effective there....The ship cant arm them and have a MWD or tank. A cerb can barely squeeze them on and does not have enough pg to use a MWD and a LSE.. So try again... with the new stats: +100 PG and +80 CPU my math says theyll have an end total of 787.5 PG and 537.5 CPU Each launcher takes 113.4 PG and 37.5 CPU for a total of 567 PG and 187.5 CPU leaving you with 220.5 PG and 350 CPU . . . I dont see the problem . . . Also, ive always said that it makes no sense to have missiles of the same size have different explosion velocities and explosion radii Why should they be different? Guns track better at shorter range to compensate for the comparatively increased transversal of their targets, missiles dont have to deal with that, so their shorter ranged versions shouldnt have any better or worse factors.
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 205	Posted - 2012.09.24 06:30:00 - [6] - Quote Apoctasy wrote: The only issue I have, is that with the Stabber it almost makes the Vagabond not worth flying, especially considering the cost. Sure the vaga can do twice the DPS and at a slightly higher range, but a 15 mill Stabber and 200 mill Vaga fit will have essentially the same tank and speed (vaga's will only be marginally greater). Basically, whatever I can accomplish with the Vaga, I can accomplish with this new Stabber. Is 200 million really worth ~250 dps? I most certainly will be taking out my vaga a lot less now. Pashan's Turret Handling Mindlink would like a word with you . . . As would the Eifyr and Co. 'Gunslinger' Medium Projectile Turret MP-806 The first one is a 7% damage bonus to turrets, and sells on contracts for around 1.6 billion The second one is a 6% damage bonus to medium projectile turrets and sells for around 450 million in Jita the former will only ever give you 250 DPS on a dreadnaught or titan, and the latter will never give you 250 DPS
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 205	Posted - 2012.09.24 06:41:00 - [7] - Quote Hannott Thanos wrote: Hagika wrote: Hannott Thanos wrote: You cant give the stabber more damage because of its great range and speed. The brutix gets 1200dps vs cane 600 dps, yet everyone fly canes. SO max skilled and over heat with drones on brutix and no drones or overheat and calling the cane only 600 dps? You need to redo your EFT. I don't have EFT at hand. Don't remember off the top of my head what dps the cane gets, but I do know that it does not get to apply it all because of falloff. My point still stands tho. I have no idea how youre getting 1200 DPS for the brutix, even with drones and 3 damage mods im getting more like 1000 with void. That being said, i agree with him. Its pure idiocy to give a longer range weapon to a faster ship. It doesnt really matter how much DPS you do because any DPS > 0 which is how much the brutix gets to do.
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 206	Posted - 2012.09.24 18:42:00 - [8] - Quote Roime wrote: Sigras wrote: That being said, i agree with him. Its pure idiocy to give a longer range weapon to a faster ship. It doesnt really matter how much DPS you do because any DPS > 0 which is how much the brutix gets to do. Brutix does more damage than shield Cane at all ranges, while having more EHP. It dies to the neuts, however, unless it uses ECMs and gets to pump Void at close range. Im not sure if you have an amazing brutix fit that i dont know about or a horrible cane fit with one tracking enhancer, two mag stabs and a flight of warriors, the brutix gets 7.2 + 11 km with null doing 592 DPS With two tracking enhancers, 2 gyrostabs, and a flight of warriors, the hurricane gets 3.9 + 30 with barrage doing 504 DPS this means that the brutix does more DPS between 0 and 13.4 km with a very small gap between 6.3 and 8.35 km and yes, the brutix does have 3,000 EHP more, but its also 140 m/s slower so you will never get that close to him. Unless your ridiculously lucky. Care to share a fit where the brutix does more DPS than the cane at > 17?
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 207	Posted - 2012.09.24 21:31:00 - [9] - Quote Deerin wrote: Sigras wrote: Care to share a fit where the brutix does more DPS than the cane at > 17? I think that would be the 200mm rail brutix....but those are quite rare......and why are all discussions on other weapon platforms and ships coming back to battlecruisers?? well yes, a rail brutix does more DPS than a cane at > 17 but then the problem is that the cane sees he's being hit with rails and closes to 0 to melt the face of the brutix with hail. And somebody suggested buffing the stabber because its DPS is low, which I argued against using the comparison of the brutix and the hurricane, the cane doesnt actually do that much DPS compared with the brutix, but everyone still uses the cane because of its range and ability to dictate engagement range.
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 207	Posted - 2012.09.25 02:54:00 - [10] - Quote J A Aloysiusz wrote: And I'll level with you - I'm fighting a little bit in scenario land. In actuality, there may be times when the caracal is at least decent. But the caracal quite literally has all lower stats than the thorax, except range. It's like comparing deimos with cerberus, imho. im assuming youre comparing a shield thorax against the caracals right? because an armor thorax is definitely slower, but even then i cant imagine a shield thorax's EHP reaching a caracals . . .
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 207	Posted - 2012.09.25 17:18:00 - [11] - Quote Sinigr Shadowsong wrote: Yun Kuai wrote: For the people who are saying the Thorax will melt the Caracal, you have to remember the thorax is only 10m/s faster than the Thorax, and if I fit an 800mm rolled tungsten + triple trimarks (or better yet, a 1600mm plate and triple trimarks), your caracal is going to be faster than my thorax by a lot. But Thorax is a Shield ship now. It has no bonuses to deffence and 4 mid slots, that's enough for MSE+Adaptive Invul+Point+MWD, standart issue Shield mids. It can now be fitted with nanofibers. this brings me to another issue, shield tanking is unbalanced against armor tanking. even the hurricane which has 4 mids and 6 lows is still usually a shield tanking ship, if it were 5/5 it would be no contest. This says to me that shield tanks are just more desirable and low slot modules are more valuable. Even if I had a ship with 6 mids and like 10 lows, I would still probably shield tank the thing and use 3 tracking enhancers 3 damage mods, 2 nanofibers, an overdrive injector and a DCU, you cant do the same thing to armor tanking.
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 207	Posted - 2012.09.25 18:41:00 - [12] - Quote yeah i guess i was thinking a cruiser or battlecruiser sized ship. yeah, of course it would be totally OP, but the point was any ship in which speed would be important you should basically never armor tank no matter how many low slots it has. minus reductio ad absurdum of course
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 209	Posted - 2012.09.26 03:28:00 - [13] - Quote Goldensaver wrote: Sigras wrote: yeah i guess i was thinking a cruiser or battlecruiser sized ship. yeah, of course it would be totally OP, but the point was any ship in which speed would be important you should basically never armor tank no matter how many low slots it has. minus reductio ad absurdum of course True enough. In smaller ships, speed is life. I can see the issues with armor tanking, but I can't think of a way to fix it without breaking things in larger ships. It would have to reach a careful balance, which is definitely a tough thing to do, and I'm glad I'm not the one who has to do it. I just wouldn't be able, and I don't envy CCP their job in this situation. This may not be popular, but it is my opinion. Armor tanking should be a nerf to agility not a nerf to speed, so the plates and the rigs would both affect your inertia modifier. This would mean that you could make the Gallente ships just as fast if not a bit faster than the matari ships, but just give the matari really good agility This would mean that the matari pilots couldnt just set "keep at range" and fire the guns, to kite they'd instead have to dodge and weave and use the low inertia against the armor tankers. This would change much in the large fleet battles except maybe make armor fleets a little slower, but it would change small gang warfare a lot. This is better because keeping range would then become skill based into second guessing or out thinking your enemy rather than shield is way faster than armor therefore shield gets to dictate range
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 219	Posted - 2012.09.29 06:45:00 - [14] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: Liang Nuren wrote: - Rigs are completely optional. Trade shield HP for shield resists, trade weapon ROF for weapon alpha, etc. That is pretty interesting. Difficult to implement but interesting. Sort off increase one area of a ship by lessening it in the same stat tree. So you can tweak a shield setup or Arty setup to preform a specific more narrow role. now that is the most interesting idea ive heard on rigs to date. Of course there would be some rigs with basically no drawback IE +Falloff -Optimal on any autocannon ship is basically no drawback but its an interesting idea.
Sigras Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N 219	Posted - 2012.09.29 06:52:00 - [15] - Quote Liang Nuren wrote: Ashriban Kador wrote: Fixing armor tanking is easy (dunno why they haven't done it yet) Move speed penalty from armor rigs to agility penalty. Move armor penalty from astronautics rigs to hull penalty. Done. On a side note: Why not have the Gallente have a similar play-style to minmatar? Armor or Shield tank with a lean towards armor, the minmatar leaning towards shields. I think you hugely underestimate the importance of agility. I don't think we'd see a real improvement with this solution. -Liang I disagree, right now, any idiot can kite a gallente ship: 1. Turn Guns On 2. Set "Keep At Range" or "Orbit At Range" 3. ??? 4. Profit If the gallente ships were faster but less agile than the matari ships, it would at least take intelligence and a quick eye to kite instead of just using one of the CCP prescribed buttons. No ship should be fastest and most agile and longest ranged, and thats what the hurricane is right now (if you count the HAM drake not the HML drake) This wouldnt make gallente ships totally OP, but it would make them more powerful than they are now, and would add some interesting risk/reward ideas for fitting IE do you want to lose some hull and a low slot for a nanofiber to counteract your agility?

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.