EVE Search - Sticky:[Winter] New destroyers

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Winter] New destroyers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 218	Posted - 2012.11.03 16:28:00 - [1] - Quote Alara IonStorm wrote: I think you should lock the Amarr and Gallente drone Bonus to their racial Dmg Types. Why? Because the uproar might actually make you fix Amarr Drones. The drone issue has been bugging me for quite some time. Why has this not been fixed yet? There is a simple typo in their attributes in which of the two smaller drones (amarr and minmatar) the amarr drone has both lower damage AND worse tracking, when (since it's the bigger of the two), it should clearly have the higher damage. It's very simple: (damage has highest on top, and tracking has slowest on top) Damage:.....Tracking: Hobgoblin.....Hobgoblin Hornet..........Hornet Warrior.........Acolyte Acolyte........Warrior -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 218	Posted - 2012.11.04 16:08:00 - [2] - Quote androch wrote: why do caldari ships always have to be so damn ugly, cant you guys give them a symetrical ship once and awihle? the random parts you add to them **** me off Caldari have plenty of symmetrical ships, and they're still ugly. Take for instance the flying brick, the Rokh, which looks like a sci-fi assault rifle. Actually come to think of it, it's pretty cool looking. And the Heron, which looks like a tuning fork or maybe the letter H. Nah, I kinda like that one too. Well then there's the Cormorant, which looks like some sort of malformed arachnid. Yeah, I can agree that one's ugly. But that's not all, what about the Merlin? Oh wait, that one actually looks pretty swell. Well howabout the Charon? Nah, that one is pretty awesome too. And it's not even symmetrical. Scorpion? No way, that's got to be one of the most impressive-looking ships in any sci-fi ever. I agree partly with you, in that the asymmetrical Caldari ships look like garbage, but I think the same can be said for all races. Perhaps the only good-looking asymmetrical ship is the Thanatos. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 219	Posted - 2012.11.06 00:49:00 - [3] - Quote Johnny Bloomington wrote: You may want to look at thoughs ships again. The Rokh is mostly symmetrical but there is a L-shaped part on one side. Heron is not symmetrical. Look at the cockpit on the side. They're symmetrical enough for me to call them symmetrical. I draw the line approximately where the Navitas is--I'm not sure whether I think it's symmetrical or not. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 221	Posted - 2012.11.06 21:20:00 - [4] - Quote I think the problem is that CCP is under the impression that 8 missile launchers is somehow too much. I don't know why they feel this way, but take a look at all of the missile boats. None of them can fit 8 missile launchers, despite the fact that missiles do less dps than other weapon systems (with the exception of torpedoes, and only with a target painter and/or webifier) and also that missile ships generally field fewer drones than other ships. I think if they just give the new caldari destroyer an 8th missile slot and 6 more powergrid, and a bit of CPU to balance, then it'd be great. It'll match the caracal's damage output with light missiles while being harder to hit. Also, I think they could maybe add a 2mn AB & MWD for destroyers and I'd suggest a 20mn for battlecruisers but they're barely more massive than cruisers. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 221	Posted - 2012.11.06 21:32:00 - [5] - Quote Zyella Stormborn wrote: I'm a bit confused. The Caracal is a bigger ship (cruiser), and uses Heavy missiles besides, does it not? His example showed the Caracal using light missiles, same as the destroyer. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 222	Posted - 2012.11.07 02:35:00 - [6] - Quote Zyella Stormborn wrote: Don't most cruisers out dps the equivalent weapon system base type dessies? No, they don't. Destroyers will outgun cruisers with ease, because cruisers never fit more than 5 bonused weapons or 4 bonused and 2 unbonused. The current destroyers can always fit 8 weapons, with at least 7 bonused. Tier 1 and 2 battlecruisers actually barely outgun destroyers for the most part (not counting drones), because they're usually stuck with the equivalent of 7 weapons. Cruiser weapons typically deal 1/3rd more DPS than their frigate counterparts. Thus, you can calculate a weapon slot as having a base power of 1, increased by 25% for each skill bonus applied to the weapon (assuming maxed skills)(all weapon bonuses, because they all affect your ability to apply the hurt), and 1/3rd increase for cruisers: (not counting the range role bonus for destroyers, also not counting drones) Coercer: 12.5 Cormorant: 11.9375 Catalyst: 12.5 Thrasher: 11.9375 Maller: 8.3333 Omen: 10.4167 Caracal: 10.4167 Moa: 9.6667 Thorax: 8.3333 Vexor: 6.6667 Rupture: 11 Stabber: 9.3333 Prophecy: 11.3333 Harbinger: 14.5833 Ferox: 11.3333 Drake: 11.6667 Brutix: 11.6667 Myrmidon: 8 Cyclone: 12.3333 Hurricane: 15.1667 These numbers should give a fairly accurate representation of each ship's raw offensive potential before drones. Actual DPS values will vary significantly due to differing weapon types and ranges, and because many of the weapon skill bonuses are not damage or rate of fire bonuses. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 222	Posted - 2012.11.07 02:53:00 - [7] - Quote Warde Guildencrantz wrote: [quote=CCP Ytterbium](like a 75mm kite cormorant can fit a medium extender with essentially no fitting mods). 75mm railguns are laughably ineffective, similar to quad light beams. There's a reason they cost only 2 MW of powergrid (or 90 MW, in the case of the quad light beams). When you absolutely need to cut powergrid away from your guns to fit something else along with them, these are the weapons you put on your ship. Most offense-oriented ships will spend a good chunk of their powergrid just on the weapons. If your basic buffer defense costs you more than half of what the ship has, it's not the weapons that cost too much. I'd say the Cormorant needs more powergrid, and I remember hearing something about it being increased a bunch. Also, if they decrease the powergrid cost of light missiles, they should also decrease the cost of 125mm railguns. But I think they're fine where they are. On the other hand, I think the 200mm autocannons should cost 5 MW instead of 4. The Thrasher just has too much powergrid left over after fitting a full rack of top guns. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 224	Posted - 2012.11.07 16:23:00 - [8] - Quote Warde Guildencrantz wrote: Last time I checked, 75mm rails doing 150dps at 30km with spike is pretty damn good, especially when you can fit MWD, disruptor, and medium extender with two mag stabs. You can always switch to closer range ammo and get around 250 dps. That's fine with me. Or you can use 150mm rails and do that DPS at 75km. Last time I checked, rail guns and spike ammo are for long range combat. 30km won't protect you from a hurricane's autocannons, and 150dps wouldn't break its tank if it fit 1 medium armor repairer. The hurricane has a huge advantage in damage output and tank, and it's got pretty excellent tracking too. The thing that would give a cormorant a chance against it is speed-either enough to outtrack it or enough to kite it. And if you don't even have the range to shoot at it while kiting, then what are you there for? I'd say 150dps at 35km is gimp. A long range destroyer should easily outrange a short range cruiser or battlecruiser. The very fact that the Cormorant can't fit a MSE and MWD together with 125mm rails without putting on a bunch of powergrid upgrades just says that ship needs a powergrid buff. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 224	Posted - 2012.11.07 19:42:00 - [9] - Quote Zyella Stormborn wrote: ...Wow, now you are facing off a destroyer and a BC? All ships have one pilot. If one ship has zero capability whatsoever for any advantages at all over another, then there's no reason to fly the one. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 226	Posted - 2012.11.07 21:45:00 - [10] - Quote Aglais wrote: There is NO REASON that a Cormorant should have the stats to in a 1v1 fight take out a ******* BATTLECRUISER. It doesn't have to win in a 1v1, it just needs to have a reason to be flown at all. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 227	Posted - 2012.11.08 12:21:00 - [11] - Quote Aglais wrote: wall of strawman arguments Lets all just take a few steps back here (you guys I mean, not me). You're putting a lot of words in my mouth. Firstly, a lot of you seem to think I was saying anything at all about destroyers attacking battlecruisers. You have it backwards. I was talking about destroyers BEING ATTACKED BY battlecruisers. My point was that 30km is not long enough for a long range kiter destroyer because that's less than a hurricane's range. And you all jumped to the conclusion that I'm talking about a cormorant trying to kill a hurricane. The cormorant is trying to kill the interceptor that is hiding next to the hurricane. Not a very good sniper if it can't shoot past the autocannons. That makes the ship useless in PVP. And secondly, I said nothing about nerfing the speed of cruisers. I didn't even say what fix I'd propose for the speed difference between cruisers and destroyers. I simply stated that destroyers are slower than cruisers. You want my opinion on the matter? I want a 2MN Microwarpdrive that costs 25MW powergrid to fit and has 3 million newtons of thrust. But this isn't about my solution, it's about spotting the problem. Thirdly, I didn't say that the Cormorant has no advantages over a Hurricane. I was making the point that even though it's a smaller ship, it does need to have a niche. And I'm not saying it doesn't. My actual concern was that the guy defending the 75mm autocannon fit he made actually thought it was a good fit. I was explaining to him that it has less PVP value than it would cost to build. Finally, I'd like to point out that there are many reasons to compare destroyers to battlecruisers, but the biggest reason is that they fight on the same battlefield. You can't just fit to beat one kind of ship and ignore the others. You've got to defend yourself fromt he ships that think it's a good idea to attack you specifically. Don't just assume there won't be any hurricanes on the field. And whoever said that I think there's a best in EVE--I think you got it backwards bro. Go read that paragraph you wrote again. Aglais wrote: The Cormorant, Corax, and the rest of the Destroyer lineup will always have a reason to be flown over a Hurricane. You think there is a "best" in EVE. This is false. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 228	Posted - 2012.11.08 15:31:00 - [12] - Quote Shiroh Yatamii wrote: That's a terribly unrealistic scenario. Remember, destroyers were designed to escort larger ships and kill frigates. In your hypothetical scenario, why did you not include a BC of your own on your side? Why do you assume there isn't? Maybe I've got a hurricane buddy shooting at the other hurricane, while the other hurricane is shooting at me to protect the interceptor. My point stands. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 229	Posted - 2012.11.10 15:15:00 - [13] - Quote Goldensaver wrote: Reaver Glitterstim wrote: I want a 2MN Microwarpdrive that costs 25MW powergrid to fit and has 3 million newtons of thrust. Please tell me you see what's wrong with this statement. I agree with the sentiment, but you phrased it wrong I really don't. Please, enlighten me, but I think I got it right. I might agree to more powergrid, but remember it's gotta fit to a destroyer. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc 229	Posted - 2012.11.10 15:38:00 - [14] - Quote Goldensaver wrote: It's really just a nitpick, But MN stands for meganewton, which is 1 million newtons. You have in that sentence a 2mn MWD providing 3mn thrust. I'm aware of that. A 1MN prop module generates 1.5 million newtons of thrust. Check it's stats. This is because it's designed for a ~1 million kg ship and adds 0.5 million kg to said ship's mass. This means that if it is equipped to a ship that is exactly 1 million KG, running it will cause the ship to be 1.5 million KG and have 1.5 million newtons of thrust, causing its propulsion module to increase speed by exactly the amount listed in its attributes. It's effectively the same as giving the ship a 1 million newton prop module without increasing its mass, except that it causes the ship to lose agility. -á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters i'm strangely comfortable with it" -Mittens

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.