Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
311
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 21:19:00 -
[1] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote: tidi can handle it fine...
Invoking tidi unnecessarily seems like a bad idea. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
311
|
Posted - 2012.09.28 22:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Hannott Thanos wrote:Then make a new module? All I can think of is CCP Fozzie's quote about Veritas poisoning his coffee when I see suggestions that try to get around drone ship issues by just putting more drones on the field. That and curiosity over the reasoning behind solving drone DPS application issues by adding more unapplied drone DPS. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
311
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 01:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ares Desideratus wrote:These are all bad.
The Amarr one looks like some kind of fat Sentinal / Vengeance hybrid ship with less tank than a Punisher. I don't like it's mixed weapons systems. One thing that definitely should be mandatory on this one is a bonus to armor resistances, some decent armor HP, and in my opinion, a smaller signature radius than the other races. Are destroyers designed to have resilience as one of their feature traits? My understanding was they were not, thus a strong defensive bonus seems inappropriate. The neut bonus does seem out of place though.
Ares Desideratus wrote:The Gallente one is just... a Catalyst with less rails and more Drones, for whatever reason that is... What does that ship bring to the table that a Catalyst doesn't already do aside from drones? It needs more of a role, make it fully dedicated to drones like the Tristan or make it an active tanking brawler like the Incursus, I says. Drones are the secondary weapons of the Gallente, and this is a class based mainly on direct combat rather than ewar/logistics/etc. So instead of drones we would have to do um... hybrids again?
Ares Desideratus wrote:The Caldari one.... well, I'm surprised it doesn't have more mid-slots, actually, but that's a good thing. It's going to be slow, but it's damage and range are going to be ludicrously over-powered. This is truly going to be the new Drake. People who say "ohh, but it won't have nearly the tank of the Drake!!11" Those people are truly, truly stupid. It's a destroyer, why would it have close to the tank of a Drake? The point is it's going to be a scary scary missile platform with stupid damage and damage projection, all on a tiny little 10 Million ISK Destroyer hull. Anyone who can't grasp this can sit on it. I mean, look at what a group of Condors is capable of doing these days! It's funny, but a few Condors are one of the scariest things you can run into right now. Odd how you say this one rightfully shouldn't have a strong tank from the shield resist race but the Amarr one should have a resist bonus. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
311
|
Posted - 2012.09.29 06:01:00 -
[4] - Quote
Shaalira D'arc wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: * Drone Damage Amplifier I: CPU increased from 27 to 30, drone damage increased from 15 to 16% * Drone Damage Amplifier II: CPU reduced from 32 to 30, drone damage increased from 19 to 23%
While this buff is appreciated and needed, have you considered the issue of Drone Damage Amps being incompatible with armor tanking? They take up much-needed low slots, especially on drone boats that have armor tanking bonuses (coughMyrmidoncough). It says something about the meta when, to use drone mods effectively, you have to shield-tank your armor-bonused drone boats. This isn't unique to DDA's. All damage mods are low slot including mag stabs and heat sinks. Both of these see extensive use by the armor tanking ships that use the related weapons systems. Why should DDA's be any different? |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
316
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 20:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
As a group of ships in the same class the roles seem all over the place. Not really sure what to think even now. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
317
|
Posted - 2012.10.02 22:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Azaraius wrote:I thought the Gallente were supposed to be drone obsessed not the Amarr. I would rather the Gallente have no hard points and have a huge drone bay. Amarr drone usage is getting upped. Kinda makes Gallente not feel special anymore. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
321
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 23:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
HELLBOUNDMAN wrote:Blastil wrote:my only comment is visual: does the Minmatar destroyer HAVE to look like a forklift had an inappropriate affair with a solar-panel factory? T he honest, the caldari boat looks like it should be a gallente boat. Too many curved edges. And yes, the minmatar boat looks like crap. The design might work for an indy ship or miner, but not a combat ship. I'm not seeing the caldari one as gallente looking. Renders I've seen don't make it look very curved. It looks more like a naga with a center structure and some more typical caldari design flare. I'm not sure what could be considered gallente looking about it.
Minmatar is fine... If you zoom out far enough |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
322
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 21:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:CheekyBabey wrote: Yes and medium drones are next to pointless on smaller ships for what isn't much more in the DPS increase due to tracking etc. ummm... Then use the flight of light drones for smaller ships? And if you decide to wolf pack a cruiser or BC then use the mediums? Yeah yeah I know, dessies get insta-popped whenever a cruiser locks them or if a BC even warps on grid. Plus no dessie has ever gotten on a cruiser or BC killmail in the entire history of EvE (at least if you go by the frantic whining on these forums). Just think of the mediums as an extra option you have should the opportunity arise. So Gallente get the "potentially more useful than the other drone counterpart in a situation I'd never actually choose to engage in" destroyer by that logic. Nice. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
323
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 21:10:00 -
[9] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:CheekyBabey wrote:So getting off the Myrm EFT warrior's track as it's getting a bit pointless since the Myrm is a survivor of nerfs and also benefits from not having a split weapon system.
Focusing back on the destroyer, would it be fair to say that a split weapon system would make it a better or worse ship for PVP?
Is it better or worse for PVE?
Does it fulfil a needed role?
Is it heavily outclassed but other ships of the same size in PVE and PVP By not having a hybrid turret bonus it becomes attractive to many more players as they would no longer feel they have to train into hybrids to use this ship, unbonused turrets could be for hybrids, lasers, or projectiles. Greatly reducing the cross training SP needed to use this ship, as it will only take about 3 days to take to level 4 for most players. I'm not sure how anyone really benefits from that. New Gallente players would be primarily spec'd towards hybrids and would have to crosstrain to get proficient in using another weapons. Considering the other things that would be better trained and the fact that the lack of a gun bonus doesn't give them a specific reason to train another type, they are effectively locked to hybrids. And veterans I doubt would be too likely to train Gallente for this ship alone, thus making it more likely they would have trained hybrids to take full advantage of the frigate lineup. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
323
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 21:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:CheekyBabey wrote:So getting off the Myrm EFT warrior's track as it's getting a bit pointless since the Myrm is a survivor of nerfs and also benefits from not having a split weapon system.
Focusing back on the destroyer, would it be fair to say that a split weapon system would make it a better or worse ship for PVP?
Is it better or worse for PVE?
Does it fulfil a needed role?
Is it heavily outclassed but other ships of the same size in PVE and PVP By not having a hybrid turret bonus it becomes attractive to many more players as they would no longer feel they have to train into hybrids to use this ship, unbonused turrets could be for hybrids, lasers, or projectiles. Greatly reducing the cross training SP needed to use this ship, as it will only take about 3 days to take to level 4 for most players. I'm not sure how anyone really benefits from that. New Gallente players would be primarily spec'd towards hybrids and would have to cross-train to get proficient in using another weapons system of the ship. Considering the other things that would be better trained they are effectively locked to hybrids. And veterans I doubt would be too likely to train Gallente for this ship alone, thus making it more likely they would have trained hybrids to take full advantage of the frigate lineup. well i think the point here is that you should only have too train drones guns should be optional like if you train for a drake you only need missiles and drone skills are optional to get more out of it but not a necessity. Thats all drone players are asking for is that really too much too ask!!! :P If we were talking a tankier class not relying on pure damage output and simply killing faster than being killed I'd be inclined to agree. Either way though, if you plan on filling those turret points with guns, bonused or not, you need to train a turret type. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
323
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 22:11:00 -
[11] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote: I'm not sure how anyone really benefits from that. New Gallente players would be primarily spec'd towards hybrids and would have to crosstrain to get proficient in using another weapons. Considering the other things that would be better trained and the fact that the lack of a gun bonus doesn't give them a specific reason to train another type, they are effectively locked to hybrids. And veterans I doubt would be too likely to train Gallente for this ship alone, thus making it more likely they would have trained hybrids to take full advantage of the frigate lineup.
When I started out I chose Gallente and started training there ships and weapons and got curious about other races ships and found that I liked caldari ships better, because hurry shared a common weapon type it was not that hard of a transition as I did not have to start out from scratch, this would give other players a similar option as most all races use drones and if they want to try out the Gallente ship progression they would have options until they got the hybrid weapon system trained They would still have those same options, and just not utilize the bonus to hybrids. Since it's not a damage bonus and is aimed at the terrible tracking of rails you essentially make it up in part by just not using rails. Besides, proficiency in small weapons tends to be less skill intensive than drone proficiency anyways. Either way i don't see this as being a terribly strong goto considering its competition, so the hull is more likely to be skipped altogether unless you see some major need for a drone destroyer which can field a couple of mediums in it's flight. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
323
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 22:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
AlexHalstead wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:Either way i don't see this as being a terribly strong goto considering its competition, so the hull is more likely to be skipped altogether unless you see some major need for a drone destroyer which can field a couple of mediums in it's flight. So a flight of 5 lights is inferior to a flight of mediums when swatting down Frigates in a destroyer's intended role? No, which is why I said it is NOT a goto unless you have a special situation in which mediums are useful. They aren't in the destroyer role so the question becomes why is the extra 10 drone band a draw over its alternative in the new Amarr destroyer for drone damage. I don't have a good answer for that at the moment. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
342
|
Posted - 2012.10.24 21:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
Zetheral wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:
AMARR DESTROYER: Role bonus: +25% to ship capacitor recharge rate
The role bonus is very ummm pointless... Why not simply give the Amarr destroyer +25% cap recharge to begin with and give it a role bonus that would actually vary based on the mods fitted... Maybe a TD bonus or cap neut amount, making it a bit more useful against larger ships. While this comment means you didn't read the update I still think CCP Ytterbium is partially at fault for not updating the op with proposed changes.
This was already changed:
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Amarr: Cap recharge bonus moved into the hull itself - thus capacitor recharge rate reduced from 370 to 275s Role bonus changed to 25% MWD speed to drones
|
|
|