EVE Search - Updating Destroyers

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
James Draekn	Posted - 2005.04.08 20:50:00 - [1] Does anyone here think that the Destroyers should be beefed up some? What I would suggest is that that CCP boost the hitpoint to Sheild, Armor, and Structure to around 550-600 to make these ships balanced. I am comparing it to the Battlecruiser which has about the double the strength of a cruiser yet half the strength of a Battleship. The destroyer is basically a bigger frigate with more guns and a larger signature radius right now and doesn't last long in combat. Would make a perfect change to allow younger players a cheap yet tough ship. Anyone?????
James Draekn X.E.N.O. Breidablik	Posted - 2005.04.08 20:50:00 - [2] Does anyone here think that the Destroyers should be beefed up some? What I would suggest is that that CCP boost the hitpoint to Sheild, Armor, and Structure to around 550-600 to make these ships balanced. I am comparing it to the Battlecruiser which has about the double the strength of a cruiser yet half the strength of a Battleship. The destroyer is basically a bigger frigate with more guns and a larger signature radius right now and doesn't last long in combat. Would make a perfect change to allow younger players a cheap yet tough ship. Anyone?????
benwallace	Posted - 2005.04.08 20:54:00 - [3] bc are 2 classes higher than destroyers don't be a n00b they are the way they are --------------------------
benwallace Contraband Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2005.04.08 20:54:00 - [4] bc are 2 classes higher than destroyers don't be a n00b they are the way they are
James Draekn	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:04:00 - [5] I'm not suggesting turning the destroyer into a Battlecruiser! I'm suggesting that CCP should make the destroyer the halfway point (Hitpoint wise) between Frigs and Cruisers. Kind of how the Battlecruiser is the halfway point between Cruiser and Battleship. Look at the hitpoints on the ship then respond. And yes it'll make it harder to kill for you Inty and assault frig pilots, but not by much. I'm only suggesting an addition of 150-200 hitpoint on average.
James Draekn X.E.N.O. Breidablik	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:04:00 - [6] I'm not suggesting turning the destroyer into a Battlecruiser! I'm suggesting that CCP should make the destroyer the halfway point (Hitpoint wise) between Frigs and Cruisers. Kind of how the Battlecruiser is the halfway point between Cruiser and Battleship. Look at the hitpoints on the ship then respond. And yes it'll make it harder to kill for you Inty and assault frig pilots, but not by much. I'm only suggesting an addition of 150-200 hitpoint on average.
Damien Vox	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:10:00 - [7] I dunno...inty pilots already hate my destroyer and it only carries one weapon.
Damien Vox Minmatar Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:10:00 - [8] I dunno...inty pilots already hate my destroyer and it only carries one weapon.
Alexi Borizkova	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:13:00 - [9] I'd like to see tier II and tier III destroyers and Battlecruisers introduced rather than see the existing ones "beefed up". It'd be rather interestign to have a destroyer with a cruiser weapon or two as main armament and some backup guns as well. Of course that would likely be the tier III one... the trick would be to not make ships in lower tiers obsolte this go round, leave the basic destroyer as "the anti frig" then add the next tier with a different niche, perhaps a gunboat capable of being a threat to cruisers, though soft yet agile.
Alexi Borizkova Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:13:00 - [10] I'd like to see tier II and tier III destroyers and Battlecruisers introduced rather than see the existing ones "beefed up". It'd be rather interestign to have a destroyer with a cruiser weapon or two as main armament and some backup guns as well. Of course that would likely be the tier III one... the trick would be to not make ships in lower tiers obsolte this go round, leave the basic destroyer as "the anti frig" then add the next tier with a different niche, perhaps a gunboat capable of being a threat to cruisers, though soft yet agile. In Corporate Caldari, taxes pay YOU.
Caldorous	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:29:00 - [11] Originally by: Alexi Borizkova I'd like to see tier II and tier III destroyers and Battlecruisers introduced rather than see the existing ones "beefed up". It'd be rather interestign to have a destroyer with a cruiser weapon or two as main armament and some backup guns as well. Of course that would likely be the tier III one... the trick would be to not make ships in lower tiers obsolte this go round, leave the basic destroyer as "the anti frig" then add the next tier with a different niche, perhaps a gunboat capable of being a threat to cruisers, though soft yet agile. Seeing the usefulness of a brutix these days... the gallente NEED a tier 2 bc (at least) or a boost on it's evasive capacities ----------------------------- 2005.03.13 01:11:29combatYour 350mm Railgun I perfectly strikes Asteroid (Veldspar), wrecking for 0.0 damage.
Caldorous Gallente	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:29:00 - [12] Originally by: Alexi Borizkova I'd like to see tier II and tier III destroyers and Battlecruisers introduced rather than see the existing ones "beefed up". It'd be rather interestign to have a destroyer with a cruiser weapon or two as main armament and some backup guns as well. Of course that would likely be the tier III one... the trick would be to not make ships in lower tiers obsolte this go round, leave the basic destroyer as "the anti frig" then add the next tier with a different niche, perhaps a gunboat capable of being a threat to cruisers, though soft yet agile. Seeing the usefulness of a brutix these days... the gallente NEED a tier 2 bc (at least) or a boost on it's evasive capacities -----------------------------
Alexi Borizkova	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:33:00 - [13] Well, that's like saying people need a tech II velator... the brutix just plain out needs some more Grid and CPU, at least the way I look at it.
Alexi Borizkova Caldari New Age Solutions	Posted - 2005.04.08 21:33:00 - [14] Well, that's like saying people need a tech II velator... the brutix just plain out needs some more Grid and CPU, at least the way I look at it. In Corporate Caldari, taxes pay YOU.
Bazman	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:04:00 - [15] Remove the Destroyers ROF penalty, and they will finally be worth something
ZaKma	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:04:00 - [16] i think he means the way a destoryer isto a frigate as a battlecruiser isto a cruiser as in in proportion they are way of, where as a destroyer is olny a tad better than a frigate a battlecruiser is a rather large amount better than a cruiser
ZaKma The Scope	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:04:00 - [17] i think he means the way a destoryer isto a frigate as a battlecruiser isto a cruiser as in in proportion they are way of, where as a destroyer is olny a tad better than a frigate a battlecruiser is a rather large amount better than a cruiser --- I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
Bazman Caldari Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:04:00 - [18] Remove the Destroyers ROF penalty, and they will finally be worth something ----- OMG READ TUXFORD!!!1
Gierling	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:05:00 - [19] I bet you money the tier II gallente destroyer will look like this. http://img221.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img221&image=gallentedestroyer0ls.jpg Bastards we are lest Bastards we become.
Gierling Gallente Celestial Fleet Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:05:00 - [20] I bet you money the tier II gallente destroyer will look like this. http://img221.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img221&image=gallentedestroyer0ls.jpg
mavskji	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:24:00 - [21] More ships would be nice but I doubt new Destoyers or BCs are on CCPs list of priorities. I agree the Brutix could do with a small boost. I would also like to see the Brutix & Cyclone bonuses changed. I see them as more offensive ships, they would be more fun if they had an offensive bonus instead of the armour/shield bonus. Tracking or something would be nice.
mavskji Caldari	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:24:00 - [22] More ships would be nice but I doubt new Destoyers or BCs are on CCPs list of priorities. I agree the Brutix could do with a small boost. I would also like to see the Brutix & Cyclone bonuses changed. I see them as more offensive ships, they would be more fun if they had an offensive bonus instead of the armour/shield bonus. Tracking or something would be nice.
General Murder	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:33:00 - [23] The main problem with destroyers is they have no funktion. Because every BS with torps can kill frigs much better the destroyers (and anything else Only when destroyers are much better at frig killing as any other ship they will see use in fleets.
General Murder	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:33:00 - [24] The main problem with destroyers is they have no funktion. Because every BS with torps can kill frigs much better the destroyers (and anything else Only when destroyers are much better at frig killing as any other ship they will see use in fleets.
Branmuffin	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:34:00 - [25] Get rid of the ROF penalty and all of a sudden the destroyers would be VERY well liked. A catalyst with ions damage mods and no ROF penalty would put out enough DPS to put a solid dent in a Battleship.
Branmuffin	Posted - 2005.04.08 22:34:00 - [26] Get rid of the ROF penalty and all of a sudden the destroyers would be VERY well liked. A catalyst with ions damage mods and no ROF penalty would put out enough DPS to put a solid dent in a Battleship.
Dakath	Posted - 2005.04.08 23:19:00 - [27] Right now I mostly use destroyers (Caldari or Minmatar) for light cargo running. Fix that ROF and maybe some 1 more low slot on the Cormorant and 1 more mid slot on the Thrasher and they would be very good indeed. I chopped Bunny into little pieces. \ ( )( X > ) ( .x ) / < _ Muahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! Sic Transit Gloria Bunny!
Dakath	Posted - 2005.04.08 23:19:00 - [28] Right now I mostly use destroyers (Caldari or Minmatar) for light cargo running. Fix that ROF and maybe some 1 more low slot on the Cormorant and 1 more mid slot on the Thrasher and they would be very good indeed.
Lilane	Posted - 2005.04.08 23:27:00 - [29] Actualy, 2 less high slots and no RoF penalty, keeoing the same CPU/Grid would be a quite simple change but would still make them intersting! And perhaps one more low/mid slot would make them great...
Lilane Gallente Elegance Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2005.04.08 23:27:00 - [30] Actualy, 2 less high slots and no RoF penalty, keeoing the same CPU/Grid would be a quite simple change but would still make them intersting! And perhaps one more low/mid slot would make them great... Dark side of Elegance.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.