EVE Search - Reduce Thoraxes bay to 100m3

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate	Posted - 2005.08.23 20:40:00 - [151] Originally by: Paradox Eve I really am having trouble pinning down where the argument is, for the thorax being overpowered. The only solid thing I reading is "the drone bay is too big, the dronebay is too big!" Because that is the problem. Originally by: Paradox Eve As if that actually stands as an argument. As has already been pointed out ad nausium, some others cruisers can use 6 heavy drones. The drones carriers can (vexor and arbitrator). The thorax is a blaster ship not a drone ship. It should not have more drones/better drones than the drone carrier of its race. Especially since heavy drones track so good. Because that is making the vexor useless. And because, well, the moa doesn't get more missiles hardpoint than the caracal on top of it's gun, and not "BS sized" (i.e. fittings for it, as the large drone bay is the "fitting" for heavy drones) launcher hardpoints. Originally by: Paradox Eve the thorax has fewer slots and fitting problems compared to other t3 cruisers The caracal has less slots than any other cruiser, my daredevil and my caracal both have 11 slots. The stabber and the omen have one more, yet they are also comparable tier 2 cruiser. The thorax has less slots because it has more drone, but the drones it currently gets are FAR more valuable than the slots it doesn't have. Emphasis on the FAR. Halving the drone bay would NOT make it underpowered, it would still be an awesome cruiser. Originally by: Paradox Eve and every other gallente ship above cruiser class has more drone bay space then the thorax. That is so wrong, brutix is outclassed by the thorax partly because it only has half its drone bay. The deimos, based on the same hull, or even the vigilant, both upgrades of the thorax, have less drone space. Originally by: Paradox Eve Someone kindly pointed out that tactics vs the thorax isn't a problem (in other words, it's not especially "hard" to kill a thorax when you know what your doing). It is possible to kill a thorax, i have a maller and a rupture setup that are quite versatile and capable of it. However, those are significantly inferior in about every way to the thorax setup (plate + heavy drones + small guns) when facing other ship types/size/fittings. Originally by: Paradox Eve So do me a favor- IN LIST FORM, lay out the argument as to exactly why the thorax is overpowered, point by point, in short and consice form (one sentence each, ect) Originally by: Paradox Eve And whoever said the drones of a thorax does BS dmg is simply full of crap. I have crap gunnery skills (seriously, nothing relevant byond lev 3), and my BS does way more damage than the most damaging heavy drones, with max skills, if we are talkling about 8 of them. And that is whithout dmg mods, and far more range (not to mention instant dmg, unlike the drones). When you add in my BS dronebay, the argument becomes even more laughable. Get out of here with that nonsense. Lying wont win you an argument. That's an easy one. The drones of the thorax do around 200 dps, that is as much as the damage output of a pre-patch torpedo raven without damage mod (not counting 6 heavy drones). A 'geddon with BS skill 3 and large energy turret 2 (surgical strike 2, rapid firing 3, gunnery 5) has, for a megapulse: rof of 5.3 sec & damage mod of 3.5. Using infrared it does 7 * 3.5 * 28 / 5.3 = 130 dps. 166 dps with ultraviolet. To be honest, i think that you are insulting me (as it is clear that you are refering to what i said by the way). Laugh all you want, you are the want looking silly because i proved you wrong with the actual numbers. As for your tip: "Get out of here with that nonsense. Lying wont win you an argument." I have also one for you. Pick a toothpick and stick it under your toenail, then kick the wall, hard. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust
Meridius	Posted - 2005.08.23 20:42:00 - [152] Originally by: Naughty Boy [ 2005.08.05 23:48:33 ] (notify) Logic has just left This thread as of 2s ago So true. The funny thing is the people saying the rax is fine are ignoring the posts made about boosting it's grid so it can fit a decent blaster setup. They don't care about making the ship better at what it should be doing, they just want there overpowered 200m3 of drone space. They know there ship is overpowered and they like it. ________________________________________________________
Meridius Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2005.08.23 20:42:00 - [153] Originally by: Naughty Boy [ 2005.08.05 23:48:33 ] (notify) Logic has just left This thread as of 2s ago So true. The funny thing is the people saying the rax is fine are ignoring the posts made about boosting it's grid so it can fit a decent blaster setup. They don't care about making the ship better at what it should be doing, they just want there overpowered 200m3 of drone space. They know there ship is overpowered and they like it. - _____
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.08.23 20:54:00 - [154] Originally by: Keltin Actually no dude, you keep using the term "disposable" in your argument, so you are only contradicting yourself with this statement. The fact that it is disposable is not the problem. It is far too good when fitted correctly, as it requires too specific setups to be destroyed. That is the very definition of overpowered. The fact that is disposable on top of that is icing on the cake, but is not the main argument at all. Originally by: Keltin Who are you to tell everyone heavy drones are a battleship sized weapon? Who died and made you king of EVE to declare what can be used as what? Sure heavy drones are a good weapon, but like so many people have pointed out to you, they can be destroyed. See any of the posts comparing the damage of heavy drones with BS weapons. Originally by: Keltin I know every MMO you have ever logged into had cookie cutter templates that you had to use to be successful. In EVE there happens to be very good ships in each class that require just that extra bit of planning to be able to defeat. Let's not make EVE just another cookie cutter game where everything is the same, just with different names. Thanks for proving my point, thorax + frig guns + plate + 8 heavy drones is a "cookie cutter setup" and to setup against it, or even incorporating into your general setup design ways to defeat it, you will have to do something that it doesn't have to do: lose versatility. Losing versatility, you lose survivability, hence your setup is worse overall. Hence, more cookie cutter setup and we all end up in the same boring ship and setup, what is exactly what you don't want to happen, don't you ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate	Posted - 2005.08.23 20:54:00 - [155] Originally by: Keltin Actually no dude, you keep using the term "disposable" in your argument, so you are only contradicting yourself with this statement. The fact that it is disposable is not the problem. It is far too good when fitted correctly, as it requires too specific setups to be destroyed. That is the very definition of overpowered. The fact that is disposable on top of that is icing on the cake, but is not the main argument at all. Originally by: Keltin Who are you to tell everyone heavy drones are a battleship sized weapon? Who died and made you king of EVE to declare what can be used as what? Sure heavy drones are a good weapon, but like so many people have pointed out to you, they can be destroyed. See any of the posts comparing the damage of heavy drones with BS weapons. Originally by: Keltin I know every MMO you have ever logged into had cookie cutter templates that you had to use to be successful. In EVE there happens to be very good ships in each class that require just that extra bit of planning to be able to defeat. Let's not make EVE just another cookie cutter game where everything is the same, just with different names. Thanks for proving my point, thorax + frig guns + plate + 8 heavy drones is a "cookie cutter setup" and to setup against it, or even incorporating into your general setup design ways to defeat it, you will have to do something that it doesn't have to do: lose versatility. Losing versatility, you lose survivability, hence your setup is worse overall. Hence, more cookie cutter setup and we all end up in the same boring ship and setup, what is exactly what you don't want to happen, don't you ? Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 - [156] Originally by: Fidelis Deus Please explain how I am bringing confusion. Originally by: Fidelis Deus The thorax is an interesting ship - it's one of the few cruisers which are viable in pvp - thus it should be nerfed. Telling that the one willing to nerf the thorax are willing to nerf it because it a cruiser good in pvp is something terribly wrong. Most of the people i know in game don't like flying battleship, and enjoy frigates and cruisers much more. I do believe that people want cruisers fixed. I also know that i am not flying cruisers in pvp because i would die to a thorax, and in order not to die to it i would have to fit specific setups, hence be far less versatile and easy prey for most other ships and setups. Something that the thorax doesn't have to do, to be able to be as effective against a frigate, a cruiser, or a battleship. All this thanks to the godly drone bay. See how you are in fact, fighting against your own goal ? (continued)
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 - [157] (continued)
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 - [158] Originally by: Fidelis Deus Please explain how I am bringing confusion. Originally by: Fidelis Deus The thorax is an interesting ship - it's one of the few cruisers which are viable in pvp - thus it should be nerfed. Telling that the one willing to nerf the thorax are willing to nerf it because it a cruiser good in pvp is something terribly wrong. Most of the people i know in game don't like flying battleship, and enjoy frigates and cruisers much more. I do believe that people want cruisers fixed. I also know that i am not flying cruisers in pvp because i would die to a thorax, and in order not to die to it i would have to fit specific setups, hence be far less versatile and easy prey for most other ships and setups. Something that the thorax doesn't have to do, to be able to be as effective against a frigate, a cruiser, or a battleship. All this thanks to the godly drone bay. See how you are in fact, fighting against your own goal ? (continued) In Rust We Trust
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:03:00 - [159] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:22:53 Quote: Looking at some of the posts in this thread, more then one user has complained he cannot kill a thorax in a battleship fitted for destroying other battleships, If you look carefully some people do call for a nerf simply because its not 60 million isk. Only one person complained because his tempest got owned by a thorax, and i do not agree at all with his argument. In the "nos" thread of necrologic, yesterday, i was exactly arguing that a battleship that doesn't have a specific defense against cruisers and frigates (be it setup or gang) should die to it. I'll dig the link for you later if you want. Quote: I do agree that the thorax is overpowered compared to other cruisers, but in the grand scheme of ships its hardly overpowered. You say yes, i say no. And i tell why. Quote: It's not carrying a battleship weapon, heavy drones, while excellent at damage dealing, are easily destroyed by a pack of drones, smartbombs, or guns. Once a plateraxes drones are gone, he is useless. Heavy drones are a battleship weapon. Only the thorax can carry them, as other non-battleship ships are almost always better of using smaller drones. There are two exceptions: 1. The ishtar, but this is a very particular case - similar to the assault launcher case, where ccp decides that it is better to use existing stuffs to fill a role in another ship class: ccp could have given a drone damage bonus but gave drone space bonus instead. 2. You want to increase your chance to scoop your drones when they are getting smartbombed. That is not easy to do. You say it's easy, i say it's not. See electrofreak's calculations about that, i can't see how you can argue against that to be honest. Besides, once against, you are telling me to decrease my versatility and survivability, something that you don't have to do. Quote: I don't see how its confusing that I believe cruisers should be able to contribute to a battle while delaing decent damage instead of being destroyed by someones bigger more expensive instawinbutton. You said: "Right now - the Thorax gives us that chance, to be able to contribute to a fight or a battle without having a seperate alt dedicated to making isk and training for a couple years." I am completely against the "bigger = better" or "more expensive = better" logic. I have no interest in a game balanced in such a way. I have a problem with you assuming that my motivations when discussing this topic are precisely to achieve such a "logic", and that is what i said in my reply. You are wrong when you assume that the nerf of the thorax is only wanted by people who wants to kill you easily. There are much more and various motivations in our acts than you may think. Why would i want a ship that i like to be nerfed, if i did not understand how this ship is a problem for the cruiser balance in itself ? Quote: I'd agree with you on the fact that compared to other cruisers its overpowered, but looking at the grand shceme it fits in perfectly. Again, you say it, but you don't give a reason why. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust
Fidelis Deus	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:08:00 - [160] You enjoy flying cruisers in PVP, yet would rather simply nerf the thorax to the point where it cannot compete as a viable vessel against bigger ships instead of rebalancing all the cruisers? The thorax fills its intended role.

Fidelis Deus	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:08:00 - [161] Edited by: Fidelis Deus on 23/08/2005 21:10:50 You enjoy flying cruisers in PVP, yet would rather simply nerf the thorax to the point where it cannot compete as a viable vessel against bigger ships instead of rebalancing all the cruisers? The thorax fills its intended role. While I would much rather have a thorax that can compete on the same level as the current one but with a blaster setup - the drone bay works fine.
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:41:00 - [162] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:41:48 Originally by: Fidelis Deus You enjoy flying cruisers in PVP, yet would rather simply nerf the thorax to the point where it cannot compete as a viable vessel against bigger ships instead of rebalancing all the cruisers? A. long range frig guns on a cruiser: 75 dps B. medium ions on a thorax: 175-200 dps (or more, depending on skills and fitting obviously) C. drone bay of the thorax: 175-200 dps (8 heavy drones) D. alternative drone bay: > 100 dps (10 medium drones) Currently, you can have A. and C. which is enough to break most battleship tanks. The proposed changes make you decide if you want to break 200 dps or not, aka: do you want the guarantee to be able to break the tank of a battleship or not. It should come at the expense of something, but it does not. You want to kill small stuffs ? Fit for small stuffs. You want to kill big stuffs ? Fit for big stuffs. You want to kill everything with the same setup ? Fine, that is the current thorax. And that is not balanced. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:41:00 - [163] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:41:48 Originally by: Fidelis Deus You enjoy flying cruisers in PVP, yet would rather simply nerf the thorax to the point where it cannot compete as a viable vessel against bigger ships instead of rebalancing all the cruisers? A. long range frig guns on a cruiser: 75 dps B. medium ions on a thorax: 175-200 dps (or more, depending on skills and fitting obviously) C. drone bay of the thorax: 175-200 dps (8 heavy drones) D. alternative drone bay: > 100 dps (10 medium drones) Currently, you can have A. and C. which is enough to break most battleship tanks. The proposed changes make you decide if you want to break 200 dps or not, aka: do you want the guarantee to be able to break the tank of a battleship or not. It should come at the expense of something, but it does not. You want to kill small stuffs ? Fit for small stuffs. You want to kill big stuffs ? Fit for big stuffs. You want to kill everything with the same setup ? Fine, that is the current thorax. And that is not balanced. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust
Fidelis Deus	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:46:00 - [164] 10 medium drones is approximately 50 dps. Secondly, without a plate, a cruiser is dead very very fast.
Fidelis Deus	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:46:00 - [165] 10 medium drones is approximately 50 dps. Secondly, without a plate, a cruiser is dead very very fast.
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:54:00 - [166] Originally by: Fidelis Deus 10 medium drones is approximately 50 dps. Not if you include the skills and damage mod of drones into the formula, as you should. Maybe it's not exactly 100, i don't have all the numbers here, but it's not like it would make a difference. Originally by: Fidelis Deus Secondly, without a plate, a cruiser is dead very very fast. That is the problem of all cruisers and frigates anyway. And if the problem is that a thorax has to few hp, how can you argue that the drone bay make up for it ? You are not going to make all ships more survivable by increasing the overall damage output. That is not logic. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
Naughty Boy Chronics of ordinary hate	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:54:00 - [167] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 21:57:52 Originally by: Fidelis Deus 10 medium drones is approximately 50 dps. Not if you include the skills and damage mod of drones into the formula, as you should. Maybe it's not exactly 100, i don't have all the numbers here, but it's not like it would make a difference. Originally by: Fidelis Deus Secondly, without a plate, a cruiser is dead very very fast. That is the problem of all cruisers and frigates anyway. And if the problem is that a thorax has to few hp, how can you argue that the drone bay make up for it ? You are not going to make all ships more survivable by increasing the overall damage output. That is not logic. Edit: Hence, why the "no nerf to thorax, boost other cruisers instead" is totally missing the point. They should have more hp, better fittings and guns worth fitting, but NOT have BS-sized damage for the sake of it. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. In Rust We Trust
Kalast Raven	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:57:00 - [168] add 100 grid to thorax + 50 to deimos, and halve the drone bay on rax. add 100 grid to vigilant too. ------- Epic Command - Recruitment and Public Affairs K. Raven
Kalast Raven Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2005.08.23 21:57:00 - [169] add 100 grid to thorax + 50 to deimos, and halve the drone bay on rax. add 100 grid to vigilant too. ------- K. Raven
Paradox Eve	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:01:00 - [170] Edited by: Paradox Eve on 23/08/2005 22:04:35 Quote: The drones carriers can (vexor and arbitrator). The thorax is a blaster ship not a drone ship. Wrong, it is a close range, heavy damage dealer. Including both drones and blasters. Quote: It should not have more drones/better drones than the drone carrier of its race. Why? It is in a higher tier, in the drone specialist race... Quote: Especially since heavy drones track so good. Oh goody, an actual point that pertains to the argument! And here I was thinking you weren't capable of that. Ok, so drones track well, but take time to find thier target and start the damage, and they can be destroyed without destroying the ship. Quote: And because, well, the moa doesn't get more missiles hardpoint than the caracal on top of it's gun, and not "BS sized" (i.e. fittings for it, as the large drone bay is the "fitting" for heavy drones) launcher hardpoints. And as I said, the thorax doesnt get "BS fitting" on drones. The Gallente BSs all have larger dronebays. Quote: The caracal has less slots than any other cruiser, my daredevil and my caracal both have 11 slots. It isn't a t3 cruiser either. The thorax has fewer slots than every other t3 cruiser. Quote: The thorax has less slots because it has more drone... Exactly! but the drones it currently gets are FAR more valuable than the slots it doesn't have. Emphasis on the FAR. Ill agree to chopping it's dronebay then, on the condition that it is given more PG/CPU AND more slots. Quote: That is so wrong, brutix is outclassed by the thorax partly because it only has half its drone bay. The Brutix is a specialty ship, so I dont consider it a "class above". Nor do I consider a destroyer a "class above" frigs. But I can respect that. Fine, there is one ship above it with less. Quote: The deimos, based on the same hull, or even the vigilant, both upgrades of the thorax, have less drone space. They are the same class of ship. Specialty designs, variations on the thorax... you have no argument here. Quote: That's an easy one. The drones of the thorax do around 200 dps... With MAX skills (note that this is more training time then the gunnery skills listed), using the most damaging drone (also lowest speed and tracking), 8 drones do 176. Quote: ...damage output of a pre-patch torpedo raven without damage mod (not counting 6 heavy drones). Well isnt that convenient for you? Quote: A 'geddon with BS skill 3 and large energy turret 2 (surgical strike 2, rapid firing 3, gunnery 5) has, for a megapulse: rof of 5.3 sec & damage mod of 3.5. Using infrared it does 7 * 3.5 * 28 / 5.3 = 130 dps. 166 dps with ultraviolet. With no skill over 3, a megathron with 7 425mm rails with AM does over 225 DPS, with another 220 from drones, for a total of 445+. This is without dmg mods. To be honest, i think that you are insulting me (as it is clear that you are refering to what i said by the way). Not you, just the argument. The argument is retarded. Should have been clear by that fact that I neither mentioned names, nor quoted. Laugh all you want, you are the want looking silly because i proved you wrong with the actual numbers. No, you tweeked numbers for the sole purpose of making yourself look right. Try again!

Paradox Eve	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:01:00 - [171] Edited by: Paradox Eve on 23/08/2005 22:04:35 Quote: The drones carriers can (vexor and arbitrator). The thorax is a blaster ship not a drone ship. Wrong, it is a close range, heavy damage dealer. Including both drones and blasters. Quote: It should not have more drones/better drones than the drone carrier of its race. Why? It is in a higher tier, in the drone specialist race... Quote: Especially since heavy drones track so good. Oh goody, an actual point that pertains to the argument! And here I was thinking you weren't capable of that. Ok, so drones track well, but take time to find thier target and start the damage, and they can be destroyed without destroying the ship. Quote: And because, well, the moa doesn't get more missiles hardpoint than the caracal on top of it's gun, and not "BS sized" (i.e. fittings for it, as the large drone bay is the "fitting" for heavy drones) launcher hardpoints. And as I said, the thorax doesnt get "BS fitting" on drones. The Gallente BSs all have larger dronebays. Quote: The caracal has less slots than any other cruiser, my daredevil and my caracal both have 11 slots. It isn't a t3 cruiser either. The thorax has fewer slots than every other t3 cruiser. Quote: The thorax has less slots because it has more drone... Exactly! but the drones it currently gets are FAR more valuable than the slots it doesn't have. Emphasis on the FAR. Ill agree to chopping it's dronebay then, on the condition that it is given more PG/CPU AND more slots. Quote: That is so wrong, brutix is outclassed by the thorax partly because it only has half its drone bay. The Brutix is a specialty ship, so I dont consider it a "class above". Nor do I consider a destroyer a "class above" frigs. But I can respect that. Fine, there is one ship above it with less. Quote: The deimos, based on the same hull, or even the vigilant, both upgrades of the thorax, have less drone space. They are the same class of ship. Specialty designs, variations on the thorax... you have no argument here. Quote: That's an easy one. The drones of the thorax do around 200 dps... With MAX skills (note that this is more training time then the gunnery skills listed), using the most damaging drone (also lowest speed and tracking), 8 drones do 176. Quote: ...damage output of a pre-patch torpedo raven without damage mod (not counting 6 heavy drones). Well isnt that convenient for you? Quote: A 'geddon with BS skill 3 and large energy turret 2 (surgical strike 2, rapid firing 3, gunnery 5) has, for a megapulse: rof of 5.3 sec & damage mod of 3.5. Using infrared it does 7 * 3.5 * 28 / 5.3 = 130 dps. 166 dps with ultraviolet. With no skill over 3, a megathron with 7 425mm rails with AM does over 225 DPS, with another 220 from drones, for a total of 445+. This is without dmg mods. To be honest, i think that you are insulting me (as it is clear that you are refering to what i said by the way). Not you, just the argument. The argument is retarded. Should have been clear by that fact that I neither mentioned names, nor quoted. Laugh all you want, you are the want looking silly because i proved you wrong with the actual numbers. No, you tweeked numbers for the sole purpose of making yourself look right. Try again!
Paradox Eve	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:04:00 - [172] As far as the "plate" issue goes. This is not a problem that is unique to the thorax. Oversized plates are a more general problem. They should adjuest speed of ship based on size of plate vs size of ship, like they do with AB and MWD. That a thorax may seem overpowered with oversized plates isn't a problem with the thorax- it is a problem with plates.
Paradox Eve	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:04:00 - [173] As far as the "plate" issue goes. This is not a problem that is unique to the thorax. Oversized plates are a more general problem. They should adjuest speed of ship based on size of plate vs size of ship, like they do with AB and MWD. That a thorax may seem overpowered with oversized plates isn't a problem with the thorax- it is a problem with plates.
Sable Terrick	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:26:00 - [174] Edited by: Sable Terrick on 23/08/2005 22:28:06 Edited by: Sable Terrick on 23/08/2005 22:27:28 As has been said in other forums. Nerf the plates.Either put size restrictions....50-200 on frigs,400-800 on cruisers and save 1600's for battleships. Also...all the Cruisers need to have a bit of a raise in overall power...but that will mean the HAC's need more of a boost...which is honestly something that only the Caldari HAC's need. As their HAC's lack the variation that the other Races have. I am planning onusing a Thorax as a training wheels sort of ship...getting used to getting close and blasting something all to hell. If you increased the PG so it could fit T2 ions and a moderate tank then it wouldnt need to rely on its drones...which it shouldnt be anyways.give it 100m/3 drone space and it can fly 10 medium drones...with the T2 ions it would be doing 25% less damage then a deimos...and thats not something to sneeze at. I think it would still be quite powerful....but it would be powerful in the role it was meant for rather then it taking the spot of the drone carrier for the class. In all honesty they should hardwire things so that you cant fit a higher class of module then the ship your flying. Either way im training for a Thorax and i dont plan on using drones exclusively on it. After all..its only short one 25% damage mod from it....and thats only if i had HAC 5. Or....for all those people that are saying the thorax is fine....are you guys as willing to give the deimos a 200 m/3 drone bay I know its just a game but i really wonder how many of these mouthy F*cks would have the stones to say that sort of thing in real life.
Sable Terrick Caldari Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:26:00 - [175] Edited by: Sable Terrick on 23/08/2005 22:28:06 Edited by: Sable Terrick on 23/08/2005 22:27:28 As has been said in other forums. Nerf the plates.Either put size restrictions....50-200 on frigs,400-800 on cruisers and save 1600's for battleships. Also...all the Cruisers need to have a bit of a raise in overall power...but that will mean the HAC's need more of a boost...which is honestly something that only the Caldari HAC's need. As their HAC's lack the variation that the other Races have. I am planning onusing a Thorax as a training wheels sort of ship...getting used to getting close and blasting something all to hell. If you increased the PG so it could fit T2 ions and a moderate tank then it wouldnt need to rely on its drones...which it shouldnt be anyways.give it 100m/3 drone space and it can fly 10 medium drones...with the T2 ions it would be doing 25% less damage then a deimos...and thats not something to sneeze at. I think it would still be quite powerful....but it would be powerful in the role it was meant for rather then it taking the spot of the drone carrier for the class. In all honesty they should hardwire things so that you cant fit a higher class of module then the ship your flying. Either way im training for a Thorax and i dont plan on using drones exclusively on it. After all..its only short one 25% damage mod from it....and thats only if i had HAC 5. Or....for all those people that are saying the thorax is fine....are you guys as willing to give the deimos a 200 m/3 drone bay I wonder how many of these mouthy F*cks would have the stones to say that without a keyboard to hide behin
kessah	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:31:00 - [176] /signed nerf the drone bay. Its stealing the Vexors thunder tbh While your at it lets see Tachyon pulse lasers and lower grid req's for Beam lasers. Except for Tachs ofc. --------------------------------------------------------
kessah Caldari Veto.	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:31:00 - [177] /signed nerf the drone bay. Its stealing the Vexors thunder tbh While your at it lets see Tachyon pulse lasers and lower grid req's for Beam lasers. Except for Tachs ofc. -------------------------------------------------------- Forever Pirate 2
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:32:00 - [178] Originally by: Paradox Eve As far as the "plate" issue goes. This is not a problem that is unique to the thorax. Oversized plates are a more general problem. They should adjuest speed of ship based on size of plate vs size of ship, like they do with AB and MWD. That a thorax may seem overpowered with oversized plates isn't a problem with the thorax- it is a problem with plates. I am sorry but thats just stupid. The only Problem with plates is that Shield Extenders AREN't as good as Armor Plates. Not speed, not agility, not anything else. The problem with the drone bay is that it is FAR TOO BIG at this point in EVE. Do I think 100m3 is too little? Only if they don't increase some other stats of it such as pgrid. CPU on hybrids isn't the thorax's fault it is a fault of the gun design and ALL of them need to be balanced according to the ship classes they go to. If everything ut the drone bay stayed the same... I would say 150m3 for the thorax and 2000 to 2500 for the Vexor. I stand with Naughty Boy on this... you guys and gals are just being un-freaking-reasonable. I can fly ANY cruiser in this game equally in all ways shape or forms and the moment I leave my munnin for something smaller is the moment I step into a thorax. jide's oBject eXplorer The Nest
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:32:00 - [179] Originally by: Paradox Eve As far as the "plate" issue goes. This is not a problem that is unique to the thorax. Oversized plates are a more general problem. They should adjuest speed of ship based on size of plate vs size of ship, like they do with AB and MWD. That a thorax may seem overpowered with oversized plates isn't a problem with the thorax- it is a problem with plates. I am sorry but thats just stupid. The only Problem with plates is that Shield Extenders AREN't as good as Armor Plates. Not speed, not agility, not anything else. The problem with the drone bay is that it is FAR TOO BIG at this point in EVE. Do I think 100m3 is too little? Only if they don't increase some other stats of it such as pgrid. CPU on hybrids isn't the thorax's fault it is a fault of the gun design and ALL of them need to be balanced according to the ship classes they go to. If everything ut the drone bay stayed the same... I would say 150m3 for the thorax and 2000 to 2500 for the Vexor. I stand with Naughty Boy on this... you guys and gals are just being un-freaking-reasonable. I can fly ANY cruiser in this game equally in all ways shape or forms and the moment I leave my munnin for something smaller is the moment I step into a thorax. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.08.23 22:49:00 - [180] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 23/08/2005 22:54:58 Quote: Wrong, it is a close range, heavy damage dealer. Including both drones and blasters. The fact that the thorax has more drone bay than the vexor makes the vexor very unappealing in comparison. You are also hidding a large part of my reply here. I did not do that with any of you arguments. Quote: Why? It is in a higher tier, in the drone specialist race... See my moa analogy. There is no sence giving the moa more missile hardpoints than to the caracal. Quote: Ok, so drones track well, but take time to find thier target and start the damage, and they can be destroyed without destroying the ship. I was messing around with a plated rifter around a shield tanked mining megathron. In a fast close orbit his Ogre drones slaughtered me, and i wasn't webbed or nossed or whatever. Whatever you think, no drawback will be harsh enough to compensate for that, no matter what you think. Quote: And as I said, the thorax doesnt get "BS fitting" on drones. The Gallente BSs all have larger dronebays. Common! Give the moa 3 cruise launchers, it has less than the scorpion so all is fine and all. Stop that, you are not funny. Quote: It isn't a t3 cruiser either. The thorax has fewer slots than every other t3 cruiser. So you want the thorax to have as many slots as others tier 3 cruisers, yet my caracal shall not get as many slots than other tier 2 cruisers because IT IS NOT A FRICKIN TIER 3 cruiser ? What is that for a reason. Quote: Ill agree to chopping it's dronebay then, on the condition that it is given more PG/CPU AND more slots. Okay, so be it, all fine to me. At least we agree on something. But what slot ? It is not THAT simple. Quote: The Brutix is a specialty ship, so I dont consider it a "class above". Nor do I consider a destroyer a "class above" frigs. But I can respect that. Fine, there is one ship above it with less. That is an uncommon conception, seeing as they are designed to kill said classes. A battlecruiser, in my mind, was designed to kill cruisers and hence, is in a class above. Fair enough. Quote: They are the same class of ship. Specialty designs, variations on the thorax... you have no argument here. Assault cruisers are still cruisers, ok. But to be honest i fail to see the relevance here. Quote: With MAX skills (note that this is more training time then the gunnery skills listed), using the most damaging drone (also lowest speed and tracking), 8 drones do 176. I didn't have the exact numbers to do the math, i stand corrected. This just doesn't prove the whole debate irrelevant by any mean, it's not like that was the only argument. Quote: Well isnt that convenient for you? As far as i can tell we are not comparing the total damage output of the thorax with the total damage output of the raven. We are comparing the drones of the thorax (his main damage source currently, in the particular setup that is showing the problem we are discussing) VS the damage output of a pre-patch torp-raven (counting only his main damage source). That seemed fair to me, but i see how convenient it is to you to write what you write. We were comparing comparable things, you propose not to. Quote: With no skill over 3, a megathron with 7 425mm rails with AM does over 225 DPS, with another 220 from drones, for a total of 445+. This is without dmg mods. See above. Quote: Not you, just the argument. The argument is retarded. Should have been clear by that fact that I neither mentioned names, nor quoted. How exactly is the argument retarded ? Because you said so ? How convenient. (continued)



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: 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.