EVE Search - Introducing myself and asking for help with balance!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Introducing myself and asking for help with balance!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Kethry Avenger PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 53	Posted - 2013.03.23 17:41:00 - [211] - Quote Some ideas. A Heavy Sniper BS: The slow but good HP version of tier 3 BC. Minmatar Alpha, Amarr Best damage projection at short range for long range guns, Gallente Best damage projection at long range, Caldari Best damage at range(make cruise missiles not suck). Worst mobility A DPS/Tank BS, Racial tank varieties, Minmatar bonus tracking, Amarr Best damage projection at long range with short range guns, Gallente best damage projection at short range for short range guns, Caldari most consistent damage (make torpedoes not suck) (Most mobile BS) A secondary EW/alt weapon BS: Amarr drone +neuts range or amount, Minny missiles +web range, Gallente Drone + point range, Caldari um, whatGÇÖs their other EW?, and which is the off weapon system? (Good BS for fighting things smaller) (least EHP) secondary EW should be less effective than recons or faction equivalents. Give us another BS. Amarr with torps, and something interesting for the others I guess. Keep Tier 3 in their role. Just donGÇÖt have them overshadow BS so much. Then buff HACGÇÖs to be the better small gang skirmish/solo ship.
Savira Terrant Valhollr 26	Posted - 2013.03.23 17:59:00 - [212] - Quote Whatever you do: Do not mess with existing Amarr BS's weapon platforms. If you want to give an Amarr BS missiles, it needs a new hull! .
Omnathious Deninard Extrinsic Operations 723	Posted - 2013.03.23 18:05:00 - [213] - Quote I was playing with some basic numbers regarding the idea of a RR Dominix Removing the damage bonus and keeping the turret hardpoints at 6 you would get Neutron Blaster Cannon II with Void II charges 454.27 DPS, Current 567.84 DPS 425mm Railgun II with Javelin II charges 280.19 DPS, Current 350.24 The damage from drones would not change. My initial thought was to give the ship a generic bonus to Energy Transfer, Shield Transfer and Remote Repair I quickly realized that would be OP, also I was suggesting a boost to the rep and transfer amount and that too would be bad so a revised concept is as follows +10% Drone Damage, HP and Logistic Drone repair amount 5% reduction in Remote Armor Repair Systems capacitor use Role Bonus: 500% bonus to Remote Armor Repair System range This could also be given a shield transfer bonus as well. This would benefit the PVP world as it would make a Dominix appearing of field a surprise ship in terms of is it fit for RR or Guns or a Combination of the two. Ideas For Drone Improvement Updated 11/30/12Catastrophic Uprising is Recruiting
Allandri Liandri Industrial Liandri Covenant 32	Posted - 2013.03.23 18:20:00 - [214] - Quote Little Dragon Khamez wrote: Not sweet at all. My attack bc is the only thing I have left that still works as it should after the winter of nerfs. All you whiners have successfully nagged the dev into nerfing them. If you find eve too hot to handle then play something else I am sick to death of nerfs. I was commenting on the part that I put in bold. I couldn't care less what happens with the rest of the battlecruisers
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 688	Posted - 2013.03.23 19:53:00 - [215] - Quote Buff nos buff nos buff nos buff nos buff nos buff nos buff nos buff nos buff nos Beyond Divinity Recruitment is open!
Falin Whalen GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 303	Posted - 2013.03.23 20:09:00 - [216] - Quote Wow, eleven pages of bad ideas. Why do some people, want to put neut bonuses on the Geddon? That is the stupidest idea ever. I do however, like the idea of turning it into a jumbo Arbitrator/Prophecy. The Raven just needs to have Cruise/Torps not suck, which coincidentally will make the Scorpion a little bit better too. Hyperion, armor tanking it makes it grid bound, shield tanking makes it run out of CPU, and no mater how you tank it you won't be able to put Neutrons on it. It's as slow as molasses on a glacier near Reykjavik in January. That being said, here is my take on rebalancing the attack battlecruisers: They have way to much alpha. This overshadows most of the BS line, as only the top end BS's can match them. Drop 1 turret / high slot. They are to speedy. When most cruisers have a hard time keeping up with them, something is a little off. 10%-15% reduction in speed to keep them from overshadowing cruisers. Agility is fine. It actualy plays into their hit and run style quite well. If they are ever pined down, they are dead, because they have sacrificed survivability to put the bigest guns and bigest engines into the smallest hull possible. You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons.
Zimmy Zeta Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 11904	Posted - 2013.03.23 20:15:00 - [217] - Quote Concerning E-war bonused battleships, it just doesn't feel right for some E-war modules. Battleships are about brute force- so modules like ECM or Neuts seem fitting for those ships. But I somehow cringe at the thought of a battleship with a bonus to TDs, SDs or -god beware- TPs. Those are "soft" E-war forms and are already used to good effect by the tech 1&2 e-war frigs and cruisers. And I don't think that any of the T1 Amarr ships should get a neut bonus- neut bonuses should be reserved for t2 Amarr ships, I'd much rather see you implement another group of t2 battleships later that uses those bonuses and hopefully doesn't step too much on the toes of the existing pirate ships. Oh, and Geddon and Abaddon are fine as they are, but I am all for a drone bonused Apoc. Please don't feed me.
Sizeof Void Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 337	Posted - 2013.03.23 23:13:00 - [218] - Quote My two cents... Role-specific ships are generally fine for BCs and lower, but, as the top sub-cap class, at least one of the BS in each race should emphasize flexibility over role. Basically, I'd like to see each race get a BS like the Domi. The Domi may not put down the most DPS and may not be popular in large fleets, but it is probably the most difficult to predict the fit, when they do pop up. I've fit my Domi with blasters, rails, neuts, ACs, arties, even pulse lasers for grins, and with nothing but drones. Shield tanked, armor tanked, and even hull tanked (again, for grins). I've even used it as a logi. It is just a fun boat to fly. And, always remember... not everyone flies in fleets.
Womyn Power Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 50	Posted - 2013.03.23 23:16:00 - [219] - Quote Bships are going to be hard to balance as people have said before, they're already ******* gay to fight if either side has cap superiority (especially their faction specific brethren, 300k~ ehp tanks are not uncommon among the apoc navy and tempest fleet), whatever you do I hope you keep in consideration eve online is a game of autists, and battleships have the potential to become something so much gayer than they are currently able to become (lol faction battleship fleet with triage support in the 150~ faction bship numbers). Attack battlecruisers are fine, talos is the only one that needs a nerf and even then all you should do is remove its drones.
Dwindlehop Stimulus Rote Kapelle 8	Posted - 2013.03.23 23:54:00 - [220] - Quote Attack BCs leave very little room in space for Attack HACs. Part of this is because the natural speed, agility, dps, and sig of Attack BCs is about on-par or superior to Attack HACs. Part of this is because Tracking Enhancers provide such a huge boost to engagement range and tracking that the velocity&sig of cruisers relative to the tracking of Attack BCs does not provide a noticeable advantage in damage taken by the cruisers. Because the falloff of Attack BC weaponry is larger than that of HAC/cruiser weaponry, Attack BCs get much more benefit from the bonus to falloff that Tracking Enhancers give. Battleships naturally have a longer sniper range than Attack BCs, but this is not useful with current scan mechanics. Battleships can fit large remote repairers/boosters, but the value of these has diminished due to a swing towards triage and logistics. Part of this swing can be attributed to the fact that the UI makes it difficult to manage hostile and friendly targets simultaneously.

Spugg Galdon APOCALYPSE LEGION 281	Posted - 2013.03.24 00:00:00 - [221] - Quote I agree with the last post. Attack BC's are pretty good to be honest. The Oracle is only shy on a little CPU as it can be hard to fit. The Naga is spot on The Talos is the only one that could potentially get a nerf to its ability to deal damage to small stuff. I would just remove its drones. You could also consider giving it a fall off bonus instead of a tracking bonus. The Tornado is spot on.
Beaver Retriever Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 14	Posted - 2013.03.24 00:38:00 - [222] - Quote Scatim Helicon wrote: CCP Rise wrote: We are almost certainly not going to do a full set of disruption BS with this pass. BUT it is something thats on the radar, so having some version of them show up down the road is on the table, just dont expect it for summer. It's disappointing to see that the radar picture for battleships is bland homogenisation across the races. Why does every race need an e-war BS? Battleships should be powerful weapons platforms, but it is far more interesting if other classes are superior in the support role as is currently the case since it diversifies a typical gang/fleet line up away from 'just bring the big ships', which was surely the whole point of the recent frigate and cruiser rebalancing efforts. What's next, logistics BS and Interdictor BS as well so there's no need to ever fly anything smaller? How is it homogenization to implement ewar battleships with race-specific ewar? What in the everloving **** would an Amarr neuting BS have in common with a Scorpion, besides not being a DPS ship? It would be extra variety and less homogenization.
Womyn Power Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 51	Posted - 2013.03.24 01:33:00 - [223] - Quote Beaver Retriever wrote: Scatim Helicon wrote: CCP Rise wrote: We are almost certainly not going to do a full set of disruption BS with this pass. BUT it is something thats on the radar, so having some version of them show up down the road is on the table, just dont expect it for summer. It's disappointing to see that the radar picture for battleships is bland homogenisation across the races. Why does every race need an e-war BS? Battleships should be powerful weapons platforms, but it is far more interesting if other classes are superior in the support role as is currently the case since it diversifies a typical gang/fleet line up away from 'just bring the big ships', which was surely the whole point of the recent frigate and cruiser rebalancing efforts. What's next, logistics BS and Interdictor BS as well so there's no need to ever fly anything smaller? How is it homogenization to implement ewar battleships with race-specific ewar? What in the everloving **** would an Amarr neuting BS have in common with a Scorpion, besides not being a DPS ship? It would be extra variety and less homogenization. Giving ewar bonuses to something not T2 in regards to webs/points/neuts isn't going to happen. It would completely or almost completely negate the use of recons on the battlefield when you've got t1 ships that can do the same thing. The only way you're going to get dedicated ewar bships of this kind is when they re-split the blops trees (cant come soon enough) and make attack and ewar/bridging t2 battleships. I'd expect the logical price for a bship with these features in the t2 range to be atleast in the 600-900 mil range much like current blops prices.
Neugeniko Insight Securities 15	Posted - 2013.03.24 02:35:00 - [224] - Quote The scorpion doesn't overshadow the other ECM ships as far as use goes. I think it will be the same for any future disruption BS as long as their price is right. Neug
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 498	Posted - 2013.03.24 03:40:00 - [225] - Quote The naga and nado are the main ones that appear in blobs, mostly because of arty and rails. They should both lose some lock range, and maybe a little bit of align time
Krell Kroenen Miner Intimidation 125	Posted - 2013.03.24 03:43:00 - [226] - Quote How to word this... given that tiers are being removed and thus tier 3 BCs are being called attack BCs and currently require large weapons to use. Will there be another attack BC added for each race that doesn't require that level of training for younger pilots that haven't trained large weapons or will they be "stuck" with only the combat class of BC's and their style of play?
To mare Advanced Technology 179	Posted - 2013.03.24 07:09:00 - [227] - Quote Amarr: I somewhat agree that amarr BS are boring especially the geddon and the baddon, since they do the same thing, but please dont turn the geddon into a drone boat, the apoc is the sniper it have its own role and its already a damn good sniper arguably the best. Caldari: scorpion is fine, rokh is fine a bit more mobilty and cap wouldnt hurt tho, raven 5 lows are too much 4 will do the job, move 1 low to a mid also the 2 utility highs are almost useless it doesnt have the fittings to use them so this is another problem. Gallente: domi is totally fine, mega i think its good enough but if you guys wanna give the thing a better speed mobility just pay attention to balance it properly not like the thorax in the cruiser class. Hype dont have enough fittings for a decent fit a full rack of ion, 2 heavy cap booster and 2 large rep should be the minimum, then change the rep bonus to a 10% or give it 7 high with a rof bonus and a 7th low (model would look bad with only7 turrets in the nose). Minmatar: phoon keep the split weapons but make it more focused on missile, 5 launcher 3 turrets and 125m of drones but change the bonus to 5% missile rof and 7,5% to target painter effectiveness. Mael is fine. Now the tempest thats a tricky one for a double dps bonus ship the dps its still crap, it had its use as an oversized BC but nomore because of the tornado. The bonuses screams gankboat so let it be change the damage bonus to a 7,5% at least it would have an advantage in alpha over the other bs and a good dps or 7 turret even if id hate to lose that double neut, please no falloff bonus bullshit
Commander Ted Caldari Provisions Caldari State 561	Posted - 2013.03.24 07:11:00 - [228] - Quote For battleships I feel that they are way to vulnerable to small/fast things. I mean 1 t1 frigate can easily be immune to any damage from a battleship. Maybe the battleships should be rethought into 3 types, Ewar, Siege, and anti support. Ewar battleships are pretty self explanatory but a dreadnaught would be a high dps, low tracking gun platform with fewer utility slots for ewar, neuts, and drones and more tank and big guns. Anti support would be lower dps, fairly flexible, good tracking ships. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Luc Chastot Gentleman's Corp 264	Posted - 2013.03.24 07:19:00 - [229] - Quote Regarding battleships: - Slight EHP increase overall, especially for combat BSs. - Get rid of the reper bonus on the Hyperion. Falloff bonus is a good candidate to replace it. - Make the Megathron rely less on drone damage. - Tell the art guys to take a long and serious look at the Dominix. Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Salpad Carebears with Attitude 330	Posted - 2013.03.24 10:54:00 - [230] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: At the moment I'm spending a lot of time thinking about ATTACK Battlecruisers and Tech 1 Battleships specifically. I want to open this thread in the hopes that you guys will contribute thoughts on those topics. I would push you towards more high level/meta discussion rather than hyper specific attribute adjustment type of stuff, we just aren't to that stage yet. If I can validate my own impressions about the state of balance regarding these two classes through your contributions, I'll feel much more comfortable going forward! The most obvious objective criterion for balance, or at least the one that is the least subjective, although it is very rarely spoken about, is that one observes the players making a variety of choices, instead of almost all of them all gravitating towards the same few choices. That's when you know that you've achieved balance. That's when you know that all the options you offer to the players are good and desirable. What is CCP actually doing to objectively monitor game balance? I've long argued that you guys ought to tally up flight-hours per ship hull. Are you doing that know? Or if not, what method are you using? Ships sold isn't a good criterion, because someone might buy a ship and then not use it, or buy a ship, get blown up in it quickly, buy a new one, get blown up again quickly, and so forth. But if one players logs 500 hours undocked in, e.g., a Navy Caracal, then that ought to add 500 points to the Navy Caracal's tally.

Bouh Revetoile TIPIAKS 262	Posted - 2013.03.24 11:14:00 - [231] - Quote Salpad wrote: The most obvious objective criterion for balance, or at least the one that is the least subjective, although it is very rarely spoken about, is that one observes the players making a variety of choices, instead of almost all of them all gravitating towards the same few choices. That's when you know that you've achieved balance. That's when you know that all the options you offer to the players are good and desirable. That's completely wrong. There is a lot of fashion effects and FOTM. Most people tends to stick to general consensus and accepted ideas ; it takes an independant, excentric person to do new things (in this case, a preferably good and renowned pvper) and make people accept it as good ideas.
Deacon Abox Justified Chaos 84	Posted - 2013.03.24 13:26:00 - [232] - Quote Falin Whalen wrote: Wow, eleven pages of bad ideas. Why do some people, want to put neut bonuses on the Geddon? That is the stupidest idea ever. I do however, like the idea of turning it into a jumbo Arbitrator/Prophecy. The Raven just needs to have Cruise/Torps not suck, which coincidentally will make the Scorpion a little bit better too. Hyperion, armor tanking it makes it grid bound, shield tanking makes it run out of CPU, and no mater how you tank it you won't be able to put Neutrons on it. It's as slow as molasses on a glacier near Reykjavik in January. That being said, here is my take on rebalancing the attack battlecruisers: They have way to much alpha. This overshadows most of the BS line, as only the top end BS's can match them. Drop 1 turret / high slot. They are to speedy. When most cruisers have a hard time keeping up with them, something is a little off. 10%-15% reduction in speed to keep them from overshadowing cruisers. Agility is fine. It actualy plays into their hit and run style quite well. If they are ever pinned down, they are dead, because they have sacrificed survivability to put the bigest guns and bigest engines into the smallest hull possible. This is a good post so I'm quoting it. :) There seems to be talk in this thread about more ewar BSs. Ewar BSs seem a little odd. And however you might implement it none would compare to the Scorpion anyway. ECM is too much a *****, which is a general problem you have to address. Also, I would add be careful with missile buffs, even though the cruise and torps need a ltttle something. The BC rebalance was a big fail. The Drake is still king, only now with HAMs. The Harbinger and the Gallente BCs are ass. Hopefully this pattern won't persist as rebalancing moves up the ship sizes. edit- However, at least the Drake is not sitting in top position at 3 x the second place ship anymore. Also, how long did it take you to craft that avatar? It is rather a good self portrait.
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition 80	Posted - 2013.03.24 15:26:00 - [233] - Quote Deacon Abox wrote: Falin Whalen wrote: Wow, eleven pages of bad ideas. Why do some people, want to put neut bonuses on the Geddon? That is the stupidest idea ever. I do however, like the idea of turning it into a jumbo Arbitrator/Prophecy. The Raven just needs to have Cruise/Torps not suck, which coincidentally will make the Scorpion a little bit better too. Hyperion, armor tanking it makes it grid bound, shield tanking makes it run out of CPU, and no mater how you tank it you won't be able to put Neutrons on it. It's as slow as molasses on a glacier near Reykjavik in January. That being said, here is my take on rebalancing the attack battlecruisers: They have way to much alpha. This overshadows most of the BS line, as only the top end BS's can match them. Drop 1 turret / high slot. They are to speedy. When most cruisers have a hard time keeping up with them, something is a little off. 10%-15% reduction in speed to keep them from overshadowing cruisers. Agility is fine. It actualy plays into their hit and run style quite well. If they are ever pinned down, they are dead, because they have sacrificed survivability to put the bigest guns and bigest engines into the smallest hull possible. This is a good post so I'm quoting it. :) There seems to be talk in this thread about more ewar BSs. Ewar BSs seem a little odd. And however you might implement it none would compare to the Scorpion anyway. ECM is too much a *****, which is a general problem you have to address. Also, I would add be careful with missile buffs, even though the cruise and torps need a ltttle something. The BC rebalance was a big fail. The Drake is still king, only now with HAMs. The Harbinger and the Gallente BCs are ass. Hopefully this pattern won't persist as rebalancing moves up the ship sizes. edit- However, at least the Drake is not sitting in top position at 3 x the second place ship anymore. Also, how long did it take you to craft that avatar? It is rather a good self portrait. I agree I loved the old incarnation of the drake, but even I was ready for it to have a total re-evaluation like the prophecy got, instead it was tweaked into suckyiness... All it has got going for it now is a strong tank. An idea was mooted at the time that the ship would have a rof bonus in exchange for losing it's bonus to resists. I wish they had done that.
Pavel Lemmont World Forge Industries Severasse Militarized Mining Union 1	Posted - 2013.03.24 16:05:00 - [234] - Quote regarding Amarr Battleships - i like the idea of making the Geddon a more dedicated drone boat - tachyons are the stronger weapons a sub cap amarr can "fit" if only had the enough amount of PG so it would be nice if the PG requirements for those guns could drop to actual BS PG
Havegun Willtravel Mobile Alcohol Processing Units 65	Posted - 2013.03.24 21:14:00 - [235] - Quote Hi Rise. Congrats on your new post and best success on your projects. To start, Don't Nerf the Talos. Yes it's a tiny bit OP up close. However, Up Close is where everyone else fears to tread and where no one else has to go to apply dps. Naga, Nado, and Oracle can sit at 40 k aligned and drop damage with a high level of immunity and GTFO if things get spooky. Talos doesn't really have that luxury. Leave it alone. LoL, it's about the only time i can remember anyone accusing Gal of having a single OP hull. The reward of dropping big DPS is the risk that you have to do it in someone's face. That's fair. Overall the Tier 3 team deserves huge props. Each of the hulls has developed a reputation for excellence in one or more ways and have been enthusiastically adopted by every segment of EvE. At the risk of being hated the only thing to balance them might be to loose a turret to tone down their dps a touch. ( if you do, remember to trim a bit of their build sheets m k ) As to BS's. Scorp : PITA. Everyone hates e-war when it's against you, loves it when it works for you. Being the only one is a bit lop sided but I'd rather see it nerfed than add an e-war boat to each race to even it out. If you want the tactical advantage of shutting someone down then put the isk on the line with a recon. Rokh: A bit Op but not horribly so. Leave it alone. Raven: Waaay to slow. Needs a big speed buff to even consider being viable up close with torps or being a useful small gang ship. Amar: What ever you do Please don't make one another unbreakable brick. The Maller and Proph are silly atm. A BS sized version would just be to much. Galente: Lets start with the most overdue part. Good gawd they be Fugly. It's not just that the Domi looks like a space turd, but the color scheme has been atrocious since i started playing. At first it was mostly green which was meh, compared to the Gold, Blue, Bronze (Rust ). Over time it's morphed into the out of focus patchwork mess we have today. Supposedly Galente are French descendants. Use a Red, White, Blue scheme with a big emphasis on white as a base color with heavier Fire Engine Red accents in the T2 versions. Just a tiny bit of love here would be appreciated. Dominix : Nothing wrong with it. The only thing i might be tempted to change is the drone bonus combo. ATM it's damage and hit points. I'm somewhat tempted to ask for it to be changed to damage and speed like the algos. PvE'ers can give some love to Drone Durability Rigs if they want more buffer, PvP'ers will loose a bit of safety margin but see DPS applied on target which overall seems like a fair trade. Hype: Worst drone bay of all the Tier 3's and it's Galente. I've often thought that the Hyperion would have been better off being a tier 1. The rep bonus was better for noobs and the domi needed alot more sp to be flown properly. Even though tiericide is meant to move away from this, that's the general direction I'd take. Nerf the Hype to a tier 1 level pg. Drop a high and balance it so that it can fit a rack of 325's or ion's and a large rep. Leave the mids as is for boosters or rechargers and voila, great new entry level BS for pve or pvp. People who paid big isk for the BPO will squawk for a bit, but not once they start selling x 10 of them. Give the Domi Tier 2 like Pg and everyone's happy. Megathron : Overall it's fine. It would be better with +50m2 drone bay and a tiny bit of pg and cpu. It would be a viable and desirable ship in every fleet concept with a resist bonus. Idealy I think it would be most useful and popular as the top of the line Galente gunship. 8 high's all guns, Damage and Tracking bonus, +1 low to equal the babboon and a bit of speed and agility for when it's in brawler mode to get on target. GL and looking forward to summer.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 573	Posted - 2013.03.24 21:47:00 - [236] - Quote Havegun Willtravel wrote: Hype: Worst drone bay of all the Tier 3's and it's Galente. I think you mean "joint best" drone bay...
Jonas Sukarala Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 41	Posted - 2013.03.24 21:54:00 - [237] - Quote i agree that tier3 dps is out of place for the size of its hull when you consider they have the same range as a class above and are better at applying the dps aswell a turret drop would be a good place to start they need to be more akin to bc's than bs. scorpion should be changed to the its navy version in style its odd to have a battleship its concept being dps and tank being a support e-war ship and then the raven could be the 4th attack bs it would make more sense. 'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition 80	Posted - 2013.03.24 21:56:00 - [238] - Quote Pavel Lemmont wrote: regarding Amarr Battleships - i like the idea of making the Geddon a more dedicated drone boat - tachyons are the stronger weapons a sub cap amarr can "fit" if only had the enough amount of PG so it would be nice if the PG requirements for those guns could drop to actual BS PG CCP have previously said that they like the Armageddon as it and it is working well, so it's unlikely they will change it's role. The apocalypse is the ship they should be looking at.
Jonas Sukarala Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 41	Posted - 2013.03.24 21:59:00 - [239] - Quote Little Dragon Khamez wrote: Pavel Lemmont wrote: regarding Amarr Battleships - i like the idea of making the Geddon a more dedicated drone boat - tachyons are the stronger weapons a sub cap amarr can "fit" if only had the enough amount of PG so it would be nice if the PG requirements for those guns could drop to actual BS PG CCP have previously said that they like the Armageddon as it and it is working well, so it's unlikely they will change it's role. The apocalypse is the ship they should be looking at. The geddon is going to be an attack bs like a big omen which makes sense as it is too simlar to the abbadon minus the resis 'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium
Falin Whalen GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 309	Posted - 2013.03.24 23:31:00 - [240] - Quote Jonas Sukarala wrote: The geddon is going to be an attack bs like a big omen which makes sense as it is too simlar to the abbadon minus the resis The big flaw in your theory is that the Geddon is so similar to the Abaddon and it can field a full flight of heavies/sentries. That makes it perfect to glide into the second combat battleship seat using the Amarr secondary weapon of DRONES. Just increase the drone bay to 375m3 and you don't have to do much else to it. The Apocalypse is the one that needs to be re-jiggered into the attack battleship. You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,09s, ref 20250716/1423
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

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.