| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Orvas Dren
   |
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:26:00 -
[1]
Reserved for Frigate data...
===============================================
The Nest
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:26:00 -
[2]
Using my friends object explorer I am going through and comparing all current Frigs/Cruisers/Destroyers for changes in the MK2 project. I will start by posting the cruisers.
Remember that these values may change, and if they do, I will do my best to update them here.
ALL CRUISERS Show a slight decrease in agility. Not sure if its back into the agility we had a year ago, but we are losing some. I will simply say that here, rather than for each ship. The values went from the current 0.65x to the new 0.55x
Gallente:
===========================
Celestis:
Slots changed from 5/4/3 to 4/5/3
Sig Radius from 135 to 108 meters
Vexor:
PGrid changed from 625MW to 675MW
Sig Radius from 150 to 120 meters
Exequror:
Sig Radius changed from 120 to 96 meters.
Altered bonus. (Unable to tell what it does now)
Thorax:
Sig Radius changed from 140 to 112
Amarr:
===========================
Arbitrator:
Slots changed from 4/3/5 to 4/4/4
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104 meters
Augorur:
Sig Radius changed from 110 to 88 meters
Maller:
Pgrid changed from 850MW to 900MW
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104 meters
Omen:
Pgrid changed from 650MW to 730MW
Added 1 launcher hardpoint with No Slot change
Sig Radius changed from 125 to 100 meters
Caldari:
===========================
Blackbird:
Sig Radius changed from 150 to 120 meters
Caracal:
Sig Radius changed from 145 to 116 meters
Moa:
CPU changed from 350 to 400
Sig Radius changed from 135 to 108 meters
Altered bonus. (Unable to tell what it does now)
Osprey:
Sig Radius Changed from 125 to 100 meters
Minnmatar:
===========================
Bellicose:
Slots changed from 5/3/4 to 5/4/3
Sig Radius changed from 110 to 88 meters
Altered bonus. (Unable to tell what it does now)
Rupture:
PGrid changed from 725MW to 850MW
CPU changed from 275 to 300
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104
Scythe:
Sig Radius changed from 100 to 80 meters
Stabber:
Sig Radius changed from 105 to 84 meters
===============================================
The Nest
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:27:00 -
[3]
Reserved for Destroyer data:
===============================================
The Nest
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:27:00 -
[4]
Reserved for Extra ships
===============================================
The Nest
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:33:00 -
[5]
oi, hurry up man!
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:34:00 -
[6]
"ALL CRUISERS Show a slight decrease in agility."
Just a note, since "decrease in agility" might sound like a bad thing... think this actually results in better ship agility... seeing how nanofibers and similar modules subtract from this parameter, and overdrive injectors add to it. o.O;
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:34:00 -
[7]
Awesome, thanks for the data.
Though, i wonder why no minmatar t1 cruiser gets 4 mid slots, it would make more sence than 4 mids for some amarr/gallente cruisers.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
---
I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:35:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Naughty Boy
Awesome, thanks for the data.
Though, i wonder why no minmatar t1 cruiser gets 4 mid slots, it would make more sence than 4 mids for some amarr/gallente cruisers.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
the bellicose gets
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
Julien Derida
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:39:00 -
[9]
Ruptures are going to be very scary with these changes, as are Omens.
----------------------------------------
Chief Inspector of the Style Police - FRICK |
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:50:00 -
[10]
edited my OP to show that the agility change may not be a decrease.
===============================================
The Nest
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:52:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Orvas Dren
Edited by: Orvas Dren on 01/09/2005 14:50:48
edited my OP to show that the agility change may not be a decrease.
Still pulling out the data for frigates. So far some have added bonus's but it looks as if all are gauranteed to have one now, whether or not they did before.
I am also seeing speed increases across most of the frigates. Slot changes, etc as well.
pooost ot 
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 14:53:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Nafri
the bellicose gets
My bad, I didn't see it 
Sincerly Yours, The Nauhgty Boy.
---
I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 15:22:00 -
[13]
almost done with frigs
===============================================
The Nest
|
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 15:24:00 -
[14]
________________________________________________________
|
Agustor
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 16:30:00 -
[15]
Does anyone know if these MK2 ships are intended to replace the current ships or to work as alternatives, with the MK1 ship still being available in game? Most are nice changes but some have some drawbacks.
For instance most ships get just plain added slots/hardpoints, while others actually loose a slot in one area and get it moved to another.
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 16:31:00 -
[16]
I would imagine they are replacements. At least, that is what I believe they are intended for. If you have issues, place them here, who knows... maybe the devs will check here for opinions. Maybe if we keep it constructive, they will even listen to us.
===============================================
The Nest
|
Jan Ors
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 16:45:00 -
[17]
Good changes on the whole, but still no slot balance? Drone balance? Frigate mass fixing? It's a step in the right direction, but other things need fixing too.
* Points to the problems with current ships highlighted by her earlier topic on the MK2 Project. *
________
My chosen sig won't fit. Fah. |
Arleonenis
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:05:00 -
[18]
i like those changes
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:05:00 -
[19]
Quote:
Rifter:
PGrid changed from 35MW to 37MW
Slots changed from 4/2/2 to 4/2/3
Added Bonus (Unable to see what it does.)
Slasher:
Slots changed from 3/2/1 to 3/3/1
Speed changed from 330m/s to 390m/s
Added Bonus (Unable to see what it does.)
hmm... the Slasher becomes the cheapest, most easy to obtain and train for, tackler ingame, and the rifter becomes even more powerfull with the 3rd low. Nice if you ask me
Quote:
Gallente:
===========================
Celestis:
Slots changed from 5/4/3 to 4/5/3
Sig Radius from 135 to 108 meters
Vexor:
PGrid changed from 625MW to 675MW
Sig Radius from 150 to 120 meters
Celestis is now an EW powerhorse, and the Vexor gets a boost in grid, wich is very nice if you ask me. With it, those 2 ships become more deadly, wether is the increased EW capabilities of the Celestis, or the increase in grid, thus improving the ship overall, of the Vexor (I can see it having a better tank and guns, while still spewing drones at you now ). However, the drone bay needs a change, because the thorax is still better overall in the stats.
Quote:
Amarr:
===========================
Maller:
Pgrid changed from 850MW to 900MW
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104 meters
Omen:
Pgrid changed from 650MW to 730MW
Added 1 launcher hardpoint with No Slot change
Sig Radius changed from 125 to 100 meters
...I don't have anything more to say about the amarr ones.
Quote:
Minnmatar:
===========================
Rupture:
PGrid changed from 725MW to 850MW
CPU changed from 275 to 300
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104
Stabber:
Sig Radius changed from 105 to 84 meters
the Rupture has become more scary and the Stabber, a harder to kill anti-AF/destroyer/interceptor/stealth bomber/frigate frig sized cruiser, with cruiser firepower ...4TW if you ask me.
...adding the overall sig rad change, you have allot of ships that become more specialized in certain roles, and hell, more usefull.
The thorax + huge dronebay is still a bit unbalanced imho. An issue that I hope to se solved with the MK2 project.
-------------------
Grimpak, all round nice guy |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:15:00 -
[20]
"the rifter becomes even more powerfull with the 3rd low. Nice if you ask me"
Yeah; Rifter changes are kinda like "wtf" ... it's already powerful as it is and one of the few frigates that actually see some use, now she gets more grid and one extra low slot... o.O;
(guess it's for the artillery Rifters, but this gives the non artillery ones so much more room to play with... uhh
Love the Caldari cruisers getting jack sh.t while about everything else got boosted, btw. Keep telling myself it's just because they didn't yet get their turn to be looked at, but... who am i kidding --;;
|
Agustor
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:23:00 -
[21]
RE: Arbitrator MK2
I'm guessing by adding a 4th mid slot and removing a low slot they want to make this the Amarr EW ship.
However loosing a low slow will really hurt PvE/tank setups, since the option to fit 2 small repairer + 2 hardner + plate will be gone. In order to keep any sort of tank on the Arbitrator viable, it would need at least 703 base grid with 4 lows. Otherwise the MK2 Arbitrator is basically a nerf.
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:24:00 -
[22]
Originally by: j0sephine
"the rifter becomes even more powerfull with the 3rd low. Nice if you ask me"
Yeah; Rifter changes are kinda like "wtf" ... it's already powerful as it is and one of the few frigates that actually see some use, now she gets more grid and one extra low slot... o.O;
(guess it's for the artillery Rifters, but this gives the non artillery ones so much more room to play with... uhh
I know, scary.
...but the best example of how a useless ship becomes very usefull is still the slasher.
increase of speed and adding a 3rd med slot. that thing will become a REALY common tackler, while being realy hard to kill.
-------------------
Grimpak, all round nice guy |
Meridius
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:26:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Orvas Dren
Thorax:
Sig Radius changed from 140 to 112
Heh, no comment.
Originally by: Orvas Dren
Amarr:
===========================
Arbitrator:
Slots changed from 4/3/5 to 4/4/4
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104 meters
Augorur:
Sig Radius changed from 110 to 88 meters
Maller:
Pgrid changed from 850MW to 900MW
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104 meters
Omen:
Pgrid changed from 650MW to 730MW
Added 1 launcher hardpoint with No Slot change
Sig Radius changed from 125 to 100 meters
I still don't see a reason to use an Omen aside from it's slightly lower cost.
Maller has 5 guns which equals an Omens 4 + 25% rof bonus. The Maller has more lows so it can do more damage in 'gank' mode as well. The Omens getting a launcher point...wtf?
The Omen will still be fairly useless imo.
Is there any change for cruiser gun signature resolution? It's 125m atm so it seems all cruisers will be under that...
________________________________________________________
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:27:00 -
[24]
Pretty nice to have some minor boosts looked at.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 17:33:00 -
[25]
Edited by: j0sephine on 01/09/2005 17:33:28
"...but the best example of how a useless ship becomes very usefull is still the slasher.
increase of speed and adding a 3rd med slot. that thing will become a REALY common tackler, while being realy hard to kill."
Aye... think the Condor is supposed to perform similar role now (got the 3/3/1 setup, a diet and more speed) ... seeing how it has the same cpu and grid Slasher has. But with lesser weight and higher top speed *and* the speed bonus on top of it Slasher wins here hands down. As if Vigil wasn't enough of a pest -.o;
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:12:00 -
[26]
One bad thing here, since cruisers are getting their sig radius lowered by.. a lot.. missiles are going to inflict even less damage than before, in fact even heavy missiles are going to do much reduced damage to cruisers now... hope CCP realizes this and changes heavy missiles..
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
Palx
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:17:00 -
[27]
What is the MK2 project???
|
Calian
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:22:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Jim Raynor
One bad thing here, since cruisers are getting their sig radius lowered by.. a lot.. missiles are going to inflict even less damage than before, in fact even heavy missiles are going to do much reduced damage to cruisers now... hope CCP realizes this and changes heavy missiles..
Turrets will do less damage to them also, it's just harder to see since with missiles it's so easy to see how sig radius effects them.
-------------------------
I hate everyone, except you. |
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:24:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Calian
Originally by: Jim Raynor
One bad thing here, since cruisers are getting their sig radius lowered by.. a lot.. missiles are going to inflict even less damage than before, in fact even heavy missiles are going to do much reduced damage to cruisers now... hope CCP realizes this and changes heavy missiles..
Turrets will do less damage to them also, it's just harder to see since with missiles it's so easy to see how sig radius effects them.
Signature Radius is much more harsh for missiles, since it's hard coded damage reduction. If a frigate stands still, a large turret will inflict maximum damage, a torpedo missile will always inflict greatly reduced damage, even if the target does not move.
Just sayin..
------
ROBBLE ROBBLE |
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:26:00 -
[30]
is it just me, or are caldari getting screwed over AGAIN in this?
|
JoeSomebody
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:28:00 -
[31]
Originally by: HippoKing
is it just me, or are caldari getting screwed over AGAIN in this?
that makes two of us 
____
When flying by Concord Customs Commander's Dominix I distinctly heard him saying "... world domination..." |
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:29:00 -
[32]
Edited by: j0sephine on 01/09/2005 18:30:40
"Signature Radius is much more harsh for missiles, since it's hard coded damage reduction. If a frigate stands still, a large turret will inflict maximum damage, a torpedo missile will always inflict greatly reduced damage, even if the target does not move."
I played with that new tracking guide thingie a bit, checking how the signature size change would affect turrets... looks like with transversal of ~200m or more they get shafted quite a bit, too. The catch is, with everyone fitting plates few people actually use medium guns, and the change doesn't affect small turrets at all... plus obviously, it doesn't affect drones in the slightest either, so certain drone-heavy ships get in fact efficiency boost, being they don't suffer damage penalty while others do... joy >>;;
|
DrunkenOne
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:45:00 -
[33]
/me laughs evilly.
Minmatar 4tw.
|
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:48:00 -
[34]
Unless they're planning to decrease the effect of sig radius on torpedos and cruise missiles, these changes do, indeed, seem to indicate caldari are being nerfed even further. Not only will it decrease missile damage, but it will also increase lock time - and caldari already have ****ty lock times. A raven with a sensor booster, IIRC, is about equal to an unmodded battleship of another race in terms of lock time - but again, *IIRC*.
-Wrayeth
|
Nomen Nescio
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 18:57:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Nomen Nescio on 01/09/2005 18:59:16
By the way:
- Signature reduction on cruiser should trigger med guns sig and heavy missiles sig reduction. Cruiser weapons are already pretty bad.
- Celestis and Arbitrator boosts are very nice.
- Omen still wont be any better then a Maller, it needs 6 lows.
- Vexor still have no role whatsoever. Not only celesits with 5 meds will be ew (arguably better then bb), but thorax still keeps the bay, so vexor with drones still pointless.
- Did I say already that celestis will be evil thing?
- How come rupture which needs only 4 guns fitting has grid of an old maller which needs 5 grid hungry lasers?
- We didnt talk about BC, but I think that brutix boost to grid is a joke. And to be honest they all need 8 highs.
|
babylonstew
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 19:00:00 -
[36]
note, wtf, caldari have the highest sig rad, and not 1 boost to thier cruisers, maller gets even more drig to help with fitting that lovely oversize plate.
and who the hell ever runs out of cpu on a moa????, its got grid issues if anytihng ffs
i bet we still have the least agilty, highest mass, slowest speed cruisers in game to.
and as pointed out,now are gimped missiles get shafted further with the reduced sig rad, woohoo
however, i like the changes toi the gila
|
PASTOR TROY
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 21:28:00 -
[37]
Nerf the thorax?
Where do I start the nerf the maller/rupture thread?
P.S.
Caldari does seem to have gotten the el shafto grande.
|
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 21:41:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Naughty Boy
Awesome, thanks for the data.
Though, i wonder why no minmatar t1 cruiser gets 4 mid slots, it would make more sence than 4 mids for some amarr/gallente cruisers.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
I concure with this.
|
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 21:50:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Orvas Dren
Minnmatar:
===========================
Bellicose:
Slots changed from 5/3/4 to 5/4/3
Sig Radius changed from 110 to 88 meters
Altered bonus. (Unable to tell what it does now)
Rupture:
PGrid changed from 725MW to 850MW
CPU changed from 275 to 300
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104
Scythe:
Sig Radius changed from 100 to 80 meters
Stabber:
Sig Radius changed from 105 to 84 meters
The bellicose, well I think the ship slot setup was fine as it was, it could have used a bit more pg though.
The Rapture, it`s a shame I hate the ships looks, still think it looks like the back side of a Spanish gallieon with 4 JATO`s attached.
Anyway now somehow it feels the Rupture has become a tidy bit too powerfull, a pg of 800 would be more fitting, cause why would there otherwise be RCU II`s in the game they aren`t there for jock rabbit.
Scythe, no comment
Stabber, would be nice if they had added 1 med slot to the Stabber. Not everyone uses the ship with autocannons + plates and adding 1 med would make it more versitile in my opinion.
Also, the Caldari...I don`t fly them, but they seems somewhat more out of wack now.
I get the distinked feeling someone want`s to steer some ships into specific setups, making one setup the preferred for that one ship. Could be wrong though.
As for the rest, im not into the other races yet so can`t really comment on those. But the Omen sure looks more sexy now, too bad it doesn`t have a counter in the Minmatar fleet, stats and slot wise, taking these MK2 stats into account.
|
Naughty Boy
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 21:50:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Naughty Boy on 01/09/2005 21:51:39
Edit: nevermind, you found it out. Bellicose mk2 has 4 mids.
Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy.
---
I have the scientific evidence that some people can write but cannot read. |
BABARR
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 22:35:00 -
[41]
Good, good, very good idea..... but now Caldari ship suucc***kksss a lot in pvp. You have increase the grid of launcher, added a new skill "adv weapon upgrade" and now increase powergrid of all ship.... but not the caldari. The Celestis got 4 med now... can have a little tank armor an drone for dmg... the blackbird : no drone, no tank...
|
JoeSomebody
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 22:56:00 -
[42]
im also very confused to why would Moa need CPU increase... whenever fitting anything i always had like 30% CPU unused 
i wonder if it got something to do with new bonus
____
When flying by Concord Customs Commander's Dominix I distinctly heard him saying "... world domination..." |
Hanns
|
Posted - 2005.09.01 23:42:00 -
[43]
im assuming the agility and sig radius boost will carry over to HAC's?
Heavy NOS 4tw! |
Erzengal
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 00:57:00 -
[44]
The Bellicose is my favorite ship, that unfortunatly sits in my hanger.
I would love for it to get some changes to make it viable to use. Even with these changes, it still suffers from WTFDoIDo Syndrome. In some cases versitility is a good thing, however in this case, it is better to use another ship, specially suited to your needs.
While 4 mids are nice, it is still better to use a ship in most cases with 5 mids if running EW. Also to note, with 1 less low, it will be even harder then before to fit guns on it than it already is.
Personally, I would rather see it made into a larger Breacher with it given more missile slots. Four would be enough, though if given 5, the caracal would need something added, such as a third low slot.
Either that, or give it more grid and cpu, and add another turret hardpoint.
|
Bleakheart
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 01:28:00 -
[45]
Okay Caldari, form up, nice straight lines. Now grab your ankles, and spell "RUN". 
Quote:
To bring Type-D Attenuation Signal Augmentation online requires 15.2 cpu units, but only 15.2 of the 734.4 units that your computer produces are still available.
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 04:38:00 -
[46]
I have seen no MK2 values for HAC's in the explorer.
I am not sure they are going to give em to them either. I think the sig radius and agility are to help with cruiser survivability, something most HAC's can do just fine on.
===============================================
The Nest
|
Fidelis Deus
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 05:13:00 -
[47]
Well, It seems Caldari gets shafted AGAIN.
As a Caldari pilot, I find it quite discouraging when I find myself flying gallente ships.
|
babylonstew
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 08:09:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Fidelis Deus
Well, It seems Caldari gets shafted AGAIN.
As a Caldari pilot, I find it quite discouraging when I find myself flying gallente ships.
Word
|
Tar om
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 08:38:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Tar om on 02/09/2005 08:39:23
Originally by: Jim Raynor
One bad thing here, since cruisers are getting their sig radius lowered by.. a lot.. missiles are going to inflict even less damage than before, in fact even heavy missiles are going to do much reduced damage to cruisers now... hope CCP realizes this and changes heavy missiles..
This isn't really true... large turrets will also suffer overall. There is only a chance of a maximum damage hit, and that chance has been lowered due to the sig radius changes. Remember, the biggest turrets have a sig radius of 400m - they'll hit a 200m sig radius target only 50% of the time when its standing still, and not at all if its moving fast enough to defeat the tracking speed of the gun.
It is missiles that always hit for the same damage under the same conditions, not guns. There is no need to boost one weapon system over another.
--
We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net
http://www.serenitymovie.com |
Kinsy
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 08:53:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Kinsy on 02/09/2005 08:53:37
Well chuffed about the Omen, it really needed that extra PG.
Same with the Celestis - it needed 5 med slots badly.
Caldari didn't have it that bad before the changes. The Blackbird and the Osprey each have their distinct roles, the Caracel was ok, but the Moa...just needs more PG. not CPU.
Oh and yes for crying out loud swop the drone bays of the Vexor and the Thorax around.
|
ThehappyOne
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 08:57:00 -
[51]
i was wondering is there any changes to HACS and AF cepters and coverts?
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 09:10:00 -
[52]
Too bad a fix (defined as: NEITHER a nerf NOR a boost) for the Thorax. (Increase powergrid & CPU slightly, axe drone bay - cuts overall damage output drastically while removing lots of fitting problems that no other tier 3 ship has)
In either case, I'd like to point out the highlight of all the changes:
Quote:
Navitas:
Structure changed from 140HP to 170HP
Pgrid changed from 15 to 20
Slots changed from 2/1/2 to 2/2/2
Speed changed from 265 to 290
Shield changed from 75HP to 140HP
Armor changed from 140HP to 180HP
Added Bonus (Unable to see what it does.)
Hooraah!
It's just sad that this hull wasn't the Gallentean interceptor hull, to be honest. Space Motorcycles for the win!
--
Ligh weight.
Some people fly Thorax or Armageddon to compensate what their body lack. I fly Dominix. |
siim
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 09:10:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Nomen Nescio
Edited by: Nomen Nescio on 01/09/2005 18:59:16
By the way:
- Signature reduction on cruiser should trigger med guns sig and heavy missiles sig reduction. Cruiser weapons are already pretty bad.
- Celestis and Arbitrator boosts are very nice.
- Omen still wont be any better then a Maller, it needs 6 lows.
- Vexor still have no role whatsoever. Not only celesits with 5 meds will be ew (arguably better then bb), but thorax still keeps the bay, so vexor with drones still pointless.
- Did I say already that celestis will be evil thing?
- How come rupture which needs only 4 guns fitting has grid of an old maller which needs 5 grid hungry lasers?
- We didnt talk about BC, but I think that brutix boost to grid is a joke. And to be honest they all need 8 highs.
You do understand that the Omen is tier 2 cruiser and maller is tier 3 right? it aint supposed to be better than the maller
|
Tar om
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 09:13:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Tar om on 02/09/2005 09:12:58
Whats a Vigilant going to do with an extra 100grid?
--
We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net
http://www.serenitymovie.com |
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 10:04:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Tar om
Edited by: Tar om on 02/09/2005 08:39:23
Originally by: Jim Raynor
One bad thing here, since cruisers are getting their sig radius lowered by.. a lot.. missiles are going to inflict even less damage than before, in fact even heavy missiles are going to do much reduced damage to cruisers now... hope CCP realizes this and changes heavy missiles..
This isn't really true... large turrets will also suffer overall. There is only a chance of a maximum damage hit, and that chance has been lowered due to the sig radius changes. Remember, the biggest turrets have a sig radius of 400m - they'll hit a 200m sig radius target only 50% of the time when its standing still, and not at all if its moving fast enough to defeat the tracking speed of the gun.
It is missiles that always hit for the same damage under the same conditions, not guns. There is no need to boost one weapon system over another.
yup - i agree with everything you say
but u still missed the point. this is going to bork battleship damage versus cruisers? ok - that makes a kinda of sense, the large guns, cruises or torps won't hit as well now
however, the point being made was that as well as borking LARGE turret damage and LARGE missile damage, it also borks the damage of MEDIUM (heavy) missiles
if, as you say, "There is no need to boost one weapon system over another.", then surely there is no reason to nerf one weapon system more than another
i got the word "bork" into one post 3 times (4 now)
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 10:06:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Ithildin
Too bad a fix (defined as: NEITHER a nerf NOR a boost) for the Thorax. (Increase powergrid & CPU slightly, axe drone bay - cuts overall damage output drastically while removing lots of fitting problems that no other tier 3 ship has)
In either case, I'd like to point out the highlight of all the changes:
Quote:
Navitas:
Structure changed from 140HP to 170HP
Pgrid changed from 15 to 20
Slots changed from 2/1/2 to 2/2/2
Speed changed from 265 to 290
Shield changed from 75HP to 140HP
Armor changed from 140HP to 180HP
Added Bonus (Unable to see what it does.)
Hooraah!
It's just sad that this hull wasn't the Gallentean interceptor hull, to be honest. Space Motorcycles for the win!
My navitas BPO might get a use
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
ALPHA12125
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 10:22:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Ithildin
Too bad a fix (defined as: NEITHER a nerf NOR a boost) for the Thorax. (Increase powergrid & CPU slightly, axe drone bay - cuts overall damage output drastically while removing lots of fitting problems that no other tier 3 ship has)
In either case, I'd like to point out the highlight of all the changes:
Quote:
Navitas:
Structure changed from 140HP to 170HP
Pgrid changed from 15 to 20
Slots changed from 2/1/2 to 2/2/2
Speed changed from 265 to 290
Shield changed from 75HP to 140HP
Armor changed from 140HP to 180HP
Added Bonus (Unable to see what it does.)
Hooraah!
It's just sad that this hull wasn't the Gallentean interceptor hull, to be honest. Space Motorcycles for the win!
My navitas BPO might get a use
like i said in another post. just keep it long enough until the nerfican is over now u have a useful bpo. same with weirda and her cruise launchers
|
Sky Hunter
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 11:09:00 -
[58]
Didnt read whole topic, but will HAC class be affected by new agility changes?
-=-
|
Mangus Thermopyle
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 11:21:00 -
[59]
Any word on the tech 2 frigates? It would be nice if they also got a speed boost, so that they atleast is good for one thing.
|
The Cosmopolite
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 11:36:00 -
[60]
It's still not clear to me whether the Mk2 Project is intending to replace the Mk1 versions or add the Mk2s to the game alongside the Mk1s.
Personally, I think there are good reasons for the adding of Mk2s to the game rather than simple replacements.
Many people like some of the existing Mk1 versions and certain ships are being changed in ways that can be argued to be bad in some ways. It doesn't seem to me to be a bad thing to have choice in the game and let people decide which version they want to use. Even ships that are apparently completely useless have their fans as they stand now and imaginative people sometimes get good results from unpopular ships.
I think another argument in favour of keeping the Mk1s and adding the Mk2s is to try and rejuvenate Tech 1 shipbuilding. Make the Mk2s more expensive in terms of BP cost and minerals and you immediately have a new territory for entrepeneurs to break into.
You'd then have a diversity of ships chosen for cost, use, preference or whatever. I also think it adds to the sense of a real universe to have old versions floating around alongside shiny new Mk2s.
It's just my view of course and perhaps CCP have decided to do a total replacement. It would be good to get a clear word on that.
Cosmo
Jericho Fraction |
Crellion
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 11:46:00 -
[61]
Hmm I also like the looks of the super cool Navitas but with the speed increase on the Atron.... dont hold your breath :)
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 12:31:00 -
[62]
Originally by: The Cosmopolite
It's still not clear to me whether the Mk2 Project is intending to replace the Mk1 versions or add the Mk2s to the game alongside the Mk1s.
Personally, I think there are good reasons for the adding of Mk2s to the game rather than simple replacements.
Many people like some of the existing Mk1 versions and certain ships are being changed in ways that can be argued to be bad in some ways. It doesn't seem to me to be a bad thing to have choice in the game and let people decide which version they want to use. Even ships that are apparently completely useless have their fans as they stand now and imaginative people sometimes get good results from unpopular ships.
I think another argument in favour of keeping the Mk1s and adding the Mk2s is to try and rejuvenate Tech 1 shipbuilding. Make the Mk2s more expensive in terms of BP cost and minerals and you immediately have a new territory for entrepeneurs to break into.
You'd then have a diversity of ships chosen for cost, use, preference or whatever. I also think it adds to the sense of a real universe to have old versions floating around alongside shiny new Mk2s.
It's just my view of course and perhaps CCP have decided to do a total replacement. It would be good to get a clear word on that.
Cosmo
AFAIK, its a complete replacement, and was never planned to be anything else
|
FireFoxx80
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 12:57:00 -
[63]
Ok, so with the signature radii decreases on cruisers, missile users are even more ****** than before?
Possibly one of the 23 # ex: P-TMC | USAC |
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 13:22:00 -
[64]
From what I can tell,
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO CHANGES TO T2 Ships ANYWHERE
yet...
They might be changed in the future, due to the changes here.
===============================================
The Nest
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 13:27:00 -
[65]
oh well, i hope this gets changed before these changes are inflicted on the galaxy.
till then
/bends over and waits for the nerfing
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 13:32:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Orvas Dren
From what I can tell,
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO CHANGES TO T2 Ships ANYWHERE
yet...
They might be changed in the future, due to the changes here.
most of the changes were made to make tech1 usefull again, hopefully tech2 doesnt gets the boost too, otherwise it would be pointless
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 13:55:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Nafri
Originally by: Orvas Dren
From what I can tell,
THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO CHANGES TO T2 Ships ANYWHERE
yet...
They might be changed in the future, due to the changes here.
most of the changes were made to make tech1 usefull again, hopefully tech2 doesnt gets the boost too, otherwise it would be pointless
As I see it, this will not make tec1 cruisers more usefull, it will only give them more single sided setups.
More 2nd (and 3rd), of all races, need 1 extra low or med slot and some cruiser need a bit more pg/cpu. This will make them more versitle, and as I currently see it, some are still lacking like they do now.
About the sig change, small sig + non 1600mm plated cruiser is logical to me, whether it does what you think it should do, I dunno.
|
Helmut 314
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:19:00 -
[68]
The changes seem very nice, not that id expect them to be final. I especially like that all races are getting a ship capable of some ECM, and the Rupture boost.
As for the Caldari, well, Blackbird is a very good ship as it is for its ridiculously low cost, Caracal needs no boost, Osprey is an excellent miner and the Moa is getting a boost. Bantam is getting a boost, Condor is getting a boost, Kestrel is getting more cpu, speed and 0.4!M kg lower mass, Heron is getting a new bonus, merlin is getting a new bonus. Stop whining.
___________________________________
Trying is the first step of failure
- Homer J Simpson |
ioctl
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:24:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Calian
Originally by: Jim Raynor
these changes might not be final yet.. i hope.
Yeah... I'm sure the devs love that someone figured out how to see stuff they haven't even hinted at yet and has essentially no bearing on what the final outcome with be just so everyone can pre-freak out about it.
Very well said. Anyone that plays on the test server with any regularity knows that they're changing things constantly, so getting all worked up over stuff that might not even make it to tq seems a bit silly.
GET A BRAIN MORANS! |
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:25:00 -
[70]
HAX!!!!!
First off your information were extracted from the client and not given to you by CCP so you can imagine that these values are not final.
The point of this whole overhaul is to make previously unused ship have a purpose. While I'm at it I'm looking over all grid and cpu of ships as well as changing some bonuses and in most cases improving them. The most drastic changes are on ships that were completely useless like Heron, Navitas and other ships.
There is a overall problems with cruisers being everybody's target and pretty much go down to every ship class so a overall boost to cruisers is needed. The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers.
Other numbers you have there have also been changed for example the low slot on Rifter was removed again, the extra med slot on Condor, Atron, Slasher and Executioner have been removed for now though I kind of want to move slots around on the executioner to give it 2 med slots.
You can expect a blog and a forum post about this project soon where we can calmly discuss these changes and you can give me some nice feedback on them. Hopefully you can play around with these ships soon, they replace the previous versions btw.
_______________ |
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:27:00 -
[71]
"As for the Caldari, well, Blackbird is a very good ship as it is for its ridiculously low cost, Caracal needs no boost, Osprey is an excellent miner and the Moa is getting a boost."
The boost for Moa is like giving Amarr more yellow paint... they already have it up to here but hey, have some more. Enjoy your newly boosted ship.
I'm also very curious what's so great about Caracal currently that it needs no boost... oh wait, probably because she can fire missiles from 120 km. That's why people are hardly PvP'ing in anything but Caracals nowadays --;;
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:30:00 -
[72]
"The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers."
The signature radius reduction does sound like a good idea... just maybe tweak the signature resolution of medium turrets and explosion size of heavy missiles a little, to reflect that change? ^^;;
|
|
CCP Hammer
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:34:00 -
[73]
Tux forgot to say you're all on KOS.
|
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:36:00 -
[74]
Edited by: j0sephine on 02/09/2005 14:36:54
"Tux forgot to say you're all on KOS."
Am about to depart for Jita... please bring the dreadnought of doom there, i'll be hanging at the gate for your convenience -.o
(CONCORD does shoot devs, too... doesn't it? >>;;;
|
JoeSomebody
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:41:00 -
[75]
Quote:
they replace the previous versions btw
at least one question is answered 
____
When flying by Concord Customs Commander's Dominix I distinctly heard him saying "... world domination..." |
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:48:00 -
[76]
Very much glad to see that the devs are reading the posts on the forum. :D Prior to this, I'd kind of felt like I wast posting to a brick wall. Thanks, Tux and Hammer.
-Wrayeth
|
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 14:59:00 -
[77]
Edited by: Wrayeth on 02/09/2005 15:02:48
Originally by: Tuxford
HAX!!!!!There is a overall problems with cruisers being everybody's target and pretty much go down to every ship class so a overall boost to cruisers is needed. The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers.
Hmm... I've got a suggestion on this: increase medium turret tracking and heavy missile explosive velocity/radius. The role of a cruiser is to kill frigates and other cruisers, so the logical thing to do is make them better at frig-killing.
What should NOT be done is to make them more powerful vs. battleships, since battleships are supposed to be able to kill cruisers - after all, if you can't effectively kill a cruiser with a battleship, why even fly a battleship at all? You'd be better off flying another cruiser.
This is all just my opinion, of course, but if you make cruisers more powerful against battleships, you completely negate the battleship's role in the game - if a battleship can't kill anything smaller than another battleship, then there's no need for ANYONE to fly one.
-Wrayeth
|
Sorja
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 15:15:00 -
[78]
Tuxford, did you have a look at this thread please?
I'm sure you did, but... just in case...
The MK2 project is highly anticipated btw 
Kill mails |
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 15:25:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Sorja
Tuxford, did you have a look at this thread please?
I'm sure you did, but... just in case...
The MK2 project is highly anticipated btw
I did and it's a good thread. I don't go all that into tech 2 ships but some changes might propagate to the tech 2 ships.
_______________ |
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 15:41:00 -
[80]
nice project tux
try not to hit caldari too hard please
looks really interesting though- when can we expect the dev blog or testing?
|
Sorja
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 15:53:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Sorja
Tuxford, did you have a look at this thread please?
I'm sure you did, but... just in case...
The MK2 project is highly anticipated btw
I did and it's a good thread. I don't go all that into tech 2 ships but some changes might propagate to the tech 2 ships.
Thank you.
Just... thank you
Kill mails |
The Cosmopolite
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 16:11:00 -
[82]
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 02/09/2005 16:12:11
Full replacement? Fair enough.
One thing that I really feel needs a look at, and I get the feeling it is, but even so, worth saying: Amarr and Min got a raw deal in the EW changes when it came to ships.
Now yeah, I know they're not supposed to be EW masters but they each need at least one cruiser that can EW effectively.
That's why I could live with a 4/4/4 Arbi. I think the extra mid would be an almost perfect swap for a low on that particular ship. (I know tankmasters will vigourously contest that notion along with interceptor pilots who have faced the 3-mid Arbi coming from the other direction... )
I'd be happy with the Arbi being left alone and some other Amarr cruiser getting at least the basics of using EW (ie at least 4 mids). Same with Min - it's a bit off neither has a 4 mid slot cruiser is my point.
Cosmo
Jericho Fraction |
madaluap
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 16:37:00 -
[83]
Edited by: madaluap on 02/09/2005 16:37:26
a new age has begon,the age of the atron...
/emote puts atron pbo in research centrum
but without joking that ship will do nothing less than utter pwnage. much more speed now and tackling capabilities. im really gonna use it in pvp ^^
|
Spy4Hire
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 16:42:00 -
[84]
Nice to see the Devs keeping up with peoples' thoughts.
Reduced sig rad and higher manueverability/speed on cruisers would be a good thing... extra grid/CPU not exactly necessary.
As it stands now Cruisers, even with the NWO buffs, are still easy to take down with BC/BS and even Inties/AFs.
Some of the frig changes are nice to see, but doubtful that they'll make underutilized frigs more popular. A frig is a frig is a frig. Used well any of them can be dangerous, even bantams (*LOL*).
As long as there are going to be changes, fix some IMPORTANT things.
Fix stations so that ships undock are are not stuck on the fool thing (and not catapulted out 5km, either). This is a HUGE PROBLEM with 0.0 stations.
Fix the refining menu and add a 'refine selected' button so we don't have to click a half hundred times to refine our loot.
And what else... too many to list.
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 17:03:00 -
[85]
I would like to see the sig changes happen, the cruisers get an additional speedboost, and the RoF of assault / heavy launchers be decreased by 20%, in addition to reverting their fitting reqs a ways down the line towards pre-Cold War levels. Right now, they're useful for sniper setups, an auxillery slot that isn't taken up in a turretship, and little more.
|
Arte
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 17:16:00 -
[86]
Gotta love it. For months people have been screaming that cruisers needed a boost. Now that they're (for the most part) getting it, people are complaining.
In real life, you can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time.
In Eve, you can't please all of the people ever and some people are never pleased.
Personally I'd like to think that the changes may bring cruisers more into wider appeal. Fingers crossed.
|
Jerod Nox
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 17:16:00 -
[87]
Executioner:
Slots changed from 2/1/3 to 2/2/3
Speed changed from 350m/s to 410m/s
Doesnt this make the executioner the undeniable king of T1 frigate speed?
*and* an extra mid slot?
|
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 17:42:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Arte
Gotta love it. For months people have been screaming that cruisers needed a boost. Now that they're (for the most part) getting it, people are complaining.
In real life, you can please some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time.
In Eve, you can't please all of the people ever and some people are never pleased.
Personally I'd like to think that the changes may bring cruisers more into wider appeal. Fingers crossed.
You`r correct, but if players don`t see the logic, from there perspective, by what`s presented to them, they will start commenting on it. Thats human nature.
To get back on cruisers, they ALL need to be revisited, not only the few, they all need "that" something extra. Whether it be a slot extra, some more pg etc etc.
I too will cross me fingers, but I will give my feedback when new news about this is brought forward.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 17:43:00 -
[89]
Originally by: The Cosmopolite
Edited by: The Cosmopolite on 02/09/2005 16:12:11
Full replacement? Fair enough.
One thing that I really feel needs a look at, and I get the feeling it is, but even so, worth saying: Amarr and Min got a raw deal in the EW changes when it came to ships.
Now yeah, I know they're not supposed to be EW masters but they each need at least one cruiser that can EW effectively.
That's why I could live with a 4/4/4 Arbi. I think the extra mid would be an almost perfect swap for a low on that particular ship. (I know tankmasters will vigourously contest that notion along with interceptor pilots who have faced the 3-mid Arbi coming from the other direction... )
I'd be happy with the Arbi being left alone and some other Amarr cruiser getting at least the basics of using EW (ie at least 4 mids). Same with Min - it's a bit off neither has a 4 mid slot cruiser is my point.
Cosmo
How about making the Augoror the EW boat? Makes sense IC (they managed to turn the hull into a Support ship which a) suggests it's got sound electrics/electronics, and b) gives them experience working with the class in that kind of direction) and OOC sense (Arbi's the drone boat, Maller's the ubertank, Omen's, well, a run-of-the-mill cruiser and Augoror's a waste of space once you can afford something bigger).
|
Kuningatar
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 18:01:00 -
[90]
Any plans for stealth bombs?
|
Cinnander
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 18:07:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Arte
(What he said)
I know tell me about it heh :D
Lets just hope they don't make cruisers FOTM. I like being a bit different. |
Mangus Thermopyle
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 19:16:00 -
[92]
I just hope that tech 2 frigates gets some love, becasue as it is now they are pretty redundant. You can do everything better in bigger ships.
Ohh, and please dont give me this tackling nonsense about interceptors. If 2 gangs fought, one with 4 BS and 4 BC, the other with 4 BS, 3 BC and one ceptor, its very easy to see who would win (and in case you dont know, the gang without the interceptor would easily win if everything else where equal).
Please, either remove the tech 2 frigates, or make them useful for something other than entering 1/10 and 2/10 complexes.
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 20:29:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Mangus Thermopyle
I just hope that tech 2 frigates gets some love, becasue as it is now they are pretty redundant. You can do everything better in bigger ships.
Ohh, and please dont give me this tackling nonsense about interceptors. If 2 gangs fought, one with 4 BS and 4 BC, the other with 4 BS, 3 BC and one ceptor, its very easy to see who would win (and in case you dont know, the gang without the interceptor would easily win if everything else where equal).
Please, either remove the tech 2 frigates, or make them useful for something other than entering 1/10 and 2/10 complexes.
good planned 3 BC and tech2 frig will win
but anyway, tech2 frigates are very very good
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 21:54:00 -
[94]
Edited by: Grimpak on 02/09/2005 21:55:21
Originally by: Tuxford
Other numbers you have there have also been changed for example the low slot on Rifter was removed again, the extra med slot on Condor, Atron, Slasher and Executioner have been removed for now though I kind of want to move slots around on the executioner to give it 2 med slots.
....giving a 3rd med to the slasher, would transform the useless speedy frig, in the cheapest tackler arround. IMHO, it's a good change
Originally by: Jerod Nox
Executioner:
Slots changed from 2/1/3 to 2/2/3
Speed changed from 350m/s to 410m/s
Doesnt this make the executioner the undeniable king of T1 frigate speed?
*and* an extra mid slot?
...actually no.
applying the speed bonus inherent from minmatar frigates to the MK2 slasher (390*1.25 im case of minmatar frig at lvl5) would give to the slasher, an amazing 487,5m/s speed. add to that navigation skills, and the slasher comes ontop (mass of both ships is the same btw).
...and I can say that the slasher atm *can* sustain a mwd running forever if you put a CPR in that lonely low-slot.
...as j0s said once, if you thought vigils were a pest, then MK2 slashers would be the king of pests
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Tux forgot to say you're all on KOS.
come and get me then
-------------------
Grimpak, all round nice guy |
Tovarishch
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 22:02:00 -
[95]
Would just like to say that's it's fantastic to see some Dev response in here. After seeing this thread I was worried that Caldari ships were about to take another hit even though they are (for the most part... not completely) at the bottom of the barrel in almost all categories.
Thanks for your responses, Devs.
|
Justin Cody
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 23:03:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Justin Cody on 02/09/2005 23:03:50
Edited by: Justin Cody on 02/09/2005 23:03:34
*bump* luv it sticky maybe?
"Ill armed and half starved, they were still desperate men, to whom danger had lost all fears: for what was death that they should shun it to cling to such a life as theirs?"--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle |
Zyrla Bladestorm
|
Posted - 2005.09.02 23:53:00 -
[97]
Originally by: j0sephine
"The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers."
The signature radius reduction does sound like a good idea... just maybe tweak the signature resolution of medium turrets and explosion size of heavy missiles a little, to reflect that change? ^^;;
Seconded for truth
.
-----
Apologies for any rambling that may have just occurred.
|
Forsch
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 00:24:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Forsch on 03/09/2005 00:24:39
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
How about making the Augoror the EW boat? Makes sense IC (they managed to turn the hull into a Support ship which a) suggests it's got sound electrics/electronics, and b) gives them experience working with the class in that kind of direction) and OOC sense (Arbi's the drone boat, Maller's the ubertank, Omen's, well, a run-of-the-mill cruiser and Augoror's a waste of space once you can afford something bigger).
That's a VERY good idea!
No one uses the Augorur these days. (Not to speak of the Navy issue, which I haven't seen in use 'ever'.) If it became an EW platform, alot of people would start using it in pvp. Bonus to armor plus EW capabilities... perfect. And the Arbi would still be used as drone carrier, to be able to deal other dmg than em/thermal.
EW Augorur, go go!
Edit: Damnit, can't even spell Augorur correctly.
The Auctoritan Syndicate
Defenders of the Empire - Curatores Veritatis Alliance |
Fidelis Deus
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 00:55:00 -
[99]
I personally think the arbitrator needs a little boost, it's never used due to the thorax.
Same problem with the vexor, why use it when their is the thorax?....
|
Gierling
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 01:27:00 -
[100]
Give the Tristan 3 turret slots please.
Bastards we are lest Bastards we become. |
ThiefKillerkiller
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 01:43:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Sorja
Tuxford, did you have a look at this thread please?
I'm sure you did, but... just in case...
The MK2 project is highly anticipated btw
I did and it's a good thread. I don't go all that into tech 2 ships but some changes might propagate to the tech 2 ships.
Look at bit on the smaller interceptors, the once that should be the tacklers but only got 2 med slots, like the Ares ! :D
|
Dale Omen
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 04:31:00 -
[102]
PGrid changed from 725MW to 850MW
CPU changed from 275 to 300
Sig Radius changed from 130 to 104
Tell you what, this is gonna be good for mimitar. Finally a bit of lovin for us matars......
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 05:49:00 -
[103]
I dislike all of these changes.
I don't know who is doing this, but they don't know a damn thing about pvp. Adding a slot here and there, boosting agility and lowering sig does what? It makes them closer to frigs. If I'm flying a cruiser, I want to be flying a cruiser and not some AF knockoff. When was the last time you got killed in a frig or cruiser by a battleship with small or medium guns? I'm betting "not that often" would be the common answer.
So why do they even die to begin with? Drones, nos, web. You put these changes in and it will do nothing but potentially screw balance between each other and do nothing to make them more balanced in the long run. How about making drones tracking correspond to the type of ship they are designed to kill? Simply crapping on the speed of heavy drones in hopes of "balance" makes them better frig killers than bs killers.. cause very few bs try to get right up to your face. And nos? How about introducing some inefficiency for oversized nos?
How about increasing HP of all ships finally? I don't care if I get hit by a large gun here and there, as long as I have time to get out of its path.. especially true for frigs. One excellent on a 1400 = dead inty.
Man, Kali better not be a bunch of stupid changes like these.
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
|
Gungankllr
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 06:12:00 -
[104]
If sigs get reduced on cruisers Caldari Missile users might as well switch to rails.
[ 2005.09.02 19:34:58 ] (combat) <color=0xffbbbb00>Your Devastator Cruise Missile I hits Deep Slumber <BOB>(Claw), doing 0.9 damage.
|
Aliksr
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 06:18:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Aliksr on 03/09/2005 06:19:05
It's not intended to balance pvp between classes DG it's to boost unused ships so they are better in some way than other ships, instead of worse in every way.
Second, people are forgetting that making cruisers more agile makes them more fun to fly. Guns can be boosted to keep pvp balanced later, they're just testing the idea ffs
|
DigitalCommunist
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 06:27:00 -
[106]
Boosting unused ships is one thing, boosting all ships overall is another. I also don't think giving ships extra grid, cpu, and turrets is going to make them much better in the long run.. it just increases the ease of fitting. And why use tier 1-2 stuff (even after boosts) when the tier 3 version will always be the best. Give the lower ranked ships unique roles and bonuses. A damage bonus on a crappy frig or cruiser is not useful.
Perpetually driven, your end is our beginning.
|
Orvas Dren
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 07:19:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Orvas Dren on 03/09/2005 07:19:23
Now my question to the devs...
Is all that data I pulled out and posted now out-of-date?
If so, could you sneak me the new stuff so I can update it?
I just hate for my thread to become suddenly very useless.
Either way, I got Hammer to respond to my thread, and in that, I am content! I'm famous now!
===============================================
The Nest
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 07:38:00 -
[108]
instead of boosting hitpoints, why not decrease damage? and while we are at it decrease optimal range of ALL guns by 50%! :) this will make medium range battles now to long range battles.
"We brake for nobody"
|
Dred 'Morte
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 11:29:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock
instead of boosting hitpoints, why not decrease damage? and while we are at it decrease optimal range of ALL guns by 50%! :) this will make medium range battles now to long range battles.
Idiot... PvE? Who gives a **** about pve when your rich and all you do is pvp right? 
Signature made by Mr Floppykickners |
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 11:48:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Dred 'Morte
Originally by: Admiral IceBlock
instead of boosting hitpoints, why not decrease damage? and while we are at it decrease optimal range of ALL guns by 50%! :) this will make medium range battles now to long range battles.
Idiot... PvE? Who gives a **** about pve when your rich and all you do is pvp right?
shut up retard!
dont you think this would happend to npcs too?
"We brake for nobody"
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 12:01:00 -
[111]
however, at the moment, lvl4 missions give a lame amount of ISK per hour
making them take longer would **** on the grave of an already dead way of making cash
|
Admiral IceBlock
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 12:24:00 -
[112]
Originally by: HippoKing
however, at the moment, lvl4 missions give a lame amount of ISK per hour
making them take longer would **** on the grave of an already dead way of making cash
increasing hitpoints all over wouldnt help much either.
just up the bounties if it becomes a big problem.
"We brake for nobody"
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 14:21:00 -
[113]
"Adding a slot here and there, boosting agility and lowering sig does what? It makes them closer to frigs. If I'm flying a cruiser, I want to be flying a cruiser and not some AF knockoff. When was the last time you got killed in a frig or cruiser by a battleship with small or medium guns? I'm betting "not that often" would be the common answer."
I think the signature size change is trying to address situation where cruisers die in droves to battleships equipped with large guns, rather than nos or drones... y'know, those battles where half people love to focus on the cruisers because they aren't really harder to hit than a battleship, but much more likely to die, so it's better chance to get a killmail to wave around?
Making them somewhat harder to hit might make some of these people realize they might as well shoot at ships of their own size instead... dunno.
|
Nomen Nescio
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:00:00 -
[114]
 DC for the win!
Although some changes to low end cruisers are welcome, in general probem lies beyond slots and sig and grid.
- BS special weaponry was not changed for ages. Large nos is a weapon of doom for any ship smaller then bs. Why is it not fixed? No small ship can engage a bs if it has large nos fitted.
- Heavy drones - wtf? I was waiting and waiting and waiting and drone "overhaul" brought tech2?!!! Heavy drones are the killer of a cruiser class, not some sig! heavy drones can catch up and deal huge damage on cruiser np. Moreover, thorax is overpowered EXACTLY because heavy drones can hit under bs size extremely good. And they have HP wich is beyond cruiser weaponry. PLUS for some bizzare reason ecm burst was totaly taken out of the game.
- HP of all ships, but especially cruiser.... I mean for the love of god, if totaly abolutely everyone fits 1600 plates, doesn't it tell you that eveyone needs more HP? Why can't we have cruisers with 4k armor/shields? With current HP cruiser blows up to bs in a volley and can't really outlast a frig sized
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:16:00 -
[115]
"I mean for the love of god, if totaly abolutely everyone fits 1600 plates, doesn't it tell you that eveyone needs more HP? Why can't we have cruisers with 4k armor/shields?"
We have them, they're called battlecruisers.
Noticeable lack of popularity of these things tells me there's more 'we' want from ships that just the fat hp... could be the cost of bc, the low speed and large signature radius make them 'no fun' in the eyes of people, in which case cheap cruisers with decreased signature radius and slightly better agility just might be "it"... guess we'll see. maybe. o.O;
|
Nomen Nescio
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:29:00 -
[116]
BC have 2 times of cruiser sig. Practicaly same cap. Have about 20% more dps max and cost 3 times. Slow as bs and has all weaknesses of cruiser. There is no role which can't be done with cruiser and done with bc.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 15:37:00 -
[117]
Aye, that's why i said i think it's not just more hp people want... they want more hp *and* all they get from a cruiser at the same time ^^
Thing is, if you start comparing then cruisers like that and battleships... the latter start looking kinda lukewarm. Maybe twice the hp, maybe twice the damage output (unless you go all gank) ... but 4 times the signature size, 4-5 times slower, 10x more expensive...why bother really when two cruisers together will perform equally good if not better..?
|
slip66
|
Posted - 2005.09.03 16:24:00 -
[118]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Tux forgot to say you're all on KOS.
lol
|
Kintac
|
Posted - 2005.09.04 12:21:00 -
[119]
Edited by: Kintac on 04/09/2005 13:03:17
You are right, why using a Vexor when there is thge Thorax ?
The Vexor really should have an increased drone bay. At lease more than Thorax.
what about +15 m¦ drone bay increase with each Cruiser level for the Vexor ?
|
Wrayeth
|
Posted - 2005.09.04 19:10:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Wrayeth on 04/09/2005 19:13:35
Screw it. I give up. Trying to make people understand that making ships useless against anything smaller than their own class would be a mistake seems to be a lost cause. This is my last post on the matter. After this, I'll just wait for the patches with my mouse pointer hovering over the "cancel" button since I hate flying frigates.
Yep, that's right: if cruisers are useless against frigates and battleships are useless against both frigates and cruisers, there's no point to flying anything BUT a frigate.
Seriously, the trend in the development process seems to be in making the larger ships less and less useful. First missiles got nerfed all to hell against anything smaller, which was both a good and a bad thing; the role of any ship in the game is to kill ships of the same size or one size smaller (EDIT: I consider destroyers a subset of frigs, and battlecruisers a subset of cruisers), so the torpedo and cruise missile reduction vs. frigs was a good thing. What was NOT beneficial to the game was the reduction of heavy missile damage against frigates and torp/cruise damage against cruisers.
Now, cruiser sig radius is being reduced, as well. This will move the raven from "sub-par" vs. cruisers to "utterly useless" and will screw the hell out of other close range battleships such as the megapulse 'geddon and blasterthron - not only will they be unable to kill frigs effectively, but now they won't be able to do much against cruisers either.
Good show, CCP.
This will result in the close-range ship users complaining about how they can't kill cruisers but the long-range sniper ship users still can; this will, predictably, result in long-range setups being nerfed so battleships cannot kill a cruiser at any range. Immediately following this, battleships will disappear entirely from PvP, and even rat hunters/missioneers will stop using them.
Again, good show - you will have entirely removed the role of battleships from the game, which is apparently what the frig and cruiser pilots of the world want. In addition, you won't have done much for cruisers, since people STILL won't fly them once battleships are gone; after all, if you can't kill a frigate with one, you might as well just fly a frigate yourself (you'll note the patch doesn't do anything to improve cruisers' ability to kill frigates).
Seriously, instead of reducing the sig radius of cruisers to make them harder to kill with battleships (battleships are SUPPOSED to kill cruisers!), a better change would be to increase the tracking of medium guns so that they become effective against frigates, and also increase heavy missile damage vs. frigates.
Of course, this will never happen...
Anyway, I'll await the changes, but I hold out little hope they'll be a positive boost for the game.
Please note that this is not intended as a flame - I'm just a battleship pilot who's getting tired of watching his ships become more and more useless - right now I never fly my raven in PvP unless intel reports the hostiles actually have battleships with them, and if my tempest becomes useless against cruisers as well, I will have no further reason to play.
Thank you, and have a nice day.
-Wrayeth
|
Mangus Thermopyle
|
Posted - 2005.09.04 22:33:00 -
[121]
LOL, as if a AF could ever do half of what a HAC could do. EVE is ONLY about big ships nowdays, tech 2 frigates are more or less redundant. The only reason tech 2 frigates are used is because people think its more fun to use them for things like level 3 mission and 3/10-4/10 complexes.
If CCP is going to keep tech 2 frigate in the game, they should make them more useful, not less.
|
Xendie
|
Posted - 2005.09.05 22:00:00 -
[122]
looks like CCP likes to kick on the already down caldari pilots.
on my turret pilot i can with L5 gun skill trained hit with medium guns for up to 700dmg if lucky on a smaller ship
on my caldari pilot i can hit for about crap on same size ship even if its standing still and im not talking about raven dmg versus battleships.
Battleships should kill Battleships and cruisers.
Cruisers should kill Cruisers and Frigates
Frigates should kill frigates and when done properly battleships.
the sig radius changes to ships will just screw up heavy missiles even more.
/me goes and parks my missile ships and grabs a huler and starts AFK mining in yulai.
|
VossKarr
|
Posted - 2005.09.05 22:11:00 -
[123]
Originally by: KilROCK
Edited by: KilROCK on 05/09/2005 21:59:11
Yehaw for the Rupture. But where's my powergrid increase on the cynabal? It should be increased aswell since it's a rupture kinda-like stat ship..
Seems they are trying to bring the t1 frigates into the game for tackling a bit more... I mean seriously... now the executioner is faster than the slasher? That's kinda bull****..
I hope there's a grid increase for the Muninn as well...
|
KilROCK
|
Posted - 2005.09.05 22:19:00 -
[124]
Originally by: VossKarr
Originally by: KilROCK
Edited by: KilROCK on 05/09/2005 21:59:11
Yehaw for the Rupture. But where's my powergrid increase on the cynabal? It should be increased aswell since it's a rupture kinda-like stat ship..
Seems they are trying to bring the t1 frigates into the game for tackling a bit more... I mean seriously... now the executioner is faster than the slasher? That's kinda bull****..
I hope there's a grid increase for the Muninn as well...
Yea well , it's not like i have problem fitting my setup (MAJOR COUGHING) but the problem right now is that i can't even fly my cynabal so that first came to my mind when typing this out lol
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.09.05 22:42:00 -
[125]
Originally by: VossKarr
Originally by: KilROCK
Edited by: KilROCK on 05/09/2005 21:59:11
Yehaw for the Rupture. But where's my powergrid increase on the cynabal? It should be increased aswell since it's a rupture kinda-like stat ship..
Seems they are trying to bring the t1 frigates into the game for tackling a bit more... I mean seriously... now the executioner is faster than the slasher? That's kinda bull****..
I hope there's a grid increase for the Muninn as well...
Why? It's a beautiful ship. If you're having problems fitting it, you're stuffing 720II's on it and drooling.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Kickass
|
Posted - 2005.09.05 23:17:00 -
[126]
Tux,
Does anyone at ccp know that its nearly impossible for a lone missle boat BS to kill a tanked cruiser? And now you make their sig radius even smaller?
A thorax with plate and resistances can tank 2 ravens easy, long as its out of NOS range. Do you guys just want everyone to stop flying missle boats all together?
Does anyone at CCP even try this stuff out before you spew it all over us? Or is it just hey lets do this now, and screw em again...
You have not even fixed the bugs from the last couple of patches, why not work on that for a while before you creat new ones.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.05 23:24:00 -
[127]
In this case no, they don't, because the stats in the DB are placeholders/first-pass-attempts and as such haven't been tested yet...
|
VossKarr
|
Posted - 2005.09.06 02:07:00 -
[128]
Edited by: VossKarr on 06/09/2005 02:26:41
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Originally by: VossKarr
Originally by: KilROCK
Edited by: KilROCK on 05/09/2005 21:59:11
Yehaw for the Rupture. But where's my powergrid increase on the cynabal? It should be increased aswell since it's a rupture kinda-like stat ship..
Seems they are trying to bring the t1 frigates into the game for tackling a bit more... I mean seriously... now the executioner is faster than the slasher? That's kinda bull****..
I hope there's a grid increase for the Muninn as well...
Why? It's a beautiful ship. If you're having problems fitting it, you're stuffing 720II's on it and drooling.
I'm sorry, but I don't see how Muninn being a beautiful ship has anything to do with my hoping for its grid increase. Will increasing its grid suddenly turn it into an ugly ship? *Shrug*
Secondly, if the Rupture is getting boosted by 125 grid, then there must be a good, valid reason for that (assuming the change does go through)- no? Whatever the reason, it's gotta apply to the Muninn as well, if not more so - seeing as it's basically the same ship with regard to its slot layout, except that it does have one more high slot and, most importantly one additional turret hard point over the Rupture.
But, hell yeah, I am stuffing 720 II"s on it! So what? Should I feel guilty for doing so? It's not like it can fit anything else after that (besides the dmg mods) without needing another RCUII, right? Forget about the two remaining high slots and a decent tank without another RCUII! For those who don't want to go all ganka, that's two lows wasted right there, just to afford your ship a (half)decent fitting. Beautiful alright!
The Eagle, for instance, can fairly comfortably fit 4x250 II's, 2 HML II's in highs; an AB II, a LSB II, 2 hardeners, sensor booster II in mids and two dmg mods and one PDS II+ RCU II to fit it all in lows - without breaking a sweat. It's been given enough grid to support such setup without compromising anything else. Why shouldn't the Muninn be afforded the same?
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.09.06 02:15:00 -
[129]
Exactly. Because you won't apply a minimal amount of thought to the setup dosn't mean I haven't. Plz don't blame the ship you fly for that.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
VossKarr
|
Posted - 2005.09.06 02:43:00 -
[130]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Exactly. Because you won't apply a minimal amount of thought to the setup dosn't mean I haven't. Plz don't blame the ship you fly for that.
Ugh-huh. The ship doesn't have enough grid to support what I want it to fit with without wasting my lows on useless RCU's- not even PDS (and even then it's gimped in some way), that's the whole point. And please don't try to find an excuse for that in my inability to fit ships, because that sh*t just doesn't fly with me. And if one-liners like above are all you can come up with in response to my posts, then you might just as well not reply at all...
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.06 19:18:00 -
[131]
It's entirely possible that the inability to fit a rack of 720 IIs is intentional.
|
Grim Vandal
|
Posted - 2005.09.06 23:56:00 -
[132]
remove the 20% sig decrease for cruisers...
instead give them +50% base velocity... anything less than 50% is pretty useless ...
isnt it interesting that eg. a heavy missile has a explosion velocity of 1050 m/s at lv 4 ... but NOT A SINGLE CRUISER can achieve said speed with an active AB except the stabber which just reaches 1000 m/s which still isnt enough ...
hell I'M GLAD that this is CURRENTLY the case cuz heavy missiles already suffer from ubber low dmg ... NONE THE LESS it shows us how gimped the cruiser ship class is ...
so again plz give cruisers a 50% base speed boost instead of the sig radius changes ...
those 10% from the last patch were nice and dandy but it just wasnt enough and another 10% wont do the trick as well IT NEEDS TO BE 50%...
btw tracking of medium guns needs some tuning as well no matter if you change the speed or sig radius ...
Greetings Grim |
Jerod Nox
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 04:44:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Grimpak
Edited by: Grimpak on 02/09/2005 21:55:21
Originally by: Jerod Nox
Executioner:
Slots changed from 2/1/3 to 2/2/3
Speed changed from 350m/s to 410m/s
Doesnt this make the executioner the undeniable king of T1 frigate speed?
*and* an extra mid slot?
...actually no.
applying the speed bonus inherent from minmatar frigates to the MK2 slasher (390*1.25 im case of minmatar frig at lvl5) would give to the slasher, an amazing 487,5m/s speed. add to that navigation skills, and the slasher comes ontop (mass of both ships is the same btw).
...and I can say that the slasher atm *can* sustain a mwd running forever if you put a CPR in that lonely low-slot.
Well lets see..
..my executioner already handles a Gistii MWD without any cap assistance at all (runs forever... never below 36%)
..my executioner has 3 low slots with 3 Local Hull Overdrive Injectors that each add 34m/s
..my executioner, after this change, will therefore have a base speed (counting overdrives, but not skills) of 410 + 3 * 34 = 512m/sec
..me executioner will thus be the king of T1 frigate speed..
..or I could fit me executioner with local hull nanofibers instead.. 410 + 3 * 24m/s .. or 482m/sec base speed.. just shy of the thrasher, but an increadible agility advantage.
all this... and an extra mid slot... obviously mr faction warp scrambler will look real nice in that slot... (not sure if it will fit with the gistii mounted as well)
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 04:56:00 -
[134]
Edited by: j0sephine on 07/09/2005 04:59:06
"..my executioner has 3 low slots with 3 Local Hull Overdrive Injectors that each add 34m/s
..my executioner, after this change, will therefore have a base speed (counting overdrives, but not skills) of 410 + 3 * 34 = 512m/sec
..me executioner will thus be the king of T1 frigate speed.."
No ^^
Slasher has single low slot, but due to ship bonus the same overdrive which gives you 34 m/sec extra, will give it 34 * 1.25 = 42.5 m/sec
So the final speed of Slasher before skills will be: (390+34) * 1.25 = 530 m/sec
close, but no banana -.^
(it won't be anymore able to put the cap recharger in low slot, but can more than make up for it with the mid slot cap rechargers if the extra mid slot change makes it in)
|
Mitchman
|
Posted - 2005.09.07 23:46:00 -
[135]
Well, the Heavy Assault ships need their production time lowered. As it is now, the demand is high for some of them (3 months waiting time at NAGA for a zealot!) is so high that the prices are getting ridiculous when you are actually able to find one.
|
Hllaxiu
|
Posted - 2005.09.08 01:59:00 -
[136]
Originally by: Nomen Nescio
Heavy drones - wtf? I was waiting and waiting and waiting and drone "overhaul" brought tech2?!!! Heavy drones are the killer of a cruiser class, not some sig! heavy drones can catch up and deal huge damage on cruiser np. Moreover, thorax is overpowered EXACTLY because heavy drones can hit under bs size extremely good. And they have HP wich is beyond cruiser weaponry.
OMG NERF THE ISHTAR!!!!!11111oneoneeleventyone!
Of course, I'd assume that medium drones would be brought up in damage if heavies were nerfed out of usefulness in any cruiser battle. Then again...
Proud member of Elite Academy. |
Justin Cody
|
Posted - 2005.09.12 02:45:00 -
[137]
Edited by: Justin Cody on 12/09/2005 02:47:51
<sarcasm><whine>ehhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh</sarcasm><whine>
pathetic whining please stop now.
"Ill armed and half starved, they were still desperate men, to whom danger had lost all fears: for what was death that they should shun it to cling to such a life as theirs?"--- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle |
Darling Hassasin
|
Posted - 2005.09.12 10:49:00 -
[138]
Originally by: Jerod Nox
Originally by: Grimpak
Edited by: Grimpak on 02/09/2005 21:55:21
Originally by: Jerod Nox
Executioner:
Slots changed from 2/1/3 to 2/2/3
Speed changed from 350m/s to 410m/s
Doesnt this make the executioner the undeniable king of T1 frigate speed?
*and* an extra mid slot?
...actually no.
applying the speed bonus inherent from minmatar frigates to the MK2 slasher (390*1.25 im case of minmatar frig at lvl5) would give to the slasher, an amazing 487,5m/s speed. add to that navigation skills, and the slasher comes ontop (mass of both ships is the same btw).
...and I can say that the slasher atm *can* sustain a mwd running forever if you put a CPR in that lonely low-slot.
Well lets see..
..my executioner already handles a Gistii MWD without any cap assistance at all (runs forever... never below 36%)
..my executioner has 3 low slots with 3 Local Hull Overdrive Injectors that each add 34m/s
..my executioner, after this change, will therefore have a base speed (counting overdrives, but not skills) of 410 + 3 * 34 = 512m/sec
..me executioner will thus be the king of T1 frigate speed..
..or I could fit me executioner with local hull nanofibers instead.. 410 + 3 * 24m/s .. or 482m/sec base speed.. just shy of the thrasher, but an increadible agility advantage.
all this... and an extra mid slot... obviously mr faction warp scrambler will look real nice in that slot... (not sure if it will fit with the gistii mounted as well)
With all due respect doesnt it feel bad when all this named stuff dies in like... one volley or one smartbombor somthing? I mean why??? Are you people so filthy ritch it actually makes sense to use all that on a tech 1 frig???? Or are we just talking theory here??? (+ as I read in a nother thread a full head of snakes protected by a tech 1 frig hull set for speed ) Anyway you are brave indeed. Best of luck.
|
Dryy
|
Posted - 2005.09.13 06:48:00 -
[139]
I'm a noob so take this for what its worth. Couldn't a battleship or cruiser have a small weapon or 2 on board for when they get attacked by smaller ships? Seems people want to sit back in thier captains chairs and push the destroy button in thier big ships. The big ships have plenty of armor to take a beating while a small gun or 2 do thier work.
|
Mardonius
|
Posted - 2005.09.13 07:24:00 -
[140]
"Celestis:
Slots changed from 5/4/3 to 4/5/3
Sig Radius from 135 to 108 meters"
Reading this has made my day. The Celestis is one of the most fun ships to fly and with 5 med slots I'm definitely looking forward to having a great Gallente EW cruiser. If this change takes place the MK2 project will have a huge impact for me.
Secondly, I think that Digital Communist has really hit the mark spot on 100 percent. His arguments totally make sense from a gameplay perspective and are well thought out. The issues he raises are key issues for PvP and need to urgently be addressed, especially the issues about heavy drones and heavy nosferatus.
No, I am not an alt of his, just a PvPer who has read this thread and every almost comment I thought about making he had already made.
I repeat, listen to Digital Communist please. Go back and read his posts. |
Sable Terrick
|
Posted - 2005.09.13 08:31:00 -
[141]
In response to the question about being filthy rich. Sometimes....the difference you get by throwing on a 30-50mil mod on a ship....makes the difference between dying and not.
As for the bit about the full snake set in a t1 frig. Since the question was how high can speed go...that was the highest you could do it...and honestly....if your going in even a remotely non straight line...what is gonna hit you at 13km/s
and since that statement was also about using an inty as the basis it wasnt a T1 frig.
back to lurking
[img http://www.djstora.co.uk/images/sableterrick.jpg /img]
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. |
Mr Floppyknickers
|
Posted - 2005.09.13 09:15:00 -
[142]
The omen gets more grid! Yes... my one beef with that ship, so can't wait for the changes so i can get one.
Also of note, 900 grid on a maller? Whoa nelly! I can only begin to imagine some of the nasty setups and pvp action maller lovers are in for, have fun ladies and gents, cruisers are on the road to being sooo much more fun.
Nice frig changes to, the extra 5 grid and speed on my favorite friglette, the incursus, will make it an even better solo hunter and tackler. Tasty!
I hope to hell these changes go through looking this good or better. And it's nice to see they are adjusting the forgotten ships of eve as well. Here's hoping the helios gets an extra high slot and the prorator transport as well.
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2005.09.13 10:01:00 -
[143]
On the subject of BCs, i see that as of right now, they all get some extra grid.
I would argue that the grid on the prophecy is fine, and that the brutix needs some extra cpu.
And incidentally, that if you shrink the sig radius of cruisers you should shrink the BC's too... 300m is a little high if cruisers go down to 95-110.
-------------
Axe the Thorax's drone bay.
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.13 10:52:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Dryy
I'm a noob so take this for what its worth. Couldn't a battleship or cruiser have a small weapon or 2 on board for when they get attacked by smaller ships? Seems people want to sit back in thier captains chairs and push the destroy button in thier big ships. The big ships have plenty of armor to take a beating while a small gun or 2 do thier work.
2 small guns wont help you against a ceptor
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
Dryy
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 04:40:00 -
[145]
Thanks Nafri, somethings seem obvious to us new people. As I read, play and learn from you vets the game becomes clearer and more fun.
|
Twi Night
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 04:50:00 -
[146]
I hope they reveiw some assault ships, particulary:
-The worthless high on the retri and make it a med.
-The vengeance needs another low / less weight...
-Hawk needs missle hardpoints
-the Caldari hacs damage bounus needs to be for all damage types - nuff said.
- and other sub par ships.
Oh well, overall the changes look promising for what we may get.
|
Sadist
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 05:16:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Tuxford
HAX!!!!!
First off your information were extracted from the client and not given to you by CCP so you can imagine that these values are not final.
The point of this whole overhaul is to make previously unused ship have a purpose. While I'm at it I'm looking over all grid and cpu of ships as well as changing some bonuses and in most cases improving them. The most drastic changes are on ships that were completely useless like Heron, Navitas and other ships.
There is a overall problems with cruisers being everybody's target and pretty much go down to every ship class so a overall boost to cruisers is needed. The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers.
Other numbers you have there have also been changed for example the low slot on Rifter was removed again, the extra med slot on Condor, Atron, Slasher and Executioner have been removed for now though I kind of want to move slots around on the executioner to give it 2 med slots.
You can expect a blog and a forum post about this project soon where we can calmly discuss these changes and you can give me some nice feedback on them. Hopefully you can play around with these ships soon, they replace the previous versions btw.
Clueless devs ftw? If you boost everything, the useless ships are still useless. To make them less useless try changing the bonus or boosting _only_ them.
Now, if I may, i dont know if anyone else is seeing this, but maybe there should be a reason to train for HAC's nowadays? Even given that HAC's will get slight boosts too, there's still less and less reason to risk flying a ship 5-10 (depends on race/fit) times more expensive than a tech 1 cruiser into combat situation where you have a significant chance of saying "buh-bye" to your precious. Anti-cruiser killing machine? With the stupidly unbalanced plates, 2 plated tier 3 cruisers can pwn a HAC, and guess what, they'll also be better at whooping frigs.
There is a disturbing tendency in eve that you have to pay ridiculous amounts of isk for a slight boost in performance, holding constant your skills. I understand this in regard to some faction and novelty items, but it shouldn't become the defining principle of eve, especially on the tech 2 ship market with corresponding ship sizes. This also concerns AFs, which also need a sig reduction or some kind of bonus modification which will justify their cost.
Other points have already been stated - guns should get an overhaul and some major rebalancing that would better define the sizes from each other, yet not floating towards gankage.
Bah, looks like i've rambled again...
---------------
VIP member of the [23] |
Earthan
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 06:25:00 -
[148]
Imho hacs are fine , they are really powerful.If bs havent got noosferatus or target painters and webifiers, a hac can easily kill a bs.
And remmber they are elite cuirsers , thay dont ought to be to common.
AS for the cost of them , the problem is the monopol of few persons haveing bp and dictating prices.If they would cost less and insurance would be reasonable at last covering reasonable part it would be ok.
Stars, stars like dust, all around me.... |
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 09:29:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Sadist
Originally by: Tuxford
HAX!!!!!
First off your information were extracted from the client and not given to you by CCP so you can imagine that these values are not final.
The point of this whole overhaul is to make previously unused ship have a purpose. While I'm at it I'm looking over all grid and cpu of ships as well as changing some bonuses and in most cases improving them. The most drastic changes are on ships that were completely useless like Heron, Navitas and other ships.
There is a overall problems with cruisers being everybody's target and pretty much go down to every ship class so a overall boost to cruisers is needed. The signature radius is something that I wanted to try but tbh I haven't tested it that much and it will definitly go out if it is a massive nerf to heavy launchers.
Other numbers you have there have also been changed for example the low slot on Rifter was removed again, the extra med slot on Condor, Atron, Slasher and Executioner have been removed for now though I kind of want to move slots around on the executioner to give it 2 med slots.
You can expect a blog and a forum post about this project soon where we can calmly discuss these changes and you can give me some nice feedback on them. Hopefully you can play around with these ships soon, they replace the previous versions btw.
Clueless devs ftw? If you boost everything, the useless ships are still useless. To make them less useless try changing the bonus or boosting _only_ them.
Now, if I may, i dont know if anyone else is seeing this, but maybe there should be a reason to train for HAC's nowadays? Even given that HAC's will get slight boosts too, there's still less and less reason to risk flying a ship 5-10 (depends on race/fit) times more expensive than a tech 1 cruiser into combat situation where you have a significant chance of saying "buh-bye" to your precious. Anti-cruiser killing machine? With the stupidly unbalanced plates, 2 plated tier 3 cruisers can pwn a HAC, and guess what, they'll also be better at whooping frigs.
There is a disturbing tendency in eve that you have to pay ridiculous amounts of isk for a slight boost in performance, holding constant your skills. I understand this in regard to some faction and novelty items, but it shouldn't become the defining principle of eve, especially on the tech 2 ship market with corresponding ship sizes. This also concerns AFs, which also need a sig reduction or some kind of bonus modification which will justify their cost.
Other points have already been stated - guns should get an overhaul and some major rebalancing that would better define the sizes from each other, yet not floating towards gankage.
Bah, looks like i've rambled again...
It is possible to boost everything but boost some things more than others...
Should also be noted that, if IIRC, HAC insurance covers build costs. Pretty much every single Isk you pay over the insurance cost is profit going into somebody's pocket. The prices are that high because that's what the market will sustain. Thus, the reason they are expensive is simply because a) they're popular, b) they're rare and c) people like making money. If you look closer the less popular ships go for less because the big manufacturers can't sell them for much more than that. The Eve economy insures that, by and large, things are sold for about as much as people think they're worth. Remember, those prices aren't set by the Devs, they're set by your fellow players in response to your buying habits.
And if you boosted AF to make them even more effective, you'd just see a price rise :P
|
Nafri
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 09:36:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Dryy
Thanks Nafri, somethings seem obvious to us new people. As I read, play and learn from you vets the game becomes clearer and more fun.
against small ships is best drones and a web, no interceptor/AF will survive your drones when hes webbed
Your bla bla hit bla bla for bla bla damage. Wanna have some bubu now? |
MaiLina KaTar
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 10:09:00 -
[151]
This thread is like bbq chicken... better even
Mai's Idealog |
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 10:22:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
It is possible to boost everything but boost some things more than others...
<snip>P
They should edit all ships, mostly tec I frigs/cruisers and not only the "useless" onces of them.
Why is the Bellicose use by so few people*? Because it lags pg big time, no because it has a bad slot layout, changing slots won`t make that big difference on this ship.
On others it would, others will benefit from a bit more pg, others from a bit more cpu.
One thing aswell: some ships are ment to be armor tanked, others shield tanked, right?
Well, this should be reflected in the ships actual layout(slots,pg,cpu,etc). Armor more lows, shields more meds.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.14 19:28:00 -
[153]
I've seen an "unused ship rebalance" double the number of flyable combat ships in a similarish game, rejuvinating the entire combat scene and providing a huge injection of fun into things. That's just by changing some numbers on existing ships that weren't being used - and, quite relevantly, they were the lower-level "my first combat ship" hulls, boosted to be low-damage high-speed dogfighters. It can be done and when it's done right it works.
|
NoLock LetsNegociate
|
Posted - 2005.09.15 16:20:00 -
[154]
Originally by: Orvas Dren
Arbitrator:
Slots changed from 4/3/5 to 4/4/4
This is not an upgrade.
It's a nerf.
As an Amarr ship, Arby need all his 5 low slots.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.15 16:38:00 -
[155]
These are not final stats
|
NoLock LetsNegociate
|
Posted - 2005.09.15 17:35:00 -
[156]
Coments
|
Jane Vladmir
|
Posted - 2005.09.15 18:38:00 -
[157]
Awesome. Miki var.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |