|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Aliventi
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
46
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
This Navy drake is going to be so be OP. No longer restricted to just kinetic damage. Velocity bonus (Kiting HAM drake anyone?) and excellent damage projection against smaller targets? Simply beyond winning. |
Aliventi
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
48
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 21:02:00 -
[2] - Quote
War Kitten wrote:Aliventi wrote:This Navy drake is going to be so be OP. No longer restricted to just kinetic damage. Velocity bonus (Kiting HAM drake anyone?) and excellent damage projection against smaller targets? Simply beyond winning. Congrats, you'll have a drake that can kill cruisers and perhaps take on frigates. But last time I checked, 8 launchers with no bonus is lower DPS than 6 launchers with 50% bonus when using the correct ammo. Hurray, you can use EM/explosive ammo now, and still do less DPS than the recently nerfed drakes. I'm missing the OP part.... Sorry Sweetheart, there is more to a ship than just DPS and tank.
The sheer power of being able to use any ammo type is something very few (raven, caracal, drones) ships can do. Yeah, you had a bonus to kinetic damage, but a lot of that bonus was being taken away by higher natural kinetic resists and ships fit with kinetic hardiners to specifically counter the drake.
On top of that HAMs hit poorly and have very restricted range. The DPS that is actually applied will be similar to the current drake once the explosion radius bonus is taken in to effect. Even better it will allow you to smoke frigs that can speed/sig tank a drake, and hit sig tanking cruisers better. And ships that hope to out range the HAMs will have some trouble.
This ship is so OP in the right hands. It's going to be nuts when these hit the server. Although I do wish for a bit more fitting freedom. Not like it will matter much. If I am paying 250+ mil isk for a navy BC I can afford to pimp it a little. |
Aliventi
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
48
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 21:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
Major Killz wrote:Perihelion Olenard wrote:Why are navy BCs necessary? This^ Why are navy BS, cruiser, frigs necessary? tbh they aren't. But those of us that PvP are more than willing to spend a little more for a better ships. Risk/reward at it's finest.
Just wait for the pirate faction BCs. Those are going to be fantastic. |
Aliventi
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
51
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Time for some feedback on the feedback.
- The Navy Battlecruiser prices are a bit too high and seem comparable with Command Ships.
Good point, I had CCP Fozzie come to my desk with puppy eyes asking for a price reduction as well. We'll probably decrease overall price by 20-25%.
- The Drake Navy Issue fittings are a bit short, especially on the powergrid side.
We discussed increasing this a bit, not much though, as we are scared of the sheer potential of this ship. Let's start around 5% and see where it gets us.
+1 for price adjustment.
All the PG we need is enough to fit 8 HAM, an LSE II preferably, a 10MN MWD, and 9-10 PG for the mods that use 1 PG each. You can then add in more for those that don't have AWU/shield Upgrades V or other fitting skills.
The ideal PG amount is around ~1,090 post fitting skills. I agree with not adding too much. There really isn't a need for 2 LSE. This drake is going to be very powerful in the right hands. |
|
|
|