Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 58 post(s) |
danneh
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 06:13:00 -
[481]
Tuxford changes are awesome if u decide to change something do not increase the drone bay of the Vexor as many have whined about its a cruisers its supposed to have medium drones.
Thanks.
|
JoeT
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 06:19:00 -
[482]
Originally by: FraXy Giving the Arbitrator a 4.th mid over a Vexor is not right. But the tracking disruptor bonus seems very nice!
Since u hit Thorax with nerfbat give the Vexor 200m3 dronebay and give it a 4.th midslot, so it will be kinda a mini-Ishtar.
Executioner can`t be considered a tackle-frig since no-one fits a scrambler on it. go with original plan and give it 2 mids.
And OMG the Punisher...
/me logs on to Eve to stock up 100 Punishers...
good thing i bought the BPO a few months ago :) mmm punishers = good times now
murder murder, yes indeed, K-I-L-L-I-N-G
Ladies and Gentalmen of the minmatar race... Remain Slaves |
Altus Morningstar
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 07:13:00 -
[483]
For the love of all thats holy WHY are you changing the Minmatar ships? Taking away our speed bonuses and giving us complete trash bonuses just is not cool guys. I don't understand the reasoning behind this. The T1 frigates might have some issues but Minnys having fast ships wasn't one of them.
The end is extremely f'ing nigh. |
Siri Danae
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 07:35:00 -
[484]
Originally by: danneh Tuxford changes are awesome if u decide to change something do not increase the drone bay of the Vexor as many have whined about its a cruisers its supposed to have medium drones.
Thanks.
1. Your commas miss you. 2. No. If you get to carry extra ammo, lens or whatnot, I should be able to carry spare drones... especially if my ship's main function is as a drone carrier. ------ I generally assume the following: 1. 95% of Empire Carebears don't get 0.0 PVPers. 2. 95% of 0.0 PVPers don't get Empire Carebears. 3. 100% of Ore Thieves steal just to upset the Miners. |
Richard Masterson
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 08:08:00 -
[485]
Please don't dump the Rifter's speed bonus. This is especially true if you are UPPING it's power grid, making people more inclined to fit artillery. The falloff bonus will be mediocre at best then.
|
Rak'Kabal Kain
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 08:13:00 -
[486]
While making crap ships a lil better is good its still not nuff.
In PVP there are only 3 classes that matter inty's, hac's and battleship's everything else is so useless when compared to these 3 classes you have to wonder why they even take up space on your hard drive.
Firstly Battleships; Can kill any other ships in the game. (The game needs to be balanced not and having a be all end all ship is not balance) Secondly HAC; Again can kill almost any ships in the game and does not suffer from the brain numbing speed of battleships. Finally Inty's; You cant hit me oh and I have 2 damage mods oh and T2 guns oh and your cruzer is dead. PS I can also do 5000m/s
Maybe asking for all ships to be useful is a bit to much...
|
Kalast Raven
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 08:15:00 -
[487]
I applaud the suggested changes, looks like a massive improvement in all respects. ------- K. Raven
|
DeepfriedTator
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 08:21:00 -
[488]
Edited by: DeepfriedTator on 18/09/2005 08:22:57
|
Eleth Ranc
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 08:48:00 -
[489]
I apologize if this has already been mentioned, I couldn't really read more than the first page in one sitting, but I personally feel that one of the changes to the Rifter is somewhat useless. Being a Minmatar ship it relies on it's somewhat superior speed to close in to targets and make good use of shorter range weapons. At least that's how I've generally seen it used. My own Rifter is equipped with three autocannons, and a Smart Bomb, as such I feel that the accuracy falloff bonus is completely useless. I would much rather see a tracking speed bonus, or something similar. Another medium or low slot would be great as well.
Also on another note, it is my perception that the Slasher is supposed to be the fastest T1 Minmatar Frigate (correct me if I'm wrong) so shouldn't it also be the single fastest T1 Frig in the game? Since the Minmatar are all about speed? From what I'm seeing the Executioner, (which alot of people seem to be complaining about as is)seems to be significantly faster, with these changes.
I'd comment on some of the other changes, but pretty much all of my experience is with Minmatar Frigates so far. I will add that I do indeed use my probe as both a miner, and a low end hauler. Though I wouldn't mind if the Burst ended up becoming a more efficient miner, minus the cargo space. Might also be interesting to make the burst a bit faster, since it's smaller.
On another note, I would like to see ship upgrades that don't necessarily take module slots. Cargo expanders, and Armor Plating should be among that category. Simply make them offset their bonusses, like Armor plating would make you tougher, but also heavier and slower. That way you could customize your ship to a greater degree, even if you only have a very small number of module slots.
Lastly (feel free to direct me to another forum if this is the wrong place to be putting this) Give us the option of telling our autopliots to automatically activate our afterburners and MWDs please?!!!!!
|
dantes inferno
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 08:57:00 -
[490]
not to keen on removing the mimitar speed bonus, the only reason i trrained mimitar frigs is due to their high speed. the rax balacing is great, no longer can i fit a full tank and good dmg while traveling at 1km/s (and there not realy thaty specialised..it took me 2-3 weeks to be able to fly a rax properly after the missile nerf) i love the changes to the bonus on merlin and moa, i always hated the hp/booster bonus, this resistance bonus will mean me using them a lot more now. the missile bonus on the condor (and the other ships with simillar bonus) i think the damage bonus should be all missiles (one of the so caled major advantages of a missil is the ability to use all 4 damage types..yet to use anything but inetic you got to sacrifise your ships bonus...not really fair tbh), or at least changed to a damage type which isnt so tanked as kinetic is. the velocity bonus at first glance seems redundant to me until i took into consideration that missiles have a limited flight time hence the faster the missile the futher it goes...so this bonus does in fact keep in line with the caldari long range bonus, but i like the look of these changes, but hope that they are made more indepth rather than juggle around a few slots and bonus/ship stats....cruisers need a lot of changes to make them usable, and caldari ships need the "balancing" nerfs they were given to compenstate for missiles removed now missiles ar more in line with turrets. cant wait to see what they do with bc's and wether or not they are going to change dd's (pleasssssse give the coercer 2 mids slots :D) and bs _____
|
|
Magnum III
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 09:37:00 -
[491]
I drive a Merlin right now and the only thing that seems low is the power output.
There was already always enough CPU output.
Also the Hawk needs another Hi slot. I know itĘs T2.
One more thing the Condor is the ugliest ship in EVE. Sorry :)
And the Thorax did not need 200m drone bay anyways.
P.S. Magnum III AKA Magnum VII
|
Dezzereth
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 09:45:00 -
[492]
Edited by: Dezzereth on 18/09/2005 09:45:51 Jeez, you get up in the morning, unsuspecting, start up the comp, to check your character's remaining training time, then you go to the the forum's general thread to see if any important thing is announced, see this thread, and the day is screwed.
What seems to be the case is that you are pulling ships of all races to a level where there is barely any difference between them, like removing speed bonuses from Minmatar. It is important that you not only see ship as EW/Assault/Scout/etc. but also differently for all races. This is what makes choosing ships in EVE interesting. E.g Amarr ships are no main missile users, their ships should reflect that, and adding the laucher to the omen is only another step to make all cruisers of all races a homogenous intermix, where nothing is different form the other. Also it seems to go either resistance bonuses (WTF?) or damage bonuses for combat ships. Everything looks the same. Why not add e.g. locking speed bonuses for tacklers, maybe only caldari (better electronics - or so its alwas told us)?
As some have pointed I also have trained Minmatar ships (up to cruiser) because of their speed, and I don't care for any other bonus they might get. Don't just look at the paper values and change them to what you think might work. E.g. I think the Arbitator is perfect as it is now, no need to meddle with it, since it works fine how it is. Also removing powergrid from Caladri ships is totally a crappy idea, since the latest upping of missile launcher PG need.
Overall I think that a few ships in the Frig to Cruiser range (includes destroyers) need tweaking a bit, but changes in such an extent are not needed tbh. Frigs, cruisers and battleships are now more balanced than ever (aside from a few exceptions), so please don't break everything again.
It would be fine if we could finally settle for ship roles and values (at last for the basic T1 frigs and cruisers) 2 years after EVE's release. Rather open up more possibilities how to fit them (by adding more modules) than changing the ships. People train cruiser 5 for a reason, though mainly because the stlye of that race's ships are to their liking. Screwing this up all the time is unnerving at best.
Please rather make intelligent balances and tweaks to R&D, its way more needed there.
After this read I think I rather go to bed again. Good night.
-- TOSGI Homepage -- |
Hakzuzu
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 09:58:00 -
[493]
As it has been said before, and I'll say again, why nerf previously good ships? We don't want a clone army of ships....or else we would play swg :)
Really, don't nerf...every race has it's specialties....yes, some ships needed boosting....
But boost...don't nerf.....
H
|
Brechan Skene
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 10:04:00 -
[494]
To the Developers,
I would like a huge change in direction in the way the Minmatar BC is being handled. I would like the grid setup to be changed to a 7/5/5 from the original 8/4/4. This would also include the change to the Hi-Slots to a 6 Guns / 3 Missile option. The inclusion of a BC cruise missile launcher would also be a benefit as well as I believe that Heavy missiles make it slightly better than a cruiser yet incredible far behind that of a BS. To me it is not the transitional ship between a cruiser and battleship that it should be. Finally in the case of the cyclone the 7.5% Shield boost bonus should be changed to a capacitor size bonus.
Could a Dev respond to my qurries? Thankyou Brechan Skene
|
Jaabaa Prime
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 11:19:00 -
[495]
Originally by: Tuxford
Condor
Heron
- CPU output increased to 250tf
- Launcher slot added
- Targetting range bonus replaced with scout bonus
Kestrel ??
The mass of all 3 of these frigates is awful when you try to warp, please reduce the mass of the Kestrel and the Heron.
Originally by: Tuxford
Slasher
- Max velocity increased to 390m/s
- Max velocity bonus replaced with 5% projectile damage per level
Rifter
- Poweroutput increased to 37MW
- Max velocity increased to 320m/s
- Max velocity bonus replaced with 10% accuracy falloff per level
I haven't looked at the numbers, but is the new speed equal or even better than the old speed with Min frigate lvl 5 (it doesn't look that way for rifters) ?
Originally by: Tuxford
Blackbird Celestis
- High slot changed to a med slot
OMG, the Blackbird already has a very well defined role, but increasing it to a 7 med slot cruiser .... Why ? -- Intergalactic Teeth Pullers "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein |
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 11:32:00 -
[496]
/second Diana Merris, for the most part. Modifications still need conceptual reworkings, both in specific instances and in "cramming ships into assigned roles" approach. More roles are needed, more diversity and quite possibly a shift more in favour of giving ships unique stats and seeing what people do with them. Skewing such changes in favour of certain roles is good; forcing them into such roles is possibly not so good. Clearly however this kind of conceptual work can't take place on public forums (been part of quasi-in-house testing/development teams before, know the score on that one) so just hoping the internal team's taking this on board and doing something about it.
|
Ravenge
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 11:36:00 -
[497]
Seems like Amarr4tw again
After all they now will have the fastest frig, taking that away from the Minmatar who was supposed to have the fastest ships.
And the best drone cruiser, taking that away from the Gallente who are supposed to be the drone users race.
As for the new rax.... before these changes Maller > Rax ... after these changes Maller > rax .. while tanking several BS's at the same time.
|
Dezzereth
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 11:42:00 -
[498]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius Clearly however this kind of conceptual work can't take place on public forums (been part of quasi-in-house testing/development teams before, know the score on that one) so just hoping the internal team's taking this on board and doing something about it.
Absolutely right. This needs a heavy rework/rethinking, though an internal one.
-- TOSGI Homepage -- |
Kanisa
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 12:11:00 -
[499]
Half the changes are either pointless concerning the gameplay or outright wrong, when looking at the history and background of the races and ships. Which change falls into which group has already been written in this thread a couple of times.
A couple changes, mostly improvements and defined roles for some ships are badly needed. Somehow I can't find those in this overhaul. I.e. the changes to the 'supposed' mining frigs fall way short. I.e. a pilot being able to efficiently use a mining frig for its intended role certainly will have enough skill to use a destroyer or a cruiser. With those, he can go to less secure systems and fend off the attacking rats that would eat his mining frig for lunch while having a higher ore yield too.
Changing the established roles of whole ship classes that used to do well without being overpowered leaves a bad taste.
Somehow I have the feeling that I am missing a vital piece of information. But that's nothing new. Maybe it falls in line with elections, Jove ambassadors, half finished Bloods event lines, factions switching sides with no reason and whatnot.
Less drones, less missiles in space and slower ships all reduce the server load.
|
Helmut 314
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 13:00:00 -
[500]
Hehe, GankaVigil ? 5% damage per level and all that CPU....
2 x 280 II howies Sensorbooster II Tracking comp II Target painter II 3 x Gyro II
Instalock, Pop!
___________________________________
Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson |
|
Locke Ateid
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 13:52:00 -
[501]
Edited by: Locke Ateid on 18/09/2005 13:55:52 Leave my Minmatar Max vecolity bonus alone! Thats one of the only things that we Mins got going for us, its bad enough you nerfed Projectiles a while ago and you're trying to make our T2 ships sheild tank without med slots. Leave it be!
|
Shindalin
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 14:00:00 -
[502]
These changes are a joke, right? If not i am speechless! I mean why are u trying to take away and in some cases swap the race differences? Why? Why? And if u cut Thorax drone bay in half and just give it grid and nothing else u wont see the cruiser fly anymore at all!
Your message are clear cry for nerf and u get it Its just plain sad to destroy one good cruiser like that. Now there is only BB left and ofc the almighty Maller that are cruisers worth of running. This is compleatly backwards from what u state that u will achive with these changes. just a little word on Celestis why on earth wouldnt u just give it a med slot? Is it that powerfull? They are just a waste of isk! Cant do anything at all no tank not dam no speed no nothing at all that keeps it alive
Why take away the speed from Minmatars? Why all this pointless changes at all? If this goes through u can cancel my account.
Sincirly yours Shindalin.
|
j0sephine
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 14:17:00 -
[503]
"OMG, the Blackbird already has a very well defined role, but increasing it to a 7 med slot cruiser .... Why ?"
The way it's written, i think it's Celestis that's given the conversion to mid slot, and Blackbird is simply left with no changes whatsoever ^^;;;
|
Crellion
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 14:31:00 -
[504]
PvP results appear to be: Best tech I frig: Executioner (Tech I frigs = tacklers) Best tech I combat cruiser: Maller Best tech I drone carrier: Auguror
Is "ammar" a word for "our favourite pets" in Icelandic?
|
Fidelis Deus
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 14:40:00 -
[505]
People seem to forget that the vexor is more powerful then the arbitrator in every way except for the lowslots. You will have a very hard time mounting a tank on the arbitrator with her gimped grid. The gimped cpu and cap(compared to the vexor) really don't allow much ewar, the tracking disruptor might help, but I would still take the vexor over it.
Is it possible to create a drone command on a vessel? This way you could enable moving from cargobay to dronebay as long as there is enough room - the room takes into account the drones outside the bay.
This basically allows drone carriers in a sense, to keep "ammo" and allow them to switch drones out if need be.
|
Ravenge
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 15:00:00 -
[506]
Originally by: Fidelis Deus People seem to forget that the vexor is more powerful then the arbitrator in every way except for the lowslots. You will have a very hard time mounting a tank on the arbitrator with her gimped grid. The gimped cpu and cap(compared to the vexor) really don't allow much ewar, the tracking disruptor might help, but I would still take the vexor over it.
Is it possible to create a drone command on a vessel? This way you could enable moving from cargobay to dronebay as long as there is enough room - the room takes into account the drones outside the bay.
This basically allows drone carriers in a sense, to keep "ammo" and allow them to switch drones out if need be.
Not anymore its not..
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 15:08:00 -
[507]
Originally by: Crellion PvP results appear to be: Best tech I frig: Executioner (Tech I frigs = tacklers) Best tech I combat cruiser: Maller Best tech I drone carrier: Auguror
Is "ammar" a word for "our favourite pets" in Icelandic?
Um, hi. Executioner. Best tackler. With one mid. Uh huh. Augoror. Isn't a drone carrier. You're thinking of Arbitrator. Please. Facts. Useful.
|
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 15:37:00 -
[508]
How much time does it take to chance the stats on a ship in the database?
Been thinking about my fav ship the Stabber again, and an other layout option: 6 Highs - 4 turrets & 3 launcher points 3 Mid - no change 4 Lows - !questionable! this is pending on if the ship should be capable of fitting 720s, or only should be capable of fitting 650 as a max atry. If it should stick to 650s for the Stabber and 720s for the rupture, then 3 lows will do.
The highs slots. The Stabber is a light fast and agile gun cruiser and as the Minmatar use missiles only as a substitue I though that it would be nice if this ship had one more launcher point. So therefore the 4 turret 3 launcher points. I think this would make this ship more versitile in combination with its new 700 powergrid.
|
Fidelis Deus
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 15:41:00 -
[509]
Your confusing the stabber with the rupture. The stabber - as of now - will still have 3 lowslots.
The problem is it is completely outclassed by the rupture.
What setup can you do in a stabber that a rupture cannot do better? Pretty much nothing, stick 2 nanofibers on the rupture and it becomes a better stabber.
Same thing with the Omen/Maller - The maller has an extra turret and lowslot - nulifying the ROF advantage of the Omen.
|
Agnar Koladrov
|
Posted - 2005.09.18 15:47:00 -
[510]
Edited by: Agnar Koladrov on 18/09/2005 15:48:30
Originally by: Fidelis Deus Your confusing the stabber with the rupture. The stabber - as of now - will still have 3 lowslots.
The problem is it is completely outclassed by the rupture.
What setup can you do in a stabber that a rupture cannot do better? Pretty much nothing, stick 2 nanofibers on the rupture and it becomes a better stabber.
Same thing with the Omen/Maller - The maller has an extra turret and lowslot - nulifying the ROF advantage of the Omen.
Well yeah thats true, therefore I came up with this layout. The Stabber is a fragile ship but fast as hell, the extra launcher point should give a nice addition to this ship. As for the Stabber vs Rupture, like I see it the Rupture is a heavy (for cruisers) gun platform, made to armor tank and shoot hard with 720s. The low slot on the Stabber can serve a good purpuse, that of adding an extra gyro cause it lacks dmg, or speed mod, etc.
But the my main point was the addition of a 3rd launcher point.
I whish Tuxford would add several possible versions of ships, to test out which work best.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 30 40 50 .. 50 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |