| 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 - 8 post(s) |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
848
   |
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:38:00 -
[691] - Quote
The **** is wrong with you people. Cruise missiles are getting seriously buffed, Raven is gaining application at the loss of almost no dps and you're complaining that these ships are going to be worse at doing the already **** [urine?] ******* easy lvl 4 missions?
Seriously? what the ****?
BYDI (Shadow cartel) Recruitment open!
|
marVLs
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:39:00 -
[692] - Quote
Trolly McForumalt wrote:Where can I find info on how to alter EFT/pyfa for upcoming ship/module changes (I googled it but found nothing)?
http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?11380-Odyssey-Changes-Rebalanced-Navy-Cruisers-T1-Cruisers-(and-EFT-files) |
Roime
Ten Thousand Years
Shinjiketo
2824
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:43:00 -
[693] - Quote
Mr Renoir,
I feel that it is polite to notify you of the fact that your personal mission running preferences are completely irrelevant in balance discussions. Internet spaceships should not be designed according to your private needs, but to fit in their position in the game.
This is to suggest that you should come up with more universally applicable arguments against the presented CNR changes.
Respectfully,
Roime
Senior Troll
New Eden Polite Forum Trolls Association
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Roman Sichko
Anonymous Operations
Darkness of Despair
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:44:00 -
[694] - Quote
IrJosy wrote:I don't use my navy domi with guns can you please change it to be like the regular domi with the drone optimal/tracking bonus?
Yes, please, all we want optimal/tracking bonus for navy domi drones, not turret bonus. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9392
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:46:00 -
[695] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Stop making sense and posting facts.
Better alert ISD
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9392
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:47:00 -
[696] - Quote
Garviel Tarrant wrote:The **** is wrong with you people. Cruise missiles are getting seriously buffed, Raven is gaining application at the loss of almost no dps and you're complaining that these ships are going to be worse at doing the already **** [urine?] ******* easy lvl 4 missions?
Seriously? what the ****?
The CNR will do 11% more raw DPS with Cruise Missiles after Odyssey.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
535
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 08:59:00 -
[697] - Quote
Caldari Prime
Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado.
Gallente - Pilot satisfaction |
Karig'Ano Keikira
Tax Cheaters
49
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:04:00 -
[698] - Quote
To try and argue my point again:
-> If you think the CNR is bad; you're terrible
- no point in arguing it is / will be bad; obviously it will get better after changes, problem is not in absolute performance of new CNR, problems are following:
1) identical bonuses to Golem:
- there are reasonably few battleships based on missiles, why make two of them virtually identical?
- making it 'better phoon' and 'worse golem' is imo simply lazy move, it could be made much more interesting ship by giving it advantage and disadvantage(s) compared to other ships in its class
- if you can sit in golem, there is no reason whatsoever to sit into CNR; currently these two ships have strengths and weaknesses and outperform each other in different scenarios - that is good design; after change CNR will simply be inferior in every aspect in every scenario - that is bad design
2) relative decrease in performance compared to Golem, SNI, new Raven, new Phoon:
- again, not problem by itself - it still outperforms regular Raven and Phoon (as it should considering it is navy ship)
- however it makes CNR boring - it is basically cheap man's golem - not good role for a ship;
- also its performance vs SNI (which also tends to be cheaper) is dubious making point of using it in PvE and PvP dubious in itself - perhaps it can be used as torp platform as SNI as cruise, but not so sure about it, especially due to fitting problems of torps on it
-> How should the Golem be differentiated from the CNR?
let's assume it should be differentiated from Golem, so problem here is how:
few ideas:
- a) give it slight damage increase; needless to say, 8 bonused launchers are probably regarded as overkill by devs, so drop it to 7 launchers and give it slight bonus to dps, let's say 5% to damage: this will put its effective dps to 8.75, bit under 10% over golem (that shouldn't be overkill considering all other stuff golem has) and give it bit more alpha, perhaps making it more interesting PvP (and I doubt effect will break the game); as a tradeoff drop its damage application bonus
-> this will pretty much leave it in role it is in now, not bad considering it has its place now
- b) make it real attack battleship:
- up its mobility and lower its sig
option I:
- drop its range bonus, give it explosion velocity bonus (so it has both velocity and radius bonuses)
-> now we have something new and interesting, battleship capable of scary damage application with cruises and torps; I still doubt it will hit cruisers and frigs well (at least unless they are webbed and painted) so it won't really break anything
option II:
- trade damage application for missile flight time (so it has double range bonuses)
-> idea here is to give it ability to shoot torps really far, giving it potential for scary damage output on medium range [keep in mind its damage will still be at raven level and below current CNR level torp-wise, so it is not THAT scary]; however it trades for it with crappy damage application of torps
option III:
- drop it to 6 launchers, trade range for damage (7.5% per level, perhaps 7%) leave it with two utility highs
- up its fitting so it can actually fit neuts in highs
-> idea here is to make it more attack
|
Pesadel0
the muppets
DARKNESS.
73
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:07:00 -
[699] - Quote
Pattern Clarc wrote:Ersahi Kir wrote:CCP Rise wrote:Hey guys
I've been watching the thread closely, and I really want to post something because I would hate to think you feel ignored. The problem is, I'm really not sure what to tell you! The discussion here seems extremely passionate, but for almost every ship and topic there are people arguing both sides. I think overall thats a good sign, and I feel good about the ships as a whole.
There are a few common concerns and I'm going to keep watching and then have a talk with the rest of the balance team in a day or two about some possible adjustments.
Thanks for the discussion - I really appreciate seeing all the different perspectives. I just want to know who's arguing for the tempest fleet issue. I thought we had pretty much agreed that the tempest was a subpar ship that has a tiny niche between the typhoon fleet issue and the maelstrom. Unimpressive drone bay, tight when fitting 1400's, even with double bonused turrets doesn't put out impressive damage, it just seems uninspired. Find something this ship can do that sets it apart, we don't need a sub par armor maelstrom with utility highs that it can't fill without fitting mods. Honestly, if the typhoon fleet issue had more powergrid it would kick the tempest around the block in every role it could possibly fill and be more flexible to boot. Pretty much.
For real fleet pest is so **** that it makes my eyes bleed. |
marVLs
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:09:00 -
[700] - Quote
Why comparing CNR to Golem if Golem will be changed, like all marauders, maybe even with totally different bonuses/roles.
CCP have the long term plan and they know what they doing. Just stop posting nonsens ffs... |
Kay 0ss
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:11:00 -
[701] - Quote
Trolly McForumalt wrote:Oh crap I just noticed the CNR has a bonus to velocity for *only* cruise missiles (musta glossed over it).
Intended? If so that is utter rubbish. I've never seen a bonus on a ship only for rails, artillery or beam lasers. This bonus needs to apply to torps as well.
It says
+10% bonus to Cruise Missile Torpedo Velocity
I think its supposed to be
+10% bonus to Cruise Missile and Torpedo Velocity |
Gimme more Cynos
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:20:00 -
[702] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:Gimme more Cynos wrote:Alexander Renoir wrote:Concernig the CNR:
All I can say is, that I strongly need one high slot for a Tractor Beam. So please do not change the slot-layout nor the Rate of Fire-Bonus.
You have changed the Cruise Missile Ammunition. Thats enough.
A Tech I Raven is useless for my skillset but my ALL Level 5 Golem is also bad today (And will be bad after the CM change). The best solution for MY PERSONAL Playstile ever was the CNR. But with this change it is ruined for me. I need one free available high-slot. Thats all.
Torpedo's where NEVER EVER an option for me. Sure I have also all Level 5 in torpoedoes.. but they are useless for my playstile.
So please overthink the Rate Of Fire-Bonus and the Slot Layout. Perhaps it will be better to change back some statistics of the CM to fit again with an ROF-bonus and a 7 launcher Slot-layout. Thanks.
MY PERSONAL OPINION:
Do not touch the CNR as ship. Changing the ammunition is enough.
+ I see a Problem with the gone rof-bonus. Yeah! I can make damage with the new CM but if the BS in Vengeance repairs itself faster than I can shoot the new CM wont be better.
+ I Need one free available high Slot for my Tractor Beam. (Noctis is not an Option. Playstile.. you know?) Dude, seriously.. get a Golem. Best advice you can probably get. After all, you have the mini Golem allready.. shouldn't be much of a change (and might actually improve your missile experience). There is just no reason to fly a CNR in PvE any longer. Perhaps you are right. But in my eyes the Golem needs torpedoes to be really effective. My problem is the range of a torpedo. I do not salvage every mission. I often fly against Serpentis / Gurista. Looting from this NPC is waste of time. I need the tractor beam to loot some (far away from all) BS zu refine this loot and build my missiles. I am a strong Cruise Missile user. I do not like torps because of the range. But one Defender and my calculated CM launchers on a Golem would fire like a normal Tech I Raven. You see? Golem is not needed because I do not loot / salvage very often. The range of a torp-golem is not enough for me. I love the range of the CM. I want to decide to kill at 92km or 24km to use the tractor. But a CM-Golem is just LOL. Best solution was ever a CM-CNR with one tractor. But this will be changed soon. If I fly the new CNR with 7 launcher and one tractor like I have ever done; this new ship would be horrible bad.
The Golem will soon be exactly like the new CNR.. it will have 8 launchers (4x2) and you will have the space for two tractors (!). It just gets more tank, and more damage application on top of it. The Golem is just plain better. There isn't a choice anymore...
Yeah, defenders might hurt a little, but seriously, it's barely noticable. |
Gimme more Cynos
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:21:00 -
[703] - Quote
marVLs wrote:Why comparing CNR to Golem if Golem will be changed, like all marauders, maybe even with totally different bonuses/roles.
CCP have the long term plan and they know what they doing. Just stop posting nonsens ffs...
Maybe because we want to fly missile-boats in the meantime? Have you ever thought about that? Not? Oh well.. |
Deerin
Murientor Tribe
Defiant Legacy
145
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:31:00 -
[704] - Quote
Karig'Ano Keikira wrote:
1) identical bonuses to Golem:
- there are reasonably few battleships based on missiles, why make two of them virtually identical?
- making it 'better phoon' and 'worse golem' is imo simply lazy move, it could be made much more interesting ship by giving it advantage and disadvantage(s) compared to other ships in its class
- if you can sit in golem, there is no reason whatsoever to sit into CNR; currently these two ships have strengths and weaknesses and outperform each other in different scenarios - that is good design; after change CNR will simply be inferior in every aspect in every scenario - that is bad design
If you want a PvE ship and you can sit in a golem, by all means do so. It is what that ship is designed for. T2. Specialization. This is the intended design.
Marauders are designed to be PvE ships with high price tags and low PvP use. They have sensor strengths below frigate level and can be jammed to hell with a single flight of ECM drones. CNR on the other hand can do both PvE and PvP. It is a more generalized ship.
I find it perfectly adequate for golem to outperform CNR, Vargur to outperform FPest, Paladin to outperform NApoc and Kronos to outperform Nmega, PvE wise.
There is one more thing: The damage application bonus on CNR is huge. It is an exp radius bonus, not a measly exp velocity bonus. It is a (1/0.75)=1.33 bonus to damage application formulas. It applies to both terms in the function, so that you can increase your damage vs smaller ships even when they are webbed.
|
The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
Mean Coalition
32
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:42:00 -
[705] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:Perhaps you are right. But in my eyes the Golem needs torpedoes to be really effective. My problem is the range of a torpedo. I do not salvage every mission. I often fly against Serpentis / Gurista. Looting from this NPC is waste of time. I need the tractor beam to loot some (far away from all) BS zu refine this loot and build my missiles. I am a strong Cruise Missile user. I do not like torps because of the range. But one Defender and my calculated CM launchers on a Golem would fire like a normal Tech I Raven.
You see? Golem is not needed because I do not loot / salvage very often. The range of a torp-golem is not enough for me. I love the range of the CM. I want to decide to kill at 92km or 24km to use the tractor. But a CM-Golem is just LOL.
Best solution was ever a CM-CNR with one tractor. But this will be changed soon. If I fly the new CNR with 7 launcher and one tractor like I have ever done; this new ship would be horrible bad.
Defenders are chance bases, it doesn't matter if you have 4 or 8 launchers, the result will be the same(at average over time).
The reason why the CNR was preferred with CMs was the higher launcher count. Now both are similar with CMs, while the CNR gives you more dps if you lazy with the painting and the Golem got the more powerful painter and utility. There is literally nothing wrong if people go with CMs on the Golem after the patch since you not lose anything in raw DPS compared to the CNR.
|
marVLs
141
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:45:00 -
[706] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote:Maybe because we want to fly missile-boats in the meantime? Have you ever thought about that? Not? Oh well..
By tracking You'r post in this topic i must admit that You don't think at all when talking about new CNR... sry, no harm but that's the true.
The most funny is that missioners and CNR PVE players on June 5th will get big buff to thier ship, and what they say? Complains and some heresies that CNR will be worse...
And just a few weeks ago no one even thinks that he's CNR will get some love in even next years...
(cruise missile buff included)
Ain't You some Liang alt? Cause he's way of thinking is the same, pointed things that CNR will be better, showed eft photos with fits ect. and still saying "new CNR will be worse at PVE activities..."
All that bulls... You and some dudes talk about here make a lot of fun for rest on players that know something, and sometimes they writes here making nice inteligent fun of that.
So when changes to pirate BS will come and Mach will loose some falloff You will be there telling everyone that's nice buff to ship? |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9398
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:48:00 -
[707] - Quote
Gimme more Cynos wrote:marVLs wrote:Why comparing CNR to Golem if Golem will be changed, like all marauders, maybe even with totally different bonuses/roles.
CCP have the long term plan and they know what they doing. Just stop posting nonsens ffs... Maybe because we want to fly missile-boats in the meantime? Have you ever thought about that? Not? Oh well..
I have a Tengu I'm looking to sell, if that's any good to you?
1 Kings 12:11
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
9398
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 09:54:00 -
[708] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:Gimme more Cynos wrote:Alexander Renoir wrote:Concernig the CNR:
All I can say is, that I strongly need one high slot for a Tractor Beam. So please do not change the slot-layout nor the Rate of Fire-Bonus.
You have changed the Cruise Missile Ammunition. Thats enough.
A Tech I Raven is useless for my skillset but my ALL Level 5 Golem is also bad today (And will be bad after the CM change). The best solution for MY PERSONAL Playstile ever was the CNR. But with this change it is ruined for me. I need one free available high-slot. Thats all.
Torpedo's where NEVER EVER an option for me. Sure I have also all Level 5 in torpoedoes.. but they are useless for my playstile.
So please overthink the Rate Of Fire-Bonus and the Slot Layout. Perhaps it will be better to change back some statistics of the CM to fit again with an ROF-bonus and a 7 launcher Slot-layout. Thanks.
MY PERSONAL OPINION:
Do not touch the CNR as ship. Changing the ammunition is enough.
+ I see a Problem with the gone rof-bonus. Yeah! I can make damage with the new CM but if the BS in Vengeance repairs itself faster than I can shoot the new CM wont be better.
+ I Need one free available high Slot for my Tractor Beam. (Noctis is not an Option. Playstile.. you know?) Dude, seriously.. get a Golem. Best advice you can probably get. After all, you have the mini Golem allready.. shouldn't be much of a change (and might actually improve your missile experience). There is just no reason to fly a CNR in PvE any longer. Perhaps you are right. But in my eyes the Golem needs torpedoes to be really effective. My problem is the range of a torpedo. I do not salvage every mission. I often fly against Serpentis / Gurista. Looting from this NPC is waste of time. I need the tractor beam to loot some (far away from all) BS zu refine this loot and build my missiles. I am a strong Cruise Missile user. I do not like torps because of the range. But one Defender and my calculated CM launchers on a Golem would fire like a normal Tech I Raven. You see? Golem is not needed because I do not loot / salvage very often. The range of a torp-golem is not enough for me. I love the range of the CM. I want to decide to kill at 92km or 24km to use the tractor. But a CM-Golem is just LOL. Best solution was ever a CM-CNR with one tractor. But this will be changed soon. If I fly the new CNR with 7 launcher and one tractor like I have ever done; this new ship would be horrible bad.
On the other hand the CNR is getting a massive speed buff and an extra mid which you can use for a prop mod. You'll be far more mobile, so you'll have less need for the tractor.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Deerin
Murientor Tribe
Defiant Legacy
146
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:07:00 -
[709] - Quote
Alexander Renoir wrote:If I fly the new CNR with 7 launcher and one tractor like I have ever done; this new ship would be horrible bad.
Why the hell is a tractor beam a balance argument for a Navy Battleship.
If you are THAT desperate about tractor beam, maybe you should look at the new SNI, which looks like a monster. It has 8 meds and shield resist bonus. You can easily put 3 target painters in that one, put rigors as rigs and apply full damage to almost everything....and still have a good tank to boot. |
zbaaca
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
1
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:09:00 -
[710] - Quote
i like new CNR. but i think range bonuses on caldari hulls must go way amarrian cap bonuses. i.e. buff HAML & torps range , so they can be used not only on the a few ships , & give us something usefull instead |
GallowsCalibrator
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
308
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:19:00 -
[711] - Quote
I am still amazed how many people are arguing the badness of the new CNR and the tears are goddamn delicious.
For PvE after Odyssey hits, a cruise setup will do more damage compared to pre-patch; and be able to apply that damage much, much better against smaller targets. Cruisers and frigate NPCs will melt. (Oh yeah, the fairly huge speed buff will also help survivability.) Yup, a Golem - a T2 PvE specialist ship is probably going to be slightly better than the CNR, and? It really should be. The Raven has much easier entry requirements to sit in as well, so hey-o.
Torpedo fits have never been fantastic (apart from my slightly comedy Forsaken Hub chaining monster that only works on them) so nbd.
For PvP? The above, but more so. This thing is going to be beastly in dealing with smaller targets thanks to the combination of launch velocity and additional precision. The extra speed will help it to chase down those targets and keep them tackled, and that lovely 7th mid provides additional flexibility. One of these in a small gang is going to be a serious sight to behold and should put the fear of God into a lot of pilots for the range of damage application it can put on targets.
If you just want paper DPS, fly a Fleet Typhoon; just don't be surprised when something smaller kills you because it seems to fit much more comfortably into an anti-BC/BS role.
(And if you want to fly a solo battleship with missiles fly a post-Odyssey Geddon and neut everything forever, theres your goddamn utility highs damn, that thing is going to be fun) |
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
852
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:28:00 -
[712] - Quote
Also people complaining about it being similar to the golem are missing the whole "the golem is going to be rebalanced too" thingg
I'm hoping Marauders will be made pvp viable. Having a ship specialized for mission running when mission running is so ******* easy is kinda ********.
Also the new paladin LOOKS ******* DELICIOUS AND I MUST HAVE IT (but i don't PVE) BUT I MUST HAVE IIIIIT
RISE, FOZZIE, PALADIN, PVP VIABLE, YES?
BYDI (Shadow cartel) Recruitment open!
|
LakeEnd
FinFleet
Raiden.
41
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:36:00 -
[713] - Quote
The Fleet Tempest is disappointment in my opinion. It-¦s quoted role as only viable armor alphafleet ship is bollocks, its only very marginally better than arty-Abaddon. Its dual bonus to guns are quite meh, when Abaddon with 8 turrets and one gyro delivers more alpha than Fleet Tempest with same one gyro, EHP difference is not all that big either. That is bit silly in my opinion.
Adjust the ROF bonus higher, 7.5% or even 10% and replace the damage bonus with either tracking or optimal bonus. Bit more drone bandwidth would not hurt either. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction
Whores in space
256
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:44:00 -
[714] - Quote
LakeEnd wrote:The Fleet Tempest is disappointment in my opinion. It-¦s quoted role as only viable armor alphafleet ship is bollocks, its only very marginally better than arty-Abaddon. Its dual bonus to guns are quite meh, when Abaddon with 8 turrets and one gyro delivers more alpha than Fleet Tempest with same one gyro, EHP difference is not all that big either. That is bit silly in my opinion.
.
That 1 million times. Pay attention Fozzie and Rise, read that and try to come with a sensible mistake on this post. OF course the NAVY version of the MOSTLY TURRET focused ship of the PROJECTILES race is a bit better than the AMARR ship using arties. But Do you think a ship is balanced when on these conditions its BARELY better? |
Aaron Kyoto
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 10:59:00 -
[715] - Quote
Cpt Gulag wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Cpt Gulag wrote:
range bonus .. really .. apoc with scorch is mdoin something like 500 dps.. now that is a shame to even say that my battleship does 500 dps...
but to be honest ... all you have to do is put amarr next to gallente tier for tier, battleships ofc.. now all you have to do is choose..
either amarr is too nerfed or gallente is too buffed..
Hey there, I see you're the leader of the local brain trust so tell me, how much DPS does a Megathron do at 50km? Do you think its more or less than any, ANY Amarr BS can do at 50km? do you warp 50 km away from an apoc in a mega to start a fight with it?
Nah just sit in a station and Smacktalk.
Unlike mission pubbies I trust the CSM and other people who understand the mechanical background of the game to make decisions based on balance. |
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 11:08:00 -
[716] - Quote
Congratulations, it performs the same as a typhoon or even raven performs about just the same in dps, adn with the Raven pilot fitting in a TP and rigs it has the damage application too!
And then please check the Typhoon FI which will have even more missile dps while still retaining slots for bonused turrets too, and don't forget 125 drone bw.
When you compare all these WITH the new cruise missile changes that CNR is just not performing anywhere worth it's price tag... heck, the new CNR become even worse at many situations that the old could do. |
Deerin
Murientor Tribe
Defiant Legacy
146
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 11:17:00 -
[717] - Quote
LakeEnd wrote:The Fleet Tempest is disappointment in my opinion. It-¦s quoted role as only viable armor alphafleet ship is bollocks, its only very marginally better than arty-Abaddon. Its dual bonus to guns are quite meh, when Abaddon with 8 turrets and one gyro delivers more alpha than Fleet Tempest with same one gyro, EHP difference is not all that big either. That is bit silly in my opinion.
Adjust the ROF bonus higher, 7.5% or even 10% and replace the damage bonus with either tracking or optimal bonus. Bit more drone bandwidth would not hurt either.
Actually Abaddon has better resists, which is better for fleet work. Though Pests cycle guns much faster thus alphaing more stuff in given time. Still...in lagy circumstances and when the FC is counting down for alpha pulses, the RoF doesn't mean that much.
Since it is quite a niche I believe a nice, fleet issue only boost would be very adequate. 7.5 dmg per level maybe? It will increase total alpha and dps by a 10% (1.375/1.25=1.1) and will make Fpest a distinct choice for these type of operations.
Another option would be %10 per level damage (a total increase of 20% alpha) and losing the rof bonus for a tracking bonus. This would nerf the total DPS of the ship (10% lower), but make it a very scary alpha platform. |
Kane Fenris
NWP
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 11:28:00 -
[718] - Quote
what i cant understand is why bring a ship that can be potentialy very fun for various purposes into a role that only a fraction of players performe in ther lifetime JUST because the ship as it is has no other use at the moment?
with other ship devs havnt been shy to make big changes (and i like those).
so i beg rise (and fozzie) to think of a solution for the pest and fleetp. that doesnt remove the ship from 95% of the eve game world.
only thing that should be taken as base for new ideas should be keep it agile and fast as its design promises and the ship is remembered (thinking of nanopest). |
Deerin
Murientor Tribe
Defiant Legacy
146
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 11:45:00 -
[719] - Quote
Kane Fenris wrote:what i cant understand is why bring a ship that can be potentialy very fun for various purposes into a role that only a fraction of players performe in ther lifetime JUST because the ship as it is has no other use at the moment?
with other ship devs havnt been shy to make big changes (and i like those).
so i beg rise (and fozzie) to think of a solution for the pest and fleetp. that doesnt remove the ship from 95% of the eve game world.
only thing that should be taken as base for new ideas should be keep it agile and fast as its design promises and the ship is remembered (thinking of nanopest).
I understand and sympathize, but the "nanopest" role is quite crowded atm. Fleet Cane, Tornado, New Fleet Phoon, Machariel, Sleipnir are some of the few candidates. Even gallente ships have taken over that role and they can do it better than the tempest.
So the only unique role we can crawl tempest into seems to be armored alpha. |
Alexander Renoir
State War Academy
Caldari State
58
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 11:48:00 -
[720] - Quote
Deerin wrote:Alexander Renoir wrote:If I fly the new CNR with 7 launcher and one tractor like I have ever done; this new ship would be horrible bad. Why the hell is a tractor beam a balance argument for a Navy Battleship. If you are THAT desperate about tractor beam, maybe you should look at the new SNI, which looks like a monster. It has 8 meds and shield resist bonus. You can easily put 3 target painters in that one, put rigors as rigs and apply full damage to almost everything....and still have a good tank to boot.
What I mean is:
Let the CNR ship as it is. With NO 8 Launchers BUT with the rate of fire bonus. With the free high Slot. I am more flexible than with a additional med-slot. An AB or MWD does not do the same, what a Tractor does. Not the Tractor is an argument against balancing. The design of the slot layout is an argument. Let it with 7 launchers but 8 high slots and the ROF bonus. There is no need to do more on the CNR.
I do not complain of the changes for the ammunition just the slot-layout and changed bonus is what I hate and what does not fit to a faction BS. NO flexibility with the 8 launcher slot-layout. And this for a gam, claiming Sandbox, do what you want etc.
I d not want that the CNR must be better than a Golem. This would be crap! But I want flexibility with an free high slot. |
| |
|
| 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 |