| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 18 post(s) |
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
59
   |
Posted - 2013.07.02 02:27:00 -
[631] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Hey sorry I've been missing for a bit - weekends you know.
So I don't have much to add here, glad that you guys are still feeling good about this mostly. A couple small updates though:
We are not going to do any name changes. There's just too much risk/cost in doing that with not enough benefit in this case. It is specifically concerning that we would change them based on current function, then change function in some way down the line and be left with names that make no sense. In general changing what things are called is pretty yucky so I feel good about avoiding it here.
As far as WHEN, I can't say exactly but its a good chance that it will be before the end of Summer.
Have fun see you o/
Sounds good.
Well, we'll get over the names. I for one have no problem with it. Never got really behind why it is that much of a trouble (for the community that is). Of course, unique names would really help but in the end, writing Mk 1 thru 5 isnt that hard either. Unless I'm missing something ultra important on tha subject.
It would still be cool if we could squeeze in some other little things, you know - Pretty please! 
Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
CFD None
Dirty Pirate Hookers
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 06:09:00 -
[632] - Quote
I would like faction industrials to be a real thing. Bloodied paint-job and bonused neuting haulers would be interesting to me. On a practical note, the EWAR would be a nice way to wiggle away from potential tackles. With all the cross training that will be going on, it makes sense.
 |
Endeavour Starfleet
902
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 07:24:00 -
[633] - Quote
As hopefully the T1 line has been discussed properly perhaps we can start thinking about Tech 2!
I have started a topic for this https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=254792 |
Goldensaver
ArTech Expeditions
196
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 08:29:00 -
[634] - Quote
Kraschyn Thek'athor wrote:
Hoarder is 240.000m, so 4x Hoarders per carrier.
4x 41.000 = 164.000m
normal Bays = 50.000
214.000m capacity for the price of an 1,3 billion isk carrier.
Roughly two carrier substitute an JF in the role of high sec mineral import.
But before, it was also possible to fit ammo loaded industrials into the carriers. So... not a big thing.
+10% per level as well.
4x41.000x1.5 (at max skill level)
So 246.000+50000
So just shy of 300k.
Still not JF level, but a carrier and 4 hoarders are a lot cheaper, and it's about 30 days to get into the hoarder and trained to max Minmatar industrial.
Gareth Sedorak wrote:
Then fly one of the many other industrial haulers....
Woosh!
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Use another ship?
Double wooooooosh!
Mineral Ore wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:
Use another ship?
Where's your humor!? My name is Mineral Ore.
I don't think they quite got it. |
Xorth Adimus
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Legion
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 09:28:00 -
[635] - Quote
You still have it all wrong.. you have the opportunity to make a real useful change
You need 3 distinct roles before you even start throwing numbers about , such as:
Mining support industrial - would be useful for many roles but with added benefit in transporting ore gas and fuel in a seperate hold, average sized normal hold to make it flexable, would have a good slot layout typically and 2/3/4.
Exploration support industrial - smallest hold but has sufficient fitting to be very flexible can apply a decent tank and also fit a wide range of exploration equipment, it has a small ship hanger to carry a frigate, typical slot layout would be 4/5/5. I would even go so far as to say battle badger !
Transport industrial - has a large hold, small tank and not much choice in fitting 1/2/2
To prevent exploits just don't allow storage of unpackaged transports in carrier hangers or holds (just as you can't put a can in another can).
Where does this leave T2?
Blockade runner - same basic layout as the exploration ship but with bigger hold bay and tank - basicly perfect as a mini orca for wormhole use.
Cloaky transport - as today with possibly a slightly smaller bay, with a fuel bay to augment more specialisation for supporting blackops capitals and fuelling pos.
This then gives a wider range of options for T3 transports.. one day soon (tm). |
Shade Alidiana
PROSPERO Corporation
MinTek Conglomerate
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 09:34:00 -
[636] - Quote
I expected at least now lowered HP for cargo role (it was quite hard to tank my current mammoth, you know). And more cargo extenders (+ lows - base) lower structure HP even more.. Pushes me to switch to Mastodon completely
And yes, I personally would really appreciate fuel transport capability for industrials.
And.. Errm... Originally the Iterons and Mammoth were industrials that specialized in hauling everything without any customisation required, that (in the backstory) brought them success and it all seems gone now. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
1223
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 12:14:00 -
[637] - Quote
Kraschyn Thek'athor wrote:Evelgrivion wrote:The ammunition bay seems like an avenue for considerable abuse; you can fit quite a few hoarders inside of a carrier's ship maintenance bay, and each of those hoarders can be filled to the brim with ammunition for mineral compression purposes. Hoarder is 240.000m, so 4x Hoarders per carrier. 4x 41.000 = 164.000m normal Bays = 50.000 214.000m capacity for the price of an 1,3 billion isk carrier. Roughly two carrier substitute an JF in the role of high sec mineral import. But before, it was also possible to fit ammo loaded industrials into the carriers. So... not a big thing.
CCP Rise wrote:
HOARDER - Ammo bay (This includes anything in the 'charge' group - bombs/cap charges/etc)
Minmatar Industrial Skill Bonuses:
+10% Ammo Bay Capacity
+5% Max Velocity
Slot layout: 3H(+1), 4M(+1), 3L; 2 turrets(+1), 0 launchers
Fittings: 180 PWG(+120), 300 CPU(-350)
Cargo (capacity / Ammo/Charge Bay Capacity): 500(-4600) / 41000
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 840(+566) / 800(-216) / 2100(+1084)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 120 / .85(-.15) / 10625000(-875000) / 12.5(-3.4)
Signature radius: 185(+5)
Warp speed: 4.5au/s
Unpacked Volume: Increased to 400000
You can now only fit 2 in a carrier.
Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
Twikki
The Rusty Muskets
Lost Obsession
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 12:46:00 -
[638] - Quote
I think 2 ship types were missed from the initial thread.
Frieghter and Jump Frieghter
Why not give them the ability to have 1 low slot!
Therefore for those wishing could say fit a damage control, to virtually double there Tank
What does this mean?
Will still get ganked in highsec, but they they will have to field more ships in order to carry this out
And give them a bonus like the venture
After all these are expensive ships, we should be able to defend them a little
Its not like we can jump in a triage carrier to assist |
|
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
1550
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 13:18:00 -
[639] - Quote
Yes, we will be rebalancing the manufacturing requirements in a similar manner to other recent rebalance efforts.
Yes, on to HACs =)
I completely agree that this rebalance paves the way for more industrial ship rebalancing in other classes, but those efforts aren't on the short term radar. There's just so many ships to work on! And new ones to create! And we really want to start chipping away at mod rebalance as well. |
|
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
1223
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 13:27:00 -
[640] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:
Yes, on to HACs =)
Like soon(tm) or later today, or this week?
Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious |
|
|
Bloodpetal
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
The Mockers AO
1300
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 13:34:00 -
[641] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Yes, we will be rebalancing the manufacturing requirements in a similar manner to other recent rebalance efforts.
Yes, on to HACs =)
I completely agree that this rebalance paves the way for more industrial ship rebalancing in other classes, but those efforts aren't on the short term radar. There's just so many ships to work on! And new ones to create! And we really want to start chipping away at mod rebalance as well.
I hope your'e rebalancing Interceptors, Covert Ops Frigates, and EWAR Frigs first... 
Where I am. |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
330
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 15:58:00 -
[642] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Yes, we will be rebalancing the manufacturing requirements in a similar manner to other recent rebalance efforts.
Yes, on to HACs =)
I completely agree that this rebalance paves the way for more industrial ship rebalancing in other classes, but those efforts aren't on the short term radar. There's just so many ships to work on! And new ones to create! And we really want to start chipping away at mod rebalance as well. Make my Deimos useful again! Great work, Rise! |
Phoenix Jones
Shockwave Innovations
Surely You're Joking
39
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 16:41:00 -
[643] - Quote
Well I do hope you still look at using the mineral hauler as a ice product hauler also |
MeBiatch
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
1113
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 16:46:00 -
[644] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:Make my Deimos useful again! Great work, Rise!
well thats a easy fix.
add a 4th mid slot. increase base cap. remove mwd bonus replace with tracking bonus and switch one of the damage bonus for a rate of fire bonus.
That and also base increase in speed and HP.
or in other terms:
Gal cruis bonus:
5% to medium hybrid turret damage
7.5% to tracking
hac bonus:
5% to medium hybrid turret rate of fire
10% to medium hybrid turret fall off
6 high (5 if the team decides on 15 slots indead of 16)
4 medium
6 low
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
Hybrid tech I ammo boost |
BinaryData
HORSE KILLERS
The Predictables
27
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 17:35:00 -
[645] - Quote
Since you're f*cking the ships up, yet again, I demand I get my SP back that I dumped into those ships.
As an industrialists, I'm disgusted at these "changes" you've made. Some of these changes are good, but some aren't needed. You pride yourself on listening to the community, yet you ignored the ones that it effects the most. I'm losing faith in CCP and this game. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1990
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 18:16:00 -
[646] - Quote
BinaryData wrote:Since you're f*cking the ships up, yet again, I demand I get my SP back that I dumped into those ships.
As an industrialists, I'm disgusted at these "changes" you've made. Some of these changes are good, but some aren't needed. You pride yourself on listening to the community, yet you ignored the ones that it effects the most. I'm losing faith in CCP and this game.
Do you also buy expensive suits to go for job interviews then take them back to the shop demanding your money back?
No, you got your benefit from the long years of hauler imbalance, now HTFU.
Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 18:23:00 -
[647] - Quote
Quote:As an industrialists, I'm disgusted at these "changes" you've made. Some of these changes are good, but some aren't needed. You pride yourself on listening to the community, yet you ignored the ones that it effects the most. I'm losing faith in CCP and this game.
Provide more details and be more specific on such regarding the changes. I don't know if your standpoint was mentioned, but CCP will continue to "listen" up to the point of what you are putting in the post.
And the frakking HACs can frakking wait until it's their turn. 
Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
Bosquit
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
51
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 18:28:00 -
[648] - Quote
My only complaint isthe Hoarder, instead of being for Ammo it should be for Pos Fuel and Materials. That would be a lot more useful than ammo, and probably appreciated by a lot of POS tenders.
"Insert Philosophical Statement Here" |
Circumstantial Evidence
80
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 18:52:00 -
[649] - Quote
From page 2
CCP Rise wrote:We talked about doing a POS fueler (and I expect this to be the most legit complaint) but it just isn't possible atm. I can't go into specifics but please trust me here =/
|
HiddenPorpoise
BG-1
The Craniac
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 19:50:00 -
[650] - Quote
BinaryData wrote:Since you're f*cking the ships up, yet again, I demand I get my SP back that I dumped into those ships.
As an industrialists, I'm disgusted at these "changes" you've made. Some of these changes are good, but some aren't needed. You pride yourself on listening to the community, yet you ignored the ones that it effects the most. I'm losing faith in CCP and this game.
What can you even be flying that's worse now? |
|
|
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
330
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 19:52:00 -
[651] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:BinaryData wrote:Since you're f*cking the ships up, yet again, I demand I get my SP back that I dumped into those ships.
As an industrialists, I'm disgusted at these "changes" you've made. Some of these changes are good, but some aren't needed. You pride yourself on listening to the community, yet you ignored the ones that it effects the most. I'm losing faith in CCP and this game. What can you even be flying that's worse now? He probably wants more underutilized/marginalized ships and for the rest of the Industrials (except the Itty V) to continue to be garbage/uninspired/lolfits.
|
Khadann
Skull Bearers
45
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 20:32:00 -
[652] - Quote
Poor PRIMAE, what a waste, it could have been the best PI ship ever, unless you turn it T2
I still don't get why these variation are mostly for gallente industrials.
|
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
512
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 21:00:00 -
[653] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:HiddenPorpoise wrote:BinaryData wrote:Since you're f*cking the ships up, yet again, I demand I get my SP back that I dumped into those ships.
As an industrialists, I'm disgusted at these "changes" you've made. Some of these changes are good, but some aren't needed. You pride yourself on listening to the community, yet you ignored the ones that it effects the most. I'm losing faith in CCP and this game. What can you even be flying that's worse now? He probably wants more underutilized/marginalized ships and for the rest of the Industrials (except the Itty V) to continue to be garbage/uninspired/lolfits.
The problem is, everything but the Gallente line is garbage/uninspired/lolfits.
Gallente get the 3 most useful restricted bays with the advantage of being able to be fit in more interesting ways since they don't require cargo expanding mods and rigs. And the Iteron V is still the big hauling no tank ship it was before.
This is a _very_ incomplete balancing pass. It gave some new and interesting ships to the Gallente line, and left that other the same tired old 'small/fast' and 'big/slow' and forced to fit 'max expanded' to actually haul a useful amount of volume.
And everyone is just "this is perfect, now lets move back to combat ships". Yes, Industrials aren't sexy, but damn near everyone in the game uses them from time to time, and they are a staple for newbies. So far CCP have done an awesome job balancing even the cheapest frigates and cruisers. But this tiericide is total crap. It is still tiered in that their are small and big tiers, meaning most people will still just buy the big ones, and the minor HP and speed difference mean nothing because all these ships are going to be fit the same way.
Seriously, 5% to velocity is dumb when you are forced to fit a bunch of modules that do -10% velocity. Giving the Sigil 'most HP' is pointless if you can't use the low slots to augment it. Why doesn't it get the Amarr armor resists? Every other class of Amarr ship gets at least 1 ship with those resists. Why doesn't the Industrial class get some racial flavor? They all have they same exact bonuses between races.
If CCP Rise just doesn't want to finish balancing Industrial because they are boring, then find some one else to do it. Just don't leave it in the same state that it was found; crappy ships forced into gimped fits, and Gallente is still the only one worth training if you want to haul a lot of stuff. |
Endeavour Starfleet
905
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 21:52:00 -
[654] - Quote
They aren't being left in the same state they started. The plans for these ships are a hell of alot better than what we have today so I don't know why you think your statement as such was accurate.
These ships will see far more use now. Yes fools will continue to fit ships designed for other aspects with cargo expanders and rigs. That is their choice. |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
512
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 22:26:00 -
[655] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
These ships will see far more use now. Yes fools will continue to fit ships designed for other aspects with cargo expanders and rigs. That is their choice.
There is no other aspects to these ships than 'haul stuff'. The Sigil, Badger, Wreathe and Iteron I all have the exact same bonus. The max expanded value are put into the stats in the OP because that is exactly what is expected for fitting. They have no other role and no other bonuses to help in that role. Unless you really expect that sticking with the 3000-4000m3 base cargo is what people are going to go with, but they haven't so far and it looks like CCP expects them to keep doing it. They got a bit more base hp and grid/cpu, which is nice. But they all go about the same buffs, so that tier is still homogeneous.
The small ships are going to be skipped for the same reason they are now. The only measure, and only real bonus, of these ships is the cargo capacity. Why use a Wreathe when a Mammoth holds more? Why train Cadari for anything other than the freighter prereq when Gallente hauls just as much cargo and gets the special hulls. Oh yah, the lolfit Battle Badger.
I don't see how people are missing this. If the cruiser rebalance did nothing but give all the ships the same rate-of-fire and agility bonus, no one would have called it good. People would have still just gone for the ships that fit the most guns, and the other would collect dust. This thing with the Industrials is the same. Each race gets a small and big cargo ship with identical bonuses, and Gallente also get the restricted ships, which leaves us right back with Gallente being the race to train for Industrials. |
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.02 22:57:00 -
[656] - Quote
Quote:Poor PRIMAE, what a waste, it could have been the best PI ship ever, unless you turn it T2
I still don't get why these variation are mostly for gallente industrials.
Yeah, Primae would have been the best candidate for PI rather than one of the playarble faction. Really a shame. Unfortunately, it takes more than busting balls to convince one about suggestions. After all, we're just cows and it is not our ranch or farm or whatever metaphorical crap.
I suppose it is simply too difficult to do these specific changes. I'd suggest to just clone a hull, but it is likely a difficulty for CCP to program or do the many things we desire. I'm just speculating.
Quote:There is no other aspects to these ships than 'haul stuff'. The Sigil, Badger, Wreathe and Iteron I all have the exact same bonus.
There's a sack full of innovations that can be done with the hulls AND those aspects to bring in diversity - well, at least I for one have a few. Each hull is awesome and could bring in some different playstyle that isn't always the same old same old. However, while people love to see new stuff, the same will turn it down.
The reasone why we're likely not able to see other aspects or anything better regarding our tastes is that either CCP or the community is simply too biased on Industrial Hull -> Must haul -> Nothing else mindset. Free/break that and we might get some new aspecs and fun.
As usual, this is only a personal interpretation so nobody will give much of a ****; I wish Industrial Ships were more appropiate to the impressions given by their title - that being BIG vessels and not just paper boats with big tummies. In combination with new modules, they could actually do more than just hauling.
Or clone the hulls and say "Okay, there's the standard hauler Industrial Ships, and then there's the Industrial VESSEL; an intermediate between big Freighters and Orca". Something like that.
But as said, it requires an open mind. Without that -> uHaul.
But most of all, these changes will make these ships at least much better than before. From what I know, that was the task of Tiericide for now.
However. In terms of hauling ships, I still think it shouldn't be that difficult in terms of putting in a query or a ruleset for the ship maint/transport bay; it only able to carry Frigates to Cruisers. or something alike. It would help at least with moving 0.0 battles - not much but one could at least bring their small stuff WITHOUT having to nag a bitchy Carrier or JF pilot.
And then there's that dream of a T2 Industrial Ship that have ship bays and can actually fit a jump portal module...
Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all. |
Claire Raynor
NovaGear
Limitless Inc.
156
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 09:14:00 -
[657] - Quote
I'm Minmatar through and though - thanks to a short 1 year stint in FW. Now the Hoarder!! :)
NewHoarder Appreciation Post
Right - Currently there are High profit options to T1 manufacture that I do. There are two options here. There are very high mark up per sale items but the quantities do not shift on these and then there are lesser marked up items that shift very large quantities. And you profit at isk/hour or isk/week - and you look at the best use of your limited manufacture slots.
As it turns out - currently where I trade - Ammunition (once many popular variations are being made) - produces the highest (reliable) isk/week of any of my blueprints. There are much higher mark up items but they will not sell the quantities - so I can produce more than I can sell - much more - so standard haulers would work for them - and I won't make them that often.
There also appears to be a trend in what must be the PvE use of non faction Cap Booster charges. Less profitable, (because I suspect people keep massive stock piles of ammo - but not so much Cap Charges). . . . But Cap Charges were something I wouldn't make too much of because of the need to then use Freighters to move them and Freighters are soooo slooowwww - it comes down to logistics of getting them to market - and my free time is worth more than that - because a round trip for CAP Boosters is time equiv. to a Level 4 mission and salvage - (and LP to turn my ammo into faction ammo for larger profit) - and the profit will not cover it. So I potentially will monitor the Cap Booster market - but only send them to market when I have ships to sell and am taking a Freighter anyway. (Making ships is a vanity project because the margins are so tight - but I like doing it).
However Ammunition is pretty small in the most part - and I could move it all at will already. Except for Torpedeos and Cruise Missiles - but with access to almost 2.2 times as much hold capacity as my old Mammoth - I will be able to get more of this to market - and if I don't like the large missiles - I can use Cap Boosters instead!
So - I will be getting Hoarders with the intent of using them to transport my ammunition to Rens - specifically with a view to start producing more of the large missile varieties - esspecially now as the new CNR and RF Typhoon are even better! I just see this giving me a use for all three Minnie industrials - when I only used to use the Mammoth.
I am going to miss the mammoth mid slot. I do get suicided en-route to Rens. I could survive a salvo from an arty Tornado down to ~15% sheilds before - but a DCU will now be needed I guess. If I take a Hoarder and a Mammoth - I can split the goods better now and take vast amounts more of the things I sell - the Mammoth will still have the highest value of goods - but will be able to lose a low to a DCU because medium rigs aren't big and paste isn't big either - other than that it is an assortment of meta 3 and 4 loot and some left over PI stuff for POS fuel and Paste. . .
I wonder - Will Nanite Repair Paste fit in the Hoarder ammo bay? (it doesn't matter because it's tiny but meh!)
And If I take the two ships I'll get the fleet boost so - Yeah - mightn't miss the mid too much . .. maybe if I take the DCU
So - I'm super excited - I will be able to take more stuff to market more quickly - and will have fun thinking about what ships I'll take - more choices and decissions! |
Caitlyn Tufy
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
Sanctuary Pact
347
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 09:40:00 -
[658] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:There is no other aspects to these ships than 'haul stuff'.
There's more than one way and more than one situation to haul stuff. Although Jump Freighters exist, people still use Blockade Runners, regular Freighters, Orca and so on. Sometimes you want to carry a lot. Sometimes, you just want to get there fast. Sometimes, you want to be as safe as possible from "evil goon gankers" and so on. And sometimes, you just want to blow stuff up with your Millenium Badger  |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Tormented of Destiny
The Kadeshi
136
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 10:47:00 -
[659] - Quote
Khadann wrote:
I still don't get why these variation are mostly for gallente industrials.
simply because gallente has so many industrial hulls. you might realise, that the races minmatar and gallente which got specialised industrials are infact those two races with more then two T1-industrial hulls ;)
Claire Raynor wrote:
I wonder - Will Nanite Repair Paste fit in the Hoarder ammo bay? (it doesn't matter because it's tiny but meh!)
it has been confirmed already that any kind of charge goes into the ammo-bay of newHoarder.
CCP Rise wrote:
We are not going to do any name changes. There's just too much risk/cost in doing that with not enough benefit in this case. It is specifically concerning that we would change them based on current function, then change function in some way down the line and be left with names that make no sense. In general changing what things are called is pretty yucky so I feel good about avoiding it here.
do you plan to change everything again, with those mysterious "industrial changes in the pipe"?
what kind of change in function might that be?
|
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
330
|
Posted - 2013.07.03 14:05:00 -
[660] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:Make my Deimos useful again! Great work, Rise! well thats a easy fix. add a 4th mid slot. increase base cap. remove mwd bonus replace with tracking bonus and switch one of the damage bonus for a rate of fire bonus. That and also base increase in speed and HP. or in other terms: Gal cruis bonus: 5% to medium hybrid turret damage 7.5% to tracking hac bonus: 5% to medium hybrid turret rate of fire 10% to medium hybrid turret fall off 6 high (5 if the team decides on 15 slots indead of 16) 4 medium 6 low
edit: side note there is a flaw with the ishtar balance. it has 15 slots... but the balance team have claimed over and over again that drone focused ships should always have one less slot then turret based ships... so what gives. Please just add a 16th slot to all hacs other then the ishtar when you do the tech II balance. please see the enyo vrs ishkur as an example of this. thaks Not really the place for this, but holy ****--Deimos with 6 turrets + ROF would be a monster. Or better yet, since 6 turrets would be crazy, move that high to a mid, and you'd have a super Thorax with a respectable shield tank. Either way it goes, I'm excited to see what Rise/Fozzie/Ytterbium come up with!
More OT--Rise, can you comment on why Amarr don't have a lolpvp option in the new haulers? Everyone else has one option, with the Amarr line sadly lacking.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 30 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |