EVE Search - Jag, Vengeance, Hawk + AS 4th bonus!

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Jag, Vengeance, Hawk + AS 4th bonus!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Kaylana Syi	Posted - 2005.12.14 20:43:00 - [121] Originally by: CCP Hammer Weirda no love Hammer? What is there to love? j/k teehee! buff the AF's and I think it won't just be Weirda's love you will be getting. Originally by: "Oveur" I don't react to threats any better than you do
Weirda	Posted - 2005.12.14 20:44:00 - [122] Originally by: CCP Hammer Weirda no love Hammer? of course do! just "don't touch this" (unless fixing AFs)! you were left out because: a) there wasn't room in the thread title to include every DEV b) wanted to ***** at TomB and Tux only because you are so loved c) three is a crowd... d) too many ppl would start discussing MC Hammer's discology in thread if you name was in title take you pick - whatever make you feel best... just please give my AF's their proper 4th bonus and give my jag and vengeance a mid... and give the Hawk 2 more launcher points... and... and... and... you get the picture! _____________ Thread Killer Give Assault Ship Missing Bonus in RMR! OMG Tux/Ouveur/TomB hate Weirda! EGO Nerfed!!!
keepiru	Posted - 2005.12.14 20:50:00 - [123] Originally by: Weirda of course do! just "don't touch this" (unless fixing AFs)! ;o ------------- Where are the missile damage implants? ;)
Alex Harumichi	Posted - 2005.12.14 20:53:00 - [124] Originally by: Grimpak Ishkur: drone damage (or drone hitpoints) Nah, it's already a drone powerhouse. I'd vote for a MWD bonus, or something like that. Originally by: Grimpak Enyo: the mwd bonus thingy or the repair bonus thingy. both are good ones. Repair, I'd say. Ishkur works much better as a MWD boat. Originally by: Grimpak hawk: this one could use a total revamping in the bonuses, making them all missile with a shield boosting one. Totally agreed. And 1-2 more missile hardpoints, making this the first (and only) missile-based AF. A lot of people would be very happy with that. Originally by: Grimpak Retribution: hmm... second damage bonus or a tracking bonus. I'd vote for tracking, but damage bonus would work also. And move the totally useless fifth highslot into a med. With a normal fitting, there is nothing you can fit in that highslot. Or alternatively, give it a bit more CPU so it could actually use that high. Right now it's affectively a 4/1/5 layout ship. Originally by: Grimpak Vengeance: damage bonus for sure. Yeah. This ship is ok otherwise, but the damage is pitiful. Ideally I'd give it one more medslot, too, so it could (gasp) shieldtank. That's what the stats seem to point it towards, but you don't shieldtank with only 3 mids and em+therm damage holes.
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.12.14 21:40:00 - [125] Edited by: Grimpak on 14/12/2005 21:42:34 Originally by: Alex Harumichi Originally by: Grimpak Ishkur: drone damage (or drone hitpoints) Nah, it's already a drone powerhouse. I'd vote for a MWD bonus, or something like that. Originally by: Grimpak Enyo: the mwd bonus thingy or the repair bonus thingy. both are good ones. Repair, I'd say. Ishkur works much better as a MWD boat. Originally by: Grimpak hawk: this one could use a total revamping in the bonuses, making them all missile with a shield boosting one. Totally agreed. And 1-2 more missile hardpoints, making this the first (and only) missile-based AF. A lot of people would be very happy with that. Originally by: Grimpak Retribution: hmm... second damage bonus or a tracking bonus. I'd vote for tracking, but damage bonus would work also. And move the totally useless fifth highslot into a med. With a normal fitting, there is nothing you can fit in that highslot. Or alternatively, give it a bit more CPU so it could actually use that high. Right now it's affectively a 4/1/5 layout ship. Originally by: Grimpak Vengeance: damage bonus for sure. Yeah. This ship is ok otherwise, but the damage is pitiful. Ideally I'd give it one more medslot, too, so it could (gasp) shieldtank. That's what the stats seem to point it towards, but you don't shieldtank with only 3 mids and em+therm damage holes. yeah but that was just the bonuses. slots however I agree with everyone said before: - bit more CPU and a med to the jag - bit more gird and cpu and med to the vengy - another med to the hawk ...however I had this insane idea on the back of my head for some time wich is to transform the retribution in a 5-turret ship. Simply make that utility slot into a turret slot. Add 5 more CPU and 6 more grid. Result: mobile turret platform. Imagine that thing with 5 beams. EDIT: and btw, the 4th med in the vengeance would not go for tanking that's for sure I can't even count the multitude of setups that the vengeance would be able to have if you armour tank the thing and you would have like 4 meds to play arround. ------------------- Celestial Horizon: we go zerg on you
LUKEC	Posted - 2005.12.15 09:38:00 - [126] vengeance can do same with 3 med slots, just forget about propulsion mod
Kai Lae	Posted - 2005.12.15 10:19:00 - [127] Edited by: Kai Lae on 15/12/2005 10:19:36 Originally by: Kaylana Syi Considering that the 720mm howie is a better battleship gun than a cruiser/battlecruiser I don't sympathize. Infact, Beams might be small guns but they output like lowerend cruiser guns more than they do frigate guns. And they work well on cruisers. As it stands it is more balanced than you realized. Medium Beam Laser IIs are almost as good as Dual 180mm II autocannons and hit pretty much the same range point. Why do you think a lot of minmatar use them on ruptures and stabbers? An AF with a full rack of beams would just be plain sick DoT. 1. 720 arty have nothing to do with beams so your point is irrevelant 2. A frig beam that can't be usually mounted on a frig is a weapon with very dubious capability. The grid needs to be reduced. If it does too much DPS/tracking/sheep shearing then that should be addressed at the same time. On a seperate issue though there are issues with a few frig weapons, small arty being one of them (especially 250's).
Weirda	Posted - 2005.12.16 20:10:00 - [128] Originally by: LUKEC vengeance can do same with 3 med slots, just forget about propulsion mod weirda NEVER fit propulsion mod on AF (unless NPCing) so you don't have to ask to forget. there are certain things that would be a nice luxury with a 4th mid: - dual webber (very helpful considering the speed of this slug vs the speed of it intended targets) - tracking disruptor - remote dampener (to force inties to either flee or come into you webber range) - ecm anyhow - now that RMR is deployed, Weirda looking forward to the DEV posting a stickie on the updates to the Assault Ship! TomB or Tux would be cool... but Weirda really hoping that Hammer is the man for this one! <3 for hammer (the dev in the shadows)! _____________ Thread Killer Give Assault Ship Missing Bonus in RMR! OMG Tux/Ouveur/TomB hate Weirda! EGO Nerfed!!!
j0sephine	Posted - 2005.12.16 20:22:00 - [129] "Weirda no love Hammer?" More likely using reverse psychology -- "If Weirda doesn't mention Hammer, he'll feel unloved and fix the AFs to show he is the best dev out there" ;o
Malthros Zenobia	Posted - 2005.12.17 06:49:00 - [130] Originally by: Kyozoku 4 missile slots. 5% missile rof, 5% missile dmg 10% missile velocity, 5% shield resist I can dream can't I? If it had the grid and cpu to fit some sort of tank/mods and 4 t2 launchers, I'd fly a hawk and probably never undock my harpy ever again. ------------------------------------ Inappropriate signature -zhuge
Kyozoku	Posted - 2005.12.17 11:41:00 - [131] Edited by: Kyozoku on 17/12/2005 11:42:19 If the vengeance had a 4th mid you could actually shield tank it and have room for a scrambler. The jag is around 30 cpu short of being a good ship. Giving the hawk 5 mids would change it's role from a tanker to an ew platform. Haven't decided if that a good thing yet. I can't really comment on the ishkur as it seems to be doing pretty well for itself atm. Bumpage till a real dev replys!
Kai Lae	Posted - 2005.12.17 19:47:00 - [132] Originally by: Kyozoku Edited by: Kyozoku on 17/12/2005 11:42:19 If the vengeance had a 4th mid you could actually shield tank it and have room for a scrambler. The jag is around 30 cpu short of being a good ship. Giving the hawk 5 mids would change it's role from a tanker to an ew platform. Haven't decided if that a good thing yet. I can't really comment on the ishkur as it seems to be doing pretty well for itself atm. Bumpage till a real dev replys! Jag, if it gets a 4th mid, will need more than 30 CPU as it will then need more to fit the extra new slot. It's a true fact though that when I outfit this ship I have like 20 extra grid and no free CPU. It also needs more capacitor, as it has the same amount as the rifter. As for the hawk, having a ship that could either be used with missiles or outfit for jamming isn't a negative, that is a positive - ship flexibility is a great asset.
R31D	Posted - 2005.12.17 20:21:00 - [133] Jaguar and Vengeance both having an extra mid would be cool. Jaguar I don't really have fitting problems with (either ACs or Artillery) but it would need extra CPU for that 4th mid slot otherwise it'd be impossible to fit. Ishkur is fine imo, doesn't need any extra slots. I don't think AF need a 4th bonus as it could easily unbalance them with each other easily but a bonus slot to a couple of them would be very useful (especially seeing as Jaguar is just a Rifter with decent EM/therm resistances Free bumpage for all
Phelan Lore	Posted - 2005.12.17 20:30:00 - [134] Originally by: Kai Lae Jag, if it gets a 4th mid, will need more than 30 CPU as it will then need more to fit the extra new slot. It's a true fact though that when I outfit this ship I have like 20 extra grid and no free CPU. It also needs more capacitor, as it has the same amount as the rifter. More cap is a must. For a ship that is supposed shield tank, having the same cap as it's tech 1 base, having less cap than the wolf, which is supposed to just be a no nonsense damage machine, and even having less cap than a claw, is unnacceptable. 40 more cap (50 with energy man 5) would go a long way imo. ________________ ~Phelan Lore Your isk has become my isk, by way of my actions...
Endorphin Lai	Posted - 2005.12.18 21:15:00 - [135] Having read this entire topic... People who think the Vengeance needs another mid... IMO no. An armor tanker with the same amount of mids becomes unbalanced - should shield tanking ships request as many lows? IMO by the sounds of it it needs a damage bonus and maybe another low. As for the Hawk - I love this ship and it is a very successful NPCing ship, however i agree that the damage sucks. Perhaps add a hi-slot and another launcher point for 2 turrets/3 launchers? But then it becomes a more damage-oriented ship like the harpy, and this is not the idea of this ship. Instead, another low is better for a damage mod, and then it becomes more balanced, as the description states it should, and another launcher point so you have the option of 1 turret/3 launchers. Then you could have: 1x 150 rail 3x std launchers 1xAB 1xSB 1xEM Hardener 1xwebber/scrambler/etc 1xBCU 2xPDU Or something like this. Any suggestions?
Kai Lae	Posted - 2005.12.18 21:39:00 - [136] The "10 slot" ships won't get another high slot. They're more tanking/utility based than the 11 slot, which are damage. Therefore it would make sense to enhance their strength of what they do well.
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.12.18 22:28:00 - [137] Originally by: Kai Lae The "10 slot" ships won't get another high slot. They're more tanking/utility based than the 11 slot, which are damage. Therefore it would make sense to enhance their strength of what they do well. does that mean that CCP should enhance the hawk in being crappy? ------------------- Celestial Horizon: we go zerg on you
keepiru	Posted - 2005.12.18 22:32:00 - [138] Originally by: Kai Lae The "10 slot" ships won't get another high slot. They're more tanking/utility based than the 11 slot, which are damage. Therefore it would make sense to enhance their strength of what they do well. Then why do so many 11 slot afs tank better than the 10-slots? For example, retribution/vengeance, enyo/ishkur... ------------- Please fix the EW stacking bug :(
Kai Lae	Posted - 2005.12.18 22:46:00 - [139] Because CCP doesn't know what they're doing in this case? Actually when I think of it the ships that have less high I generally see as short range, and when you look at the harpy or wolf that seems borne out. The way you can match the DPS is to go with short range weapons. Not only that the ishkur, jag etc seem more suited to it (jag due to speed, I know the optimal bonus doesn't fit).
Trelennen	Posted - 2005.12.20 02:56:00 - [140] slight bump . Tux/TomB, any answer? Or you Hammer, as you already know the thread. If you look into this, I'm sure Weirda (and others) will really love you, and next thread title will be "<...> needs <...>, Hammer? <3<3" Originally by: DarK The cluetrain obviously doesn't stop at this station anymore...
Gronsak	Posted - 2005.12.20 03:59:00 - [141] why do AF need a 4th bonous? they already have a smaller sig than t1 couterparts (unlike hacs which have higher in most cases) imo AF are fine. i have used caldari and galante intensively, both work good. are not over powered and DEFNITLY not underpowered other 2 races i cant say, but im sure they are ok too
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2005.12.20 04:30:00 - [142] Edited by: Naughty Boy on 20/12/2005 04:30:57 Originally by: Gronsak why do AF need a 4th bonous? Because they are lacking a 4th bonus, every t2 ship get 4 real bonuses, and AF only get a fake 4th bonus. Originally by: Gronsak they already have a smaller sig than t1 couterparts (unlike hacs which have higher in most cases) but they are slow and heavy (as fast as hacs with an ab, whereas t1 frigates can go way faster than t1 cruisers). Originally by: Gronsak imo AF are fine. i have used caldari and galante intensively, both work good. are not over powered and DEFNITLY not underpowered Ishkur, harpy are arguably the two best assault frigates. The ishkur for damage + slot layout, the harpy for range + ew. Enyo is a good t2 frigate, and hawk just... well, it's a pimped merlin - not that impressive. You can't juge them all on basis of those because jaguar isn't much more than a rifter (i think that the rifter is better than the jaguar). Vengeance is terrible. They need something really, they aren't really worth flying over their t1 counterpart (and that's not even considering their price). Originally by: Gronsak other 2 races i cant say, but im sure they are ok too I am sure you shouldn't be sure. Sincerly Yours, The Naughty Boy. --- Spreadsheet - Damage @ range. Check for updates/known issues, feedback welcome.
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa	Posted - 2005.12.20 13:56:00 - [143] Edited by: Shan''Talasha Mea''Questa on 20/12/2005 13:56:37 Why haven't the assault frigs inherited both T1 boni for their frigate V skill ? Edit: Spelling.
Uther Doull	Posted - 2005.12.20 14:05:00 - [144] Originally by: CCP Hammer Weirda no love Hammer? and here i was thinking "Yay, a dev post on the matter" :(
Alex Harumichi	Posted - 2005.12.20 14:19:00 - [145] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 20/12/2005 14:23:53 Originally by: Naughty Boy Ishkur, harpy are arguably the two best assault frigates. The ishkur for damage + slot layout, the harpy for range + ew. Enyo is a good t2 frigate, and hawk just... well, it's a pimped merlin - not that impressive. You can't juge them all on basis of those because jaguar isn't much more than a rifter (i think that the rifter is better than the jaguar). Vengeance is terrible. They need something really, they aren't really worth flying over their t1 counterpart (and that's not even considering their price). Yeah. Ishkur, Enyo, Harpy, Wolf are all fine, all solid ships with different strengths. Jaguar is fast, but that's about it. Compared to the new boosted Rifter, it doesn't offer all that much. Could use a bit of help. Retribution is borderline ok. Gimped by only one medslot, but packs a mean if limited-range punch and tanks well. The biggest problem with this ship, tbh, is probably the fitting reqs of beam lasers, but it could use some other help too, perhaps a bit more grid & cpu. A second medslot would make this a very good ship, but maybe too good(?). Dunno. Vengeance is gimped by abysmally low damage output and nothing to make up for that. It has a nice shield, but resists and # of medslots don't encourage shield tanking. It could benefit from a damage bonus, and maybe something else. Hawk has a problem in that everything it does, the Harpy can do much better. It needs to lose the gunboat role (Harpy does that) and gain a more missile-based role. More launchers, another missile bonus. This would make it the first and only missile AF in the game, which many would love I'm pretty sure.
Forsch	Posted - 2005.12.20 14:33:00 - [146] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Hawk has a problem in that everything it does, the Harpy can do much better. It needs to lose the gunboat role (Harpy does that) and gain a more missile-based role. More launchers, another missile bonus. This would make it the first and only missile AF in the game, which many would love I'm pretty sure. Harpy <-> Hawk is the same problem like Crow <-> Raptor but from a different side. Harpy and Crow do everything their counterparts do but better. Hawk needs more missiles slots. Raptor needs more gun slots. (And maybe a look at the bonus of each.)
CardboardSword42	Posted - 2005.12.20 14:35:00 - [147] I'm throwing my support behind giving the Hawk more missile hardpoints and changing the rail bonus to a missile bonus. Fleshreaper Inc. Representative
Cade Morrigan	Posted - 2005.12.20 16:04:00 - [148] I wanted a new toy so bought a Hawk recently. That's a goofy ship to fit, making it a missile boat would be a great way to differentiate it from the Harpy, please do it CCP!
Trelennen	Posted - 2005.12.21 06:21:00 - [149] /me pets the thread, but it needs devs love! Originally by: DarK The cluetrain obviously doesn't stop at this station anymore...
Weirda	Posted - 2005.12.21 16:36:00 - [150] must babysit thread some more... again... 4th bonus 4tw! _____________ Thread Killer Give Assault Ship Missing Bonus in RMR! OMG Tux/Ouveur/TomB hate Weirda! EGO Nerfed!!!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.