|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
620
   |
Posted - 2013.07.18 11:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sacrilege changes are not enough, it is still bad. do something else with it or it will now have replaced the eagle as the worst hac
rest are decent changes though
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
620
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 12:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
with the sac. how about removing the utility high and adding a low slot.
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
622
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 15:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:
I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.
While the Sacrilege didn't gain bonuses or slot changes, the added PG and added drone bay push it over the edge I think it would become a solid heavy brawler with a lot of utility. I spent some time trying to find a 4th bonus that fits better than the cap recharge bonus but it's actually very difficult. I think keeping its character as a really sturdy bruiser seems more interesting than anything else I've come across, but I'll keep watching feedback on this. Its really important to me that this both useful and fun.
Ishtar just got an extra turret slot, so not having the fitting requirement improved seams daft given the fact that you just did that. plus it was always a ***** to fit anyhow
sac, omg its still crap, but as of now you just made it worse than all of them even the now actually decent eagle, well done. remove utility high and give it that extra low it needs so badly for tank.
rest are mostly ok changes
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
622
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 15:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.
please say your also chatting about the now worst hac the sac
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
622
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 15:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:CCP Rise wrote:I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish. please say your also chatting about the now worst hac the sac I would still bet on the eagle being the worst.
at least it can have a go at its role, ok needs a little more lock range to actually do it decently but still not looking to bad for it.
the sac as a close range brawler needs that extra low. adding hml is just a meh we have to do something to it change and does nothing for a close range brawler.
was looking forward to it finally getting fixed but no, ill have to wait another 5 years
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
630
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 09:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Ersahi Kir wrote:I honestly think the new cerb is pretty good for the people that do caracal and tengu fleets. The increased range on heavy assault missiles (68 km javs, 45 km normal) and the same damage as a 5 launcher tengu may make this ship a competitor as a doctrine ship. I scratched out a quick fit today, and if I didn't mess my math up I figured that it can go all tech II as a HAM/AB fit except for 2x meta 4 LSE's.
It all depends on if that extra ~22km on jav heavy assault missiles is worth it. Just so you understand what you're suggesting, an AB HAM Cerb and an AB HAM Caracal are separated by 3 m/s, 19khp, and a little under 200 dps. For that staggering increase in power (<-this is sarcasm) you pay 15x the cost of the Caracal. Oh, and for 200 million more and less training time, you could just buy a Tengu which outclasses the Cerb in EVERY SINGLE WAY.
its ok the tech3 balance will soon screw the tengu over anyhow
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
632
|
Posted - 2013.07.20 19:52:00 -
[7] - Quote
Legion40k wrote:Steve Spooner wrote:
How did you pass reading comprehension? The Vagabond got an ADDITIONAL BONUS because the 5% velocity per level is now PART OF THE HULL so regardless of your minmatar cruiser level it is 25% faster (irrelevant since it has to be 5, but still)
If the calculator lies, fair enough, but as I explained theres a quirk with this bonus and prop mods to achieve such a high speed. Take a look, its..odd
im pretty sure 239 x 1.25 is 298.75 m/s not 260m/s like stated in the new base stats of the vaga, so unless there is some other special dev maths going on its going to be a little slower
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries
Dark Stripes
636
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 16:51:00 -
[8] - Quote
Roime wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Harvey James wrote:dude compare T3's EHP with T1 cruisers and then blankly stare at the main reason ooohh... look it has about three times the amount .. that's not normal ... then look at the dps difference... Look at the DPS. - Thorax - 2 Magstabs 5 Neutrons, Void - 522 DPS - Loki - 2 Gyros 6 425mms, RF EMP - 525 DPS Now look at the cost. - Thorax - 10m - Typical Armor Tanked Loki - 400m And the SP loss. - Thorax SP loss - 0sp - Typical Armor Tanked Loki ~ 7 days of training (Subsystem 5, Minmatar Strat Cruiser 4) So, a T3 costs 40x as much before bling (which any good T3 pilot has), and costs the pilot 7 days of training every time one explodes. [Condescending Wonka] Tell me again about how T3s are OP compared to T1 Cruisers? [/Condescending Wonka] So you decided to compare a Gallente cruiser with Minmatar T3, and exaggerate the training time by a comfortable 3-4 days? Understandable if you want to push your agenda, but still looks blatantly stupid. Proteus: 1004dps, 112K EHP, 400mil Thorax: 40mil So real cost difference is only 10x, 3-4 days of training and you get twice as much dps and about six times more EHP. And HACs are barely better than T1, but take longer to train than T3. This increase in performance is completely out of whack when compared with performance increases between other ship classes.
this is one of the reasons hac's need to sit in the middle of cruisers and t3's.
cruisers > faction cruisers > hacs > t3's is the way it should be but currently the distinction between them is so small in some cases might as well not bother
OMG when can i get a pic here
|
|
|
| |
|