Solai
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
72
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 20:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
General Nusense wrote:Dvla wrote:The only thing these changes do for a 0.0 pilot is making flying boosters even more annoying than it already is. In serious business fleet all wing commanders will still be t3 boosters but now you have to scan for probes all the time. Yes it makes them vulnerable but it sure as hell is less vulnerable than flying a (relatively) paper thin wing booster on grid. Is that fun? No it ******* isn't. Yes you balanced some stuff and gave them shiny new stats but you clearly are not understanding the big picture here. You want to put fleet boosters on grid and have an effect? Then make them be able to do that, not be the best plex tank or a mission runner. You have absolutely the wrong problems in mind when you designed these ships.
Overall nerfs to effectiveness of links is great though so job well done on that at least. HEY MR. GOONIE WHY NOT POST THIS WITH YOUR MAIN TOONIE? Cuz people might judge the post based on the poster rather than the content of the post. ...Why do you want to know?
Also, Dvla is right on. I fly logi, and I notice I can keep the Amarr FC ships alive, but consistently cannot keep the others up. |
Solai
Jolly Codgers Get Off My Lawn
72
|
Posted - 2013.08.01 21:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:While on the subject, why not give us bigger HAC's rather than shoehorning that role into the differant role of being a "fleet command ship".
The people who want proper T2 fighting battlecruisers don't want to train up a half a year of leaderships skills that they will rarely use
The people who want a durable fleet boosting ship to command from don't want to have their ship bonuses wasted on guns that they will never shoot, or even fit.
If the name of the game for T2 is specialization, then make these ships specialized. The old idea of Field/Fleet command ships is actually very workable.
"Command Ships" should be extremely difficult to remove from the field, they should have absurd tanks, bonuses to warfare links, and very good electronics - Locking range, Scan resolution, and sensor strength. Hell, perhaps even add on Probing/target painting bonuses so they truly help the fleet. A true command ship would only have guns for KM whoring, and possibly smartbombs to remove drones.
"Bigger Hacs" should be another thing altogether, and arguably every "reworked" command ship (except for damnation) we have right now is a Bigger Hac rather than a "Command Ship". Giving these ships the tank to have the stay power they need to command would make them too difficult to remove when used in a DPS role. If the damage bonuses were nerfed to accommodate Command ship tanks, nobody would use them for pewing. Most importantly, do not make us train 6 million in Leadership to have to fly these things, there should be a semi-logical progression from HACs, perhaps an AWU V requirement and/or tech 2 medium weapons of that race. And if your fleet is not big enough to justify a proper command ship, it's acceptable to slap some links on a T2 BC and leave it at that.
This is excellent stuff. Command/boosting needs durability, or its no good. But the flipside is that a ship with that kind of durability shouldn't be able to throw out lots of damage, or else it's just *better,* which we know is bad. Maybe the answer is differentiating T2 fighty BC's away from command BCs. |