|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
50
   |
Posted - 2011.10.29 08:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ain't none of you motherfuckers ever making it back to the gate again. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
53
|
Posted - 2011.10.29 19:02:00 -
[2] - Quote
Veronica Kerrigan wrote:how is this any different from sitting a dual web rapier on a gate? Same web strength, but with more than twice as much range. As far as I know, those are not game breaking, so how is this again?
Rapiers cost bux and some degree of SP, BCs don't cost **** or require that much SP.
Edit: in addition to having your speed completely raped like Amarr said.'
Edit2: How is "motherfuckers" not word-filtered but a 4 letter word for boo-boo is?
Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP is just clueless at what they are doing. It was clearly not enough to see all those drakes and canes around, now we're getting a new breed of the same OP dirt-cheap crap everyone will jump onto.
Yeah, let's remove even those remains of diversity we still have. Let it be BC Online.
I think CCP is fully aware of what they are doing. They just don't care if it expands on Battlecruisers Online because BC Online means a lot of subscribers. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 07:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Josefine Etrange wrote:Desudes wrote:I like it. It allows cheaper gangs and thus, higher engagement rate.
I personally am sick of the chicken **** attitude people take because they are in an expensive ship. That simply is part of eve. If you want this gone, make risk more profitable.
While I'm largely neutral in this until the ships hit TQ and the metagame gets one or two months to shake out, I am somewhat apprehensive that these will overshadow field command ships as damage dealers/general purpose solopwnboats.
Fon Revedhort wrote:I don't think so. If anything, it causes boredom and results in sub losses at the long run.
Checked out the new account plex deals? They definitely aren't thinking "long run" here. At any rate, average EVE player only stays for seven months, which is a figure that holds true across most games in general (singleplayer, MP, MMO, etc.) so it makes sense to offer content catering to them as opposed to telling them "train for 18 months (at a minimum) to get an end-game PvP ship." |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.30 08:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
draconothese wrote:im thinking this ship may use the webs to get rails to track if they even use this bonus we are a few months off from them putting this patch out so anything could change
The webs aren't range bonused, so if you manage to web something, it's within blaster range already. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
65
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 01:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:
Why is it fair you can shoot from 65 or + km with your shortest range weapon system?
Why isn't fair the shortest range weapon system, to remind you end of fall off is about 25km scratching paint, to get something to hold targets and melt them?
Is their supposed niche or not?
You are complaining that blasters aren't pulse lasers. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 06:12:00 -
[6] - Quote
Astald Ohtar wrote:we should take off all ships & everyone should fly drakes !
This is a hilarious statement because if there is one thing these tier 3 BCs are going to counter, it's going to be the ubiquitous Drake and Hurricane fits that have been FOTM since just after Dominion. If they go live with stats as-is, CCP will have pulled off a magnificent troll on the entire community.
|
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 12:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:You can already fit double web on hulls with double hp Talos will have.
2x 60% webs have more impact on targets than 1x 87% web, why people don't do it?
Two questions:
1) Where did 87% come from? The closest thing I could think of is using an X5 web (with reduced strength) which doesn't make a whole lot of sense on a web strength-bonused hull.
2) Even if it was 87%, a single 87% web is more effective than 2x 60% webs. But realistically, people will put a 90% web on the Talos and in that case you need four 60% webs to (roughly) match it. And like Amarr laid out earlier, the Talos can simply fit two webs. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
66
|
Posted - 2011.10.31 12:42:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tanya Powers wrote:2 Answers
1-F.Y.A.
2-Why?
1. No idea what "FYA" means.
2. Because they want to make people move really slow? I dunno, I think it's the point of double webs in general, someone correct me if I'm wrong. |
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
68
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 00:42:00 -
[9] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:
Given how the new tier3s are going to be flown (or how they're supposed to at least) this kind of a really, REALLY big deal in terms of balance. You've got a ship class that's paper thin, that's supposed to use its speed and its range to tank the things it fights, and yet one of these ships (the talos) can't actually do anything past 20km. It damn well BETTER have an absurd bonus for what it can do close range, or else the damn thing will NEVER get used over it's much more survivable-by-virtue-of-range counterparts.
As for the whole issue of 90% webs in gatecamps, if you've got a bunch of people camping a gate, and you have no scout, and you jump into their gatecamp, you SHOULD die. The idea that damn near any small fast ship can slip by a group of any size with no risk at all is absurd.
Also, 90% webs on everything was a problem, especially after the nano nerf. 90% webs on one battlecruiser with the ehp of a t1 cruiser is not a problem.
I never complained about the 90% web bonus. I'm just pointing out that Tanya apparently wants blasters to be Pulse v2.0, in which case, why not just use pulse and leave blasters their niche?
|
Mfume Apocal
Origin.
Black Legion.
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 01:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
According to the latest batch of stats, goodbye 90% web, hello tracking bonus. Along with some other nerfs. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|