| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
33
   |
Posted - 2013.10.08 16:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
Not to get too far off this heated debate of Virus strength and low vs. null sec utility ....
... but the dev blog stated 'full line of SoE ships' or something like that. Let's discuss an exploration BS please ... pretty please?!? Let's assume the Frigate is high-sec. Cruiser is low-sec. Then a BS could be null-sec?
Role Bonus: 50% bonus Energy Turret optimal range or tracking speed
Role Bonus: 40% increase Scan Prob Strength
Role Bonus: +10 Virus strength for Relic and Data Analyzers
Can fit Cover Ops Cloaking devices
Amarr Cruiser Bonus:
4% bonus to Armor Resists
Gallente Cruiser Bonus:
15% bonus to Sentry and Heavy Drone hitpoints and damage
Slot layout: 6H, 6M, 7L; 4 turrets, 0 launchers
Rigs: 3 with 400 calibration.
Fittings: 13500 PWG, 600 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 6800 / 9500 / 8200
Capacitor (amount) : 6400
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 110 / .13 / 105200000 / 9.09s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 700
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 68km / 275 / 7
Sensor strength: 30
Signature radius: 450
Cargo Capacity: 800
Solves the virus strength issue. 
Helps to provide a 'full fleet of SoE ships'. 
Emoticons were added to show how serious I am!  ... no seriously, we would like to see a BS.
Although, I'm not going to lie ... I'd love to see them also add a Battle Cruiser to the mix as well. But I am a fan of ships smaller than BS's. |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
34
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 13:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
Sounds like the impact of virus strength on exploration needs to be tweaked to allow for a more linear progression. If anything, this thread helps underline issues with exploration.
Zero for high-sec
+5 for low-sec
+10 for null-sec.
or update it to be:
+5 for high-sec
+10 for low sec
+15 for null-sec.
That assumes the only limited factor in success is virus strength.
I'd say CCP would also need to adjust sites by skill level too.
level III for high-sec.
level IV for low-sec.
T2 and level V for null-sec.
Allow for progression. Even with the 'ideal' skill set, there should be a chance for failure. SoE probes and modules should also help improve success. Nothing should be 100%.
Agreement or disagreement, this conversation has acted like a mini-Pandora's box. It has let some exploration issues out of the bag for open discussion ... even under the guise of SoE ships. IMO of course. |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 16:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Assuming the current T1 and T2 frigs are for non-combat. They can handle all non-combat sites: T1 = high/low. T2 = all.
Would it be fair to assume that the SoE are combat related and fall into specific roles?
Frigate = high sec. Some low sec with good skills.
Cruiser = low-sec and some null-sec with good skills.
BS = Null-sec and WH space?
I mention the BS because of the place holder people found in the data base. That would make it a 'full line' of exploration ships. How do you balance exploration for each of the target areas? I am thinking some behind the scenes updates to exploration would be needed to smooth out the roles for all these ships.
Very cool looking ships. I am now debating going into Amarr hulls to fly one of these. non-combat exploration has never interested me. Combat exploration? That is a different animal. |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 22:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
This back and forth is driving me nuts. It's a pain to sift through the muck to read insightful ideas.
I think we need to wait and see if there is a BS in the works. All indicators say .... YES. Place holder bunk model? check. Place holder stats? Check.
I still feel CCP is trying to provide a linear improvement for combat sites:
Frigate: hi-sec.
Cruiser: hi-sec and low-sec.
Battle Ship: All the above plus null and WH.
It would be AWESOME if they did BC for null and BS for WH.... just saying. I know that's not going to happen as zero pirate factions have dedicated BC's. But one could hope.
Perhaps a comment from a dev on the goal, vision for each ship? |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.10 19:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
A rough estimated dps with drones: 162 dps with around 649 volley. Hob II's.
Drone interfacing V
Gallente Specialization IV
Combat Drone V.
If you took the frigate and put in 3 x Drone Damage Amp's II's you would have plenty of pg/cpu for a buffer shield tank/rigs. Lots of flexibility
I'd say that with some good drone skills, you will have some decent dps.
You can do very similar dps (more) with a Tristan. Tristan would lack explore skills and utility slots (of course).
Tristan will sacrifice tank or dps to get close. It has slightly more pg (a ton less cpu) and of course ... much much cheaper to buy and die in.
I mention the Fat-Man as a point of reference for combat ability. |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.10 20:57:00 -
[6] - Quote
Two unbonused projectiles will give around 45 dps. Chances are, if you maximize drone dps, then you won't have the pg to put arties/rails/beams on the boat.
I imagine you'd get more use out of a cloak and energy vamp/neut. |
Deviant X
Sky Boxers
Northern Associates.
35
|
Posted - 2013.10.11 14:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
I think it has been discussed to death, but these are for exploration combat sites with some cross over into non-combat.
My take anyway..... |
| |
|