| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
90
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 19:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
In light of CCP's recent changes, it would make sense to turn Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration into a dedicated missile subsystem.
Current effects: 7.5% bonus to medium projectile turret rate of fire per level 7.5% bonus to missile launcher rate of fire per level
Dedicated missile effects: (much like Tengu's Accelerated Ejection Bay) 5% bonus to Explosive Missile Damage per level 7.5% bonus to Heavy, Heavy Assault and Rapid Light missile launcher rate of fire per level 7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness
NOTE: Don't hate about the bonuses, support the idea of HAM Lokis and let CCP do their thing. Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Icewolf7
Depopulation Squad
0
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 19:50:00 -
[2] - Quote
Pobunjenik wrote:In light of CCP's recent changes, it would make sense to turn Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration into a dedicated missile subsystem.
Current effects: 7.5% bonus to medium projectile turret rate of fire per level 7.5% bonus to missile launcher rate of fire per level
Dedicated missile effects: (much like Tengu's Accelerated Ejection Bay) 5% bonus to Explosive Missile Damage per level 7.5% bonus to Heavy, Heavy Assault and Rapid Light missile launcher rate of fire per level 7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness
NOTE: Don't hate about the bonuses, support the idea of HAM Lokis and let CCP do their thing.
I tried fitting one in EFT the other day.... Guns, missiles and drones... yeah that's a little to spread out |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1098
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 20:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.
If you try to make it a dedicated missile subsystem, all you do is create a faster Tengu. Better to give it 2nd-Generation Minmatar Split WeaponsGäó and make it properly versatile - and properly viable - like it was intended to be.
If I had any idea which CSM cares even a little about the T3 rebalance (other than simply seeing them nerfed into the ground) I would say to them "Hey, if the topic of T3 balancing comes up, perhaps you can suggest this to them." |

Qweasdy
Absolute Massive Destruction Cult of War
19
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 20:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.
40 is not quite as weird as the 100mbit bandwidth that some ships have, I mean seriously, there is no possible configuration of 5 drones that can use all that. |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1098
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 21:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
Qweasdy wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth. 40 is not quite as weird as the 100mbit bandwidth that some ships have, I mean seriously, there is no possible configuration of 5 drones that can use all that.
No, but there is a possible combination of 4 drones that can use all of it. Why are people so completely obsessed with having to field five drones?
When the Stratios was nerfed, half the complaints weren't about the drop in DPS, they were about not having magical five drones and only having crappy trash four. I don't get it. |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
91
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 21:07:00 -
[6] - Quote
Keep in mind guys, this is a thread about a Loki HAM subsystem. Please don't wander off topic. Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Qweasdy
Absolute Massive Destruction Cult of War
19
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 21:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Qweasdy wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth. 40 is not quite as weird as the 100mbit bandwidth that some ships have, I mean seriously, there is no possible configuration of 5 drones that can use all that. No, but there is a possible combination of 4 drones that can use all of it. Why are people so completely obsessed with having to field five drones? When the Stratios was nerfed, half the complaints weren't about the drop in DPS, they were about not having magical five drones and only having crappy trash four. I don't get it.
because if you want to use all the bandwidth using 4 drones that becomes a sub optimal way of doing it, for example: I have a myrmidon fit open up in front of me right now, with 2 T2 hammerheads and 3 T2 ogres it does 502 dps, with 4 T2 ogres it does 497 dps. Therefore the 4 ogre setup is completely useless, it does slightly less dps and applies damage significantly worse than the 95 mbit setup.
This completely obsoletes the need for the extra 5mbit, aside from very niche uses for this ship it effectively has 95 mbit. |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1098
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 21:14:00 -
[8] - Quote
Pobunjenik wrote:Keep in mind guys, this is a thread about a Loki HAM subsystem. Please don't wander off topic.
It's really a thread about the Loki's split weapons subsystem and what should be done with it. Delving into in-depth discussions about drones and bandwidth and OCD is a little off-topic but the rest of it is fine. |

Qweasdy
Absolute Massive Destruction Cult of War
19
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 21:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
back on topic: T3 rebalance is still coming, these haven't been rebalanced with the new ship design policies in mind, this is something you'll probably have to just be patient on till summer expansion. |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
91
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 21:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Tech3s are due for a change, and are not meant to go above Tech2 in terms of raw performance (example: Warfare Subsystems, have a look why at the end of this blog). The other problem with Tech3s is that only a few of the sub-system configurations are actually decent, with the rest being quite terrible. Ideally all the sub-systems should have a proper role on the field, and Tech3 should be used because of their flexibility and adaptability, not because they surpass hulls of the same category at their specialized purpose. The chart linked in the first post is slightly out-of-date - the new one we've showed during Fanfest 2013 is here. In summary:
- Tech1 are the basic entry level, simple gameplay hulls that are used as reference points for all the other. That's why we started with them during the "tiericide" initiative.
- Navy / Faction are improvement over Tech1, with roles more or less varied depending on the ships themselves. Ex: Drake vs Drake Navy Issue, Megathron vs Vindicator and so on.
- Tech2 hulls provide specialized gameplay with advanced mechanics. Perfect example are Stealth Bombers, Interdictors, Heavy Interdictors, or Black Ops.
- Tech3 vessels were initially meant to be extremely flexible with adaptable roles due to sub-system configurations. In practice, they currently overlap in stats with other, more specialized ship classes, which create problems.
Tech3 ships are due to be rebalanced after Tech2 hulls so that our team may use the experience they've gained along the way to overhaul them properly. Exactly how and when this is going to be accomplished, we cannot say for now, even if we do have some ideas. Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1098
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 23:06:00 -
[11] - Quote
Precisely. Leave the bonuses at 7.5% per level but expand the number of hardpoints for each weapon type. The Scythe Fleet still has more bonus at 10% per level but the HEC subsystem becomes relevant and useful and actually desirable for something.
At all 5, you have a 37.5% RoF bonus vs the Scythe's 50% bonus to M Projectile RoF/ Missile damage. The lower bonus with more weapons should (I haven't done the math at all) equate into a rough balance with the Navy ship in terms of damage output. Having output be on par with Navy is roughly where CCP's latest balancing graph says T3s should be in terms of improvement over T1, so all is then well on that front. |

Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
591
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 23:13:00 -
[12] - Quote
Qweasdy wrote:back on topic: T3 rebalance is still coming, these haven't been rebalanced with the new ship design policies in mind, this is something you'll probably have to just be patient on till summer expansion. There's no Summer expansion, only 4 updates and another Winter expansion in late 2014. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
91
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 23:31:00 -
[13] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Qweasdy wrote:back on topic: T3 rebalance is still coming, these haven't been rebalanced with the new ship design policies in mind, this is something you'll probably have to just be patient on till summer expansion. There's no Summer expansion, only 4 updates and another Winter expansion in late 2014. Got links about that? Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1098
|
Posted - 2013.11.16 23:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
So I just now did some quick EFT wizardry. I loaded up a Scythe Fleet and a fresh Loki fitting, set both to All Skills at V, gave both ships three gyros because I felt like it and put four T2 425s on the Scythe. I configured the Loki with the Turret Concurrence Registry to get the hardpoints I needed, loaded it up with six T2 425s and flipped it over to the HEC.
Here are my results:
Scythe Fleet, 3x T2 Gyro, 4x T2 425mm w/T1 EMP: 429 DPS, 665 Volley Loki w/Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration Sub, 3x T2 Gyro, 6x T2 425mm w/T1 EMP: 515 DPS, 997 volley.
If you turn off an AC on the Loki so that only five are firing, you have 429 DPS with 831 volley.
It gets a little bit more dicey when you start to talk about missiles, as the Loki has a different bonus than the Scythe (RoF instead of damage) and does slightly more DPS with the same number of launchers and BCUs.
For the record, 3x BCUs and 4x T2 launchers w/T1 ammo will yield 223 Heavy/ 309 HAM DPS on the fleet scythe and 238 Heavy/ 330 HAM DPS on the Loki.
If we allow this subsystem to give the pilot 5 launchers or 5 turrets (4 from subsystem and 1 from Engineering sub) then we see ~413 HAM DPS. That would probably be kind of overpowered (I'm no expert on balance, but I try to recognize that limits do exist) so it should be scaled back - but how? Since we keep referencing the Scythe Fleet here we can convert the 7.5% per level missile RoF into a 7.5% missile damage bonus. This is also how the Typhoon Fleet handles its split weapon bonus, so clearly there's some merit to the idea.
People may object to this next bit, but I would file it under the heading of "higher skill training makes it okay": Leave the drone bandwidth as-is. 99 DPS on the Scythe Fleet vs 135 on the Loki (If you know what you're doing) isn't that big of a difference as to need a nerf. |

Motorbit
Viriette Industrial Combined Arms Militia Villore Accords
24
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 03:23:00 -
[15] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: they currently overlap in stats with other, more specialized ship classes, which create problems. whats so unclear on this that you still suggest to balance this subsystem by using a faction cruiser as pattern? |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1098
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 03:26:00 -
[16] - Quote
Motorbit wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: they currently overlap in stats with other, more specialized ship classes, which create problems. whats so unclear on this that you still suggest to balance this subsystem by using a faction cruiser as pattern?
CCP Ytterbium's comment was in reference to T3 ships as a whole overshadowing T2. T1 and Navy ships are not classified as "specialized". You may also want to quote the first part of what Ytterbium said, where he notes that many subsystem configurations are quite terrible.
Unless of course you're just trolling. |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
91
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 11:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
If they made every subsystem of every T3 cruiser realistically usable (for PVE/PVP), I'd be very happy. You can't have versatility if only 20% of your variables make sense. Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Asa Shahni
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
2
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 17:08:00 -
[18] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.
If you try to make it a dedicated missile subsystem, all you do is create a faster Tengu. Better to give it 2nd-Generation Minmatar Split WeaponsGäó and make it properly versatile - and properly viable - like it was intended to be.
If I had any idea which CSM cares even a little about the T3 rebalance (other than simply seeing them nerfed into the ground) I would say to them "Hey, if the topic of T3 balancing comes up, perhaps you can suggest this to them."
why give a sub that can be used with either guns or missiles since you already have 2 other for projectiles ....just give him the damn ham ss and be done with it :') |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1103
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 19:19:00 -
[19] - Quote
Asa Shahni wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.
If you try to make it a dedicated missile subsystem, all you do is create a faster Tengu. Better to give it 2nd-Generation Minmatar Split WeaponsGäó and make it properly versatile - and properly viable - like it was intended to be.
If I had any idea which CSM cares even a little about the T3 rebalance (other than simply seeing them nerfed into the ground) I would say to them "Hey, if the topic of T3 balancing comes up, perhaps you can suggest this to them." why give a sub that can be used with either guns or missiles since you already have 2 other for projectiles ....just give him the damn ham ss and be done with it :')
Because it is one of exactly two subsystems on the Loki that can be used with any drones, meaning you can use it to clear things that get under your artillery. Also because the Accelerated Ejection Bay is better at missiles than this proposed version would be, so what's the point? Nobody will use it for HAMs without a velocity bonus and giving it one would just make it an explosion-damage copy of the Tengu's subsystem.
Some of us actually like the Matari flair for ships that can be given neutral (ie non-weapon) rigs, fitted to fly missiles, then docked and immediately refitted to fly artillery (or autocannons). It's a great racial feature that shouldn't be lost just because there are people who want a Tengu without the stigma of saying they fly a Tengu. |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
91
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 19:54:00 -
[20] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:It's a great racial feature that shouldn't be lost just because there are people who want a Tengu without the stigma of saying they fly a Tengu. Or for people that want a Matari styled missile boat (look at Minmatar's missile ships' bonuses, they're different). Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1112
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 20:27:00 -
[21] - Quote
Pobunjenik wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:It's a great racial feature that shouldn't be lost just because there are people who want a Tengu without the stigma of saying they fly a Tengu. Or for people that want a Matari styled missile boat (look at Minmatar's missile ships' bonuses, they're different).
I actually did exactly that. For cruisers and up, Matari and Caldari missile ships both have RoF bonuses. From what I could tell, Caldari also tends to have velocity/flight time or explosion bonuses when two missile bonuses are present and Matari tends to have damage bonuses instead. That being said, your proposal is identical to the Tengu's subsystem except where it trades a projection bonus for a painter bonus. Explosive damage being bonused instead of Kinetic does not count as a change, IMO. |

Asa Shahni
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
3
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 05:06:00 -
[22] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Asa Shahni wrote:Alvatore DiMarco wrote:The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.
If you try to make it a dedicated missile subsystem, all you do is create a faster Tengu. Better to give it 2nd-Generation Minmatar Split WeaponsGäó and make it properly versatile - and properly viable - like it was intended to be.
If I had any idea which CSM cares even a little about the T3 rebalance (other than simply seeing them nerfed into the ground) I would say to them "Hey, if the topic of T3 balancing comes up, perhaps you can suggest this to them." why give a sub that can be used with either guns or missiles since you already have 2 other for projectiles ....just give him the damn ham ss and be done with it :') Because it is one of exactly two subsystems on the Loki that can be used with any drones, meaning you can use it to clear things that get under your artillery. Also because the Accelerated Ejection Bay is better at missiles than this proposed version would be, so what's the point? Nobody will use it for HAMs without a velocity bonus and giving it one would just make it an explosion-damage copy of the Tengu's subsystem. Some of us actually like the Matari flair for ships that can be given neutral (ie non-weapon) rigs, fitted to fly missiles, then docked and immediately refitted to fly artillery (or autocannons). It's a great racial feature that shouldn't be lost just because there are people who want a Tengu without the stigma of saying they fly a Tengu.
1 - the sub you use with arty is the one without drone bay (lol)
2 - legion's assault optimisation does not have any explosion velocity and lots of people use it (shadow cartel got a doctrine designed around them)
3 - who cares if the sub is identical to another from another hull since its already the case in other sub categorys
4 - just give the loki an assault optimisation (legion one) since missiles are the secondary weapon system of the race (cyclone / typhoon anyone ?)
'nough said G’+/ |

Stitch Kaneland
Soldiers of Farscape The East India Co.
2
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 06:22:00 -
[23] - Quote
new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.
I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome. |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
378
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 07:25:00 -
[24] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.
I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome. or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
92
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 13:23:00 -
[25] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.
I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome. or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved.
That is no solution whatsoever.
I'm all for making EACH AND EVERY subsystem viable in space. Right now, every T3 has a set of useful subs, a set of somewhat useful sets and a heap of useless ones. Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

Asa Shahni
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
3
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 14:33:00 -
[26] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.
I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome. or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved.
you have a funny way of solving problems :') |

Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
379
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 15:13:00 -
[27] - Quote
Asa Shahni wrote:Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.
I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome. or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved. you have a funny way of solving problems :') 5 turrets/launchers with 7.5% RoF bonus per level translate into 8 effective turrets or launchers which is rather balanced (and in line with other offensive subs) when compared to 12(10 in pvp/wh variant) effective launchers + projection bonus on Tengu with acceleration ejection bay. Drone bandwidth could be reduced to 25 tho. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks. |

Asa Shahni
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
3
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 15:22:00 -
[28] - Quote
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Asa Shahni wrote:Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.
I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome. or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved. you have a funny way of solving problems :') 5 turrets/launchers with 7.5% RoF bonus per level translate into 8 effective turrets or launchers which is rather balanced (and in line with other offensive subs) when compared to 12(10 in pvp/wh variant) effective launchers + projection bonus on Tengu with acceleration ejection bay. Drone bandwidth could be reduced to 25 tho.
we are not here to debate if other subs are balanced compared to this one but how could we balance this one to be on par with the others : loki need an assault optimisation or something similar |

Pobunjenik
Direwolf-Rayet skylian Verge
94
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 15:37:00 -
[29] - Quote
IMO, this will happen when CCP gets around to balance T3s. They're doing it gradually, so we just need time.
Minmatar has projectile and missile bonused ships, so a missile subsystem for the Loki is bound to happen. Neka mi se jave igra-ģi sa prostora Balkana koji nisu jebeni fa+ķisti. 1st Wormhole Alliance Tournament |

SOL Ranger
SOL.
121
|
Posted - 2013.11.18 16:01:00 -
[30] - Quote
I can't agree, removing split weapon systems from Minmatar is a very bad idea, making Cyclone/Claymore/Typhoon into pure' missile ships was also a very bad idea, we need more complex flavour in the ships and less homogenization into strict guns or missiles setups.
I suggest something in the lines of:
Ex A. Medium range version - Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration 7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire per level 10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff per level 7.5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire per level 10% bonus to Missile Launcher velocity per level
Ex B. Short range/application version - Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration 7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire per level 7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking per level 7.5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire per level 5% bonus to Missile Launcher explosion velocity per level
In any case the bonuses need to be appropriate to reflect the needs to become useful rather than just display theoretical maximum damage output and then fail in any kind of practical application.
Minmatar needs more viable split weapon ships, not 'pure' missile ships.
The Vargur requires launcher hardpoints, following tempest tradition.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |