Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 23:42:00 -
[31] - Quote
Got a destroyer infestation? Bring cruisers. |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
91
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 00:24:00 -
[32] - Quote
Dro Nee wrote:Tsubutai wrote:Since there doesn't seem to be a thread on this, I'll start one. IMO, the changes currently on SiSi are massively over the top; the new destroyers are so good as to render almost all frigates pointless. This is largely because of the removal of the ROF penalty As it stands on TQ, a thrasher is a credible threat to almost any frigate, t1 or t2; the problem is that the others fall some way short. However, this isn't really for want of (potential) DPS; it's much more to do with a lack of fitting room and, in the case of the catalyst and coercer, slot layout. As it stands, the changes don't address the core issue with the coercer (ships with one mid: still stupid and pointless after all these years) and go way overboard with the other three. The aim should have been to leave the thrasher more or less unchanged and bring the other three up to its level rather than boosting them all some way above it. My fear is that if the SiSi changes go live on TQ, they're going to kill off a lot of the variety in frigate pvp without really having any beneficial effects on diversity in larger fleets.
TL;DR: keep the increased fitting room and sig radius reduction, restore the ROF penalty, give the coercer a second mid. After playing around I have to agree that SISI destroyers are likely to kill off variety in frig PVP. Keeping the fitting and sig bonus is good. I would halv the RoF penalty instead of getting rid of it completely though. Why not read the thread before posting?
|
Mirei Jun
Right to Rule THE UNTHINKABLES
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 01:58:00 -
[33] - Quote
Couldn't disagree with the OP more.
Been playing this game for years and Destroyers have never been able to fill their role as an anti-frig platform... Until now.
Before these changes it was possible to easily kill destroyers... In frigates class ships. They were no threat at all (the thrasher being the lone exception and even that was quite kill-able).
This is the right change for them. Its a long time coming, and its perfect.
Destros were high risk, mediocre damage. They are now high risk, high damage. This is what they should be.
GJ CCP |
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 02:04:00 -
[34] - Quote
Tsubutai wrote:Since there doesn't seem to be a thread on this, I'll start one. IMO, the changes currently on SiSi are massively over the top; the new destroyers are so good as to render almost all frigates pointless. This is largely because of the removal of the ROF penalty As it stands on TQ, a thrasher is a credible threat to almost any frigate, t1 or t2; the problem is that the others fall some way short. However, this isn't really for want of (potential) DPS; it's much more to do with a lack of fitting room and, in the case of the catalyst and coercer, slot layout. As it stands, the changes don't address the core issue with the coercer (ships with one mid: still stupid and pointless after all these years) and go way overboard with the other three. The aim should have been to leave the thrasher more or less unchanged and bring the other three up to its level rather than boosting them all some way above it. My fear is that if the SiSi changes go live on TQ, they're going to kill off a lot of the variety in frigate pvp without really having any beneficial effects on diversity in larger fleets.
TL;DR: keep the increased fitting room and sig radius reduction, restore the ROF penalty, give the coercer a second mid. Yes and no. The speed, ehp and sig changes are greatly appreciated, and the coercer really needs a mid, but the dps of all dessies is now simply too high. It's fantastic news for new players and especially budding FW pilots as they can gather a gang of scrubs and do pretty insane damage that fits their wallets. I'm betting that there will be active repping Catalyst and Cormorant fits that will be so OP, they will be nigh on invincible in small fights.
Time to explode my rifters, I think. |
Soon Shin
Abyssal Heavy Industries Narwhals Ate My Duck
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 09:44:00 -
[35] - Quote
The destroyers are excellent anti-frigate platforms that put out high dps, but gets torn apart by bigger ships and other destroyers. The life expectancy of destroyers will be much shorter than any other ship, but with the damage buff they will be worth using and losing. |
Cailais
Rekall Incorporated
112
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:26:00 -
[36] - Quote
Destroyers have spent the last couple of years as salvage boats.
That's right - mobile dumpsters.
Its high time they reprised their role. That they can pwn frigates? Well whatdya know - that's what they're for.
Keep the changes.
C.
|
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 16:40:00 -
[37] - Quote
The number of people in this thread who have obviously not flown destroyers is pretty funny. |
Mitsu Blutz
V0LTA VOLTA Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 23:09:00 -
[38] - Quote
remove the penalty rof on destroyer t1 and give a sig bonus to the entire destroyer hull class
my dictor need a lower sig QQ!!! |
Moonaura
Swedish Aerospace Inc The Kadeshi
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.09 23:55:00 -
[39] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote: One small change I'd make is a slight tweak to destroyer sig radius to make them more vulnerable to cruiser-scale weaponry. They should be deadly against frigates, but very vulnerable to larger ships.
Trust me. They are vulnerable against larger ships and easily die to medium gunnery. Any more vulnerable and they won't work at all in the mixed fleet situation you so eloquently described, and a concept I agree with you on.
|
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 16:05:00 -
[40] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:It would have been nice to have done something that closed the achievment gap between thrashers and all others.
Thrasher already was pretty balanced in the sub-cruiser catagory. Most of these changes exceed balance.
but whatever. There is no official feedback thread so either CCP doesnt care or we are getting trolled with the current changes.
I just have one question:
Which will we see first 1) "OMG NERF DESTROYERS!!!!111" whine threads 2) " OMG BUFF MY AF/SHINY BECAUSE THEY DIE TO DESTROYERS!!!!!111" whine threads 3)" I DEMAND ALL STATS ON MY DIC TO BE AS GOOD OR BETTER THAN T1!!!!111" whine threads
Looks like 3) is the winner!!!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=32492&find=unread |
|
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
203
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 16:59:00 -
[41] - Quote
Frigate = paper Destroyers = Scissors
The rules are pretty simple.
Repair Drones should be able to repair anyone ... really, they should. -áThink of them as the first targetable subsystem if you're worried about PvP and for missions if someone wants Rep drones over a flight of Hobs, who cares. -áThere is no reasonable objection here other than it's always been that way (so was RR until recently). |
He11sing
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 18:19:00 -
[42] - Quote
Coercer still only has one mid slot |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
203
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 18:49:00 -
[43] - Quote
He11sing wrote:Coercer still only has one mid slot
I think no ships should have ONLY 1 med slot, or all ships of that hull type should ONLY have 1, it just isn't fair. Repair Drones should be able to repair anyone ... really, they should. -áThink of them as the first targetable subsystem if you're worried about PvP and for missions if someone wants Rep drones over a flight of Hobs, who cares. -áThere is no reasonable objection here other than it's always been that way (so was RR until recently). |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 19:07:00 -
[44] - Quote
Apollo Gabriel wrote: it just isn't fair.
|
Xenial Jesse Taalo
Tactical Nyan Cat Attack Force OMNIMODUS ALLIANCE
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 19:15:00 -
[45] - Quote
Apollo Gabriel wrote:He11sing wrote:Coercer still only has one mid slot I think no ships should have ONLY 1 med slot, or all ships of that hull type should ONLY have 1, it just isn't fair.
Dunno, I think the mindset of "This is what you have to use" can simply be replaced with "This is what it does, and there are other things to use." I don't like the 1-mid Coercer, but I do like that at least I have a choice and that there is some strong variety to work one's head around in other jobs. The perfect example is that I can only pilot frigs and dessies, and I had to light a cyno. The guy jumping through had big fat armour reppers. So which ship did I go with?
Continuing with the point of switching mindsets, if an Amarr pilot doesn't like the Coercer he is only a Frigates III away from any other destroyer.
But I admit this does mean the battlefield is pretty much pre-determined.
So in the interests of variety I would like to see the other destroyers put on par with the Thrasher. And in the interest of variety I would like to see that done without adjusting the slots layout.
Regarding the topic, this buff sounds like good fun to me. Shakes things up. I don't see a problem with dessies becoming very difficult for a T2 frigate to kill. Then again, will it make Assault Frigs redundant? That's a worry I admit, replacing frigate roaming variety with, basically, Thrashers. I don't know enough to predict. However, AFs are due their 4th bonus anyway, no? Sounds like good timing.
Kind of feels like an interdictor nerf though.
|
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.11 20:27:00 -
[46] - Quote
The coercer, while not viable for solo, is the most minmaxable for raw dps/damage projection seeing as it has the most lowslots. moreover, pulses with their optimal-heavy nature benefit hugely from the ship's built-in role bonus and align perfectly with gang-oriented strategy for applying that dps. solo pvp is a pretty narrow/niche part of eve in which ship balance favors very few ships/strategies, as soon as you realize that and consider a ship's balance in a larger context you can often find a better use for it. the retribution, on the the other hand, needs to be wholly revamped. but that's another story... |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
85
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 02:05:00 -
[47] - Quote
Destroyer's ROF penalty removal was necessary to bring the other destroyers closer to the Thrasher's level. The penalty made the races all about alpha. Is it any surprise that the thrasher, as the only destroyer to also get a straight damage bonus, was the best? I've had alot of fun in the Catalyst over the past few days. And the cormorant is very unique in throwing out 300 salvoes 70km every three seconds.
If you want to truly balance destroyers change one of the Thrasher's turrets for a missile slot. That damage bonus along with 7 turrets still puts it ahead of the pack.
Oh - and has anyone tried destroyers with halo implants? |
Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
207
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 04:13:00 -
[48] - Quote
Someone please show me I am wrong, but iirc only the amarr have ships with 1 med slot. Repair Drones should be able to repair anyone ... really, they should. -áThink of them as the first targetable subsystem if you're worried about PvP and for missions if someone wants Rep drones over a flight of Hobs, who cares. -áThere is no reasonable objection here other than it's always been that way (so was RR until recently). |
Jiji Hamin
Federal Defence Union Gallente Federation
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 04:26:00 -
[49] - Quote
Apollo Gabriel wrote:Someone please show me I am wrong, but iirc only the amarr have ships with 1 med slot.
outside of rookie ships, i think that the only ships with 1 med-slot are the coercer and the retribution. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.12 10:45:00 -
[50] - Quote
As you already change destroyers , could you make them balanced between the class? like caldai should have that high signature compared to the matar , they are both shield tankers , and matar is already faster and lighter. I just dont get why matar ships are so small in signature , must be hard to lock on those huge rusty solarwings. |
|
Bomberlocks
CTRL-Q
47
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 02:44:00 -
[51] - Quote
Naomi Knight wrote:As you already change destroyers , could you make them balanced between the class? like caldai should have that high signature compared to the matar , they are both shield tankers , .... The Thrasher does very well as an armour tanker with scram and web in the mids. |
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 14:39:00 -
[52] - Quote
Confirming that the Thrasher can be set up dual prop with 200mm II and a small nuet. With a full halo set I can get a 41m sig radius bumming around low sec. |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest BricK sQuAD.
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 16:53:00 -
[53] - Quote
I think what the op is trying to get across is that thrashers will completely dominate small scale frigate pvp. There would be literally no point in flying any assault frigate anymore, even just for solo/pairs.
Yeah, I get that it sounds good in concept. Destroyers 'should' kill frigates. But it'll suck in the game when the whole game is thrashers/dramiels online. At least now you can kind of compete with fotm dramiels and get the satisfaction of a nice killmail/loot. Killing one of the new thrashers with a frigate (which would be next to impossible) would net you a rubbish pile 10 mil killmail that the other guy probably doesn't even care about.
A sig radius reduction and a rebalancing of the catalyst, coercer and cormorant would've been much better.
I can also see dumb scram double web fits sitting on deadspace plexes. |
Dark Drifter
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 20:08:00 -
[54] - Quote
Sniperdoc wrote:Alsyth wrote:With their decreased sig and massive dps/EHP buff, they can murder cruisers and some BCs now, that's a bit overpowered in my opinion. An AB thrasher can solo any med-sized gunship if they can orbit close and kill its drones. Yes. I found the same. You can actually use a destroyer to solo cruisers now as well. So, a BIT overpowered.
i have been using dessys to solo cruisers for the past 2 years. . .
DD |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 02:04:00 -
[55] - Quote
While the balancing change is welcome, this made the already superiour thrasher even better. THis character is gallnte, has **** projectiles skills and **** shield skills, and still finds t1 fitted thrasher more effective than any other t2 fitted destroyer. THis is wrong. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
19
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 02:38:00 -
[56] - Quote
Bienator II wrote: since frigs are currently a class without a real counter.
For realz dude?
|
Zarnak Wulf
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
86
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 05:07:00 -
[57] - Quote
Maxsim Goratiev wrote:While the balancing change is welcome, this made the already superiour thrasher even better. THis character is gallnte, has **** projectiles skills and **** shield skills, and still finds t1 fitted thrasher more effective than any other t2 fitted destroyer. THis is wrong.
The destroyers for the past few years were all based on alpha. A ROF penalty hurts the races OTHER then Minmatar more because their damage is more DPS - it depends on the time factor alot more. Removing the ROF penalty in a sense unleashed them. They hybrid buff helped out the catalyst and cormorant immensly. I no longer need multiple fitting mods on those two destroyers to do anything.
A rail Catalyst has an optimal father then 280mm and 30 DPS more. Very nice. A blaster Catalyst does such sick damage it might be my new toy when they roll these things out. (again)
A rail cormorant can hit ranges undreamed of. It does similar damage DPS wise to the Thrasher at over twice the range.
The thrasher is still the best due to the sheer shock of it's alpha - and it should probably lose a turret. But it's not correct to say it was assisted by the changes more then the other destroyers. The gap is alot smaller then it used to be.
|
NorthCrossroad
EVE University Ivy League
5
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 09:35:00 -
[58] - Quote
I like the buff - it creates a bigger role-window for destroyers. The problem is that having 1-mid on any small ship makes it useless 90% of the time for PvP. Coercer and Retribution are a good examples. Small ships favor flexibility of fits, and most part of flexibility comes from mid slots. So two+ midslots is a prerequisite for a ship that is used in PvP.
Some posters said that one can still fly them in fleets and use as pure DPS platform, but checking the stats of ships used/killed proves that it's not a valid point. Thrasher is great and is widely used - coercer will still be used only as a lightweight salvager or lvl 1-2 mission runner. Vengeance with it's 3 mids is a solid PvP boat solo and gang-wise - retribution is a very rare bird even for E-UNI fleets, that are famous for having kitchen-sink composition. You can do lvl 3 in it, but it's bad in everything else.
North |
Roffle Roffle
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.14 15:54:00 -
[59] - Quote
Still having difficulty finding a reason to fly any of them except the thrasher. Cormorant is massively improved, but the thrasher is still better most of the time. Others I'm not even going to bother with. I require 3-4 mids, not 1 or 2. I think they should be faster also. |
Mitsu Blutz
V0LTA VOLTA Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 04:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
I want it like that http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/2797/mitsusabre1.png |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |