| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Songbird
38
   |
Posted - 2011.11.20 13:13:00 -
[61] - Quote
BTW has anyone noticed that the tier 3s have 80-100 less signature than proper BC's - hell with signature under 200 they are more like cruisers with BS guns not BC's. |
Johlie
Seekers of a Silent Paradise
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 21:23:00 -
[62] - Quote
No tank and big guns? Sure sounds like a battle cruiser to me. |
Zendon Taredi
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 12:56:00 -
[63] - Quote
yup. that's the idea. trade tank for speed, they are seriously quick ships afaik. |
Onictus
Legendary Knights
Vorpal's Edge
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 13:02:00 -
[64] - Quote
Songbird wrote:BTW has anyone noticed that the tier 3s have 80-100 less signature than proper BC's - hell with signature under 200 they are more like cruisers with BS guns not BC's.
That is why I call a Tornado what would happen if a Tempest ****** a Fleet Stabber |
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 18:21:00 -
[65] - Quote
I think the OP just hit a completely new level of stupid. Just saying. |
Nalha Saldana
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 18:46:00 -
[66] - Quote
Worthless in pve? I cleared a Guristas sanctum with np on sisi :> |
Ris Dnalor
Fleet of Doom
Ushra'Khan
24
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:37:00 -
[67] - Quote
Lucien Visteen wrote:Two words.
Glass Cannon
they're hardly glass cannons. I mean they can be fit that way sure, but so can any other ship. They can have a meaningful buffer tank and still dish out lots of damage. Except for the Naga which is horribly broken, of course 
|
Fedimart
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 19:37:00 -
[68] - Quote
Sebastian N Cain wrote:By the way, did anyone of you notice that the new T3 Battlecruisers have a quite small tank? And what subsystems will they get? They are T3, after all...
I'm guessing this is an attempt at humor? |
Sai Hai
Shin-Ra Ltd
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 20:35:00 -
[69] - Quote
They are useless this is for sure.
Also everyone says: this is a pvp ship and sutff. So what's the point of making a pvp ship while 70% of EvE population are carebears and other non-pvp people.
CCP should make those ships to be useful in pve otherwise carebears will cry.
If carebears leave this game it will die without them. |
Cambarus
Clearly Compensating
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.24 23:37:00 -
[70] - Quote
Sai Hai wrote:They are useless this is for sure.
Also everyone says: this is a pvp ship and sutff. So what's the point of making a pvp ship while 70% of EvE population are carebears and other non-pvp people.
CCP should make those ships to be useful in pve otherwise carebears will cry.
If carebears leave this game it will die without them.
New and interesting roles pretty much never mesh well with pve. PVE is too static, too predictable. People will gravitate towards 1 or 2 ships per race, and if CCP introduces a new ship, it will either be worse than what's out there, and go unused, or be better, obsoleting another ship in the process. In PVP there are so many variables thrown around that new ships can have new and interesting uses, without removing the usefulness of other ships in the process. |
Sai Hai
Shin-Ra Ltd
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 07:30:00 -
[71] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Sai Hai wrote:They are useless this is for sure.
Also everyone says: this is a pvp ship and sutff. So what's the point of making a pvp ship while 70% of EvE population are carebears and other non-pvp people.
CCP should make those ships to be useful in pve otherwise carebears will cry.
If carebears leave this game it will die without them. New and interesting roles pretty much never mesh well with pve. PVE is too static, too predictable. People will gravitate towards 1 or 2 ships per race, and if CCP introduces a new ship, it will either be worse than what's out there, and go unused, or be better, obsoleting another ship in the process. In PVP there are so many variables thrown around that new ships can have new and interesting uses, without removing the usefulness of other ships in the process.
While I agree with you about PvP part and some others, those shops were designed (visual part) by players.
I mean those who designed them will be glad to see more of those ships around.
Making them PvP only will make you see them a lot less.
If I were a designer of one of those ships I'd be a sad panada if CCP made my ship PvP only.
edit: adding drones (to those 3) will make them more PvE friendly while in PvP it won't hurt that much. |
Onictus
Legendary Knights
Vorpal's Edge
38
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 08:01:00 -
[72] - Quote
I bet the swarm of T3s will blot out the sun in low sec.
They aren't going to be great for slug fests, but they are going to be fantastic for run and gun style low-sec battles. |
Azver Deroven
Pitch Black.
Shadow Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 09:13:00 -
[73] - Quote
Yes, Im very well aware. Isnt it wonderful news?
Imagine, finally a proper BC instead of german-doctrine bollocks...
And yeah, sexy to the boot. I reckon these could work well in pve presuming you want to **** about with your mate, have him overtank and you overgank?
Dunno. I know I'll be trying some gankfits just for the luls. And after that I can orbit jita 4-4 in talon just to look sexy.
DISCLAIMER:My views do not represent those of my alliance, my corporation or myself. Yes, I can even confuse myself from time to time. |
Headerman
Quovis
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
345
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 11:04:00 -
[74] - Quote
Tornado's doing > 10km/s? Oh yeah!
And, OP is dumb.
The Apostle : I want a kangeroo
Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians
Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US?
Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1650
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 12:48:00 -
[75] - Quote
Sai Hai wrote:edit: adding drones (to those 3) will make them more PvE friendly while in PvP it won't hurt that much. It will hurt a lot because that would negate the design of them: to go up against much larger targets by delivering similar damage to what they do while easily evading their weapons, but at the cost of being much more vulnerable, especially to smaller ships.
The tier-3s are probably some of the best-developed ships in terms of having a role we've seen in EVE in a very long time, at least conceptually, and more or less by default, that completely excludes from being PvE ships because such a ship can't really have a specific role (or at least none that isn't already covered by fortyeleven different ships).
GÇöGÇöGÇö
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 12:52:00 -
[76] - Quote
Well lets take a look at them.
1.) Winmatar is OP
2.) Amarr is well balanced
3.) Gallente and Caldari are junk.
Yep working as intended for years now.  |
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 13:06:00 -
[77] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:The problem the new BCs is that they're really fragile and cost as much as a BS. I almost certainly won't fly them unless I need the range from large guns for some reason (meaning engaging from 120km+).
-Liang
Liang if your engaging from 120km+ would you not be better in BS's just incase they have long range sniping BS's.
At that range your smaller sig and faster speed dont mean much for tank. So there very likely to rip a teir 3 BC apart.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 13:14:00 -
[78] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Sai Hai wrote:edit: adding drones (to those 3) will make them more PvE friendly while in PvP it won't hurt that much. It will hurt a lot because that would negate the design of them: to go up against much larger targets by delivering similar damage to what they do while easily evading their weapons, but at the cost of being much more vulnerable, especially to smaller ships. The tier-3s are probably some of the best-developed ships in terms of having a role we've seen in EVE in a very long time, at least conceptually, and more or less by default, that completely excludes from being PvE ships because such a ship can't really have a specific role (or at least none that isn't already covered by fortyeleven different ships).
I dont know I see the Talos as probly being a fairly good Baster/Mission ships against Kin/Therm missions now that it has it's 25m3 drone bay back.
And secondly I can easly see a web and manuly piloting your ship in missions with ether the Nage or Winmatar and being able to take out the frigs. |
Wuxi Wuxilla
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 14:39:00 -
[79] - Quote
Quote:
instead of german-doctrine bollocks...
Wait, what? |
Brego Tralowski
The Scope
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:10:00 -
[80] - Quote
Can you imagine hundreds of these ships shooting at each other in huge fleet fights! Great fun. |
Sai Hai
Shin-Ra Ltd
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:31:00 -
[81] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Tippia wrote:Sai Hai wrote:edit: adding drones (to those 3) will make them more PvE friendly while in PvP it won't hurt that much. It will hurt a lot because that would negate the design of them: to go up against much larger targets by delivering similar damage to what they do while easily evading their weapons, but at the cost of being much more vulnerable, especially to smaller ships. The tier-3s are probably some of the best-developed ships in terms of having a role we've seen in EVE in a very long time, at least conceptually, and more or less by default, that completely excludes from being PvE ships because such a ship can't really have a specific role (or at least none that isn't already covered by fortyeleven different ships). I dont know I see the Talos as probly being a fairly good Baster/Mission ships against Kin/Therm missions now that it has it's 25m3 drone bay back. And secondly I can easly see a web and manuly piloting your ship in missions with ether the Nage or Winmatar and being able to take out the frigs.
This.
Talos is the ship you can use for missions easily.
Others won't be OP if they had drones.
P.S. right now the role of those ships is to have a high manufacturing price and very small use. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
1652
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:19:00 -
[82] - Quote
Sai Hai wrote:Others won't be OP if they had drones. Not OP, just broken and poorly designed.
GÇöGÇöGÇö
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
GÇö Karath Piki-á |
Cambarus
Clearly Compensating
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:29:00 -
[83] - Quote
Rip Minner wrote:Well lets take a look at them. 1.) Winmatar is OP 2.) Amarr is well balanced 3.) Gallente and Caldari are junk. Yep working as intended for years now.
Are you insane?
Talos does terrible things at 100km, and the naga, 400dps out to the hardlock? If anything it's the amarr tier3 that's the runt of the litter, followed by the talos, and even then, neither of those ships are by any means bad. The tornado has more volley, but less DPS, less range, and less tracking. It does pull ahead in its ability to tank, but having messed around on sisi with both (and having perfect skills for both) I can say that the naga is just as good, the differences being more situational than anything else. |
Azver Deroven
Pitch Black.
Shadow Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:57:00 -
[84] - Quote
Wuxi Wuxilla wrote:Quote:
instead of german-doctrine bollocks...
Wait, what?
Basicly german BC's went for heavy armour with smaller guns as restricted by treaties, and became pocket battleships, just outgunned (See Prophecy ), and after they went for larger designs again, speed 'n armour but ligher armament (see Scharnhorst and Gneisenau). Whereas Fisher's concept was agile, largest guns that can stick to it with lack of armour, as its expected to outgun anything that can outrun it, and outrun anything that can outgun it.
Somewhat offtopic but I guess I better define since I made the claim.
DISCLAIMER:My views do not represent those of my alliance, my corporation or myself. Yes, I can even confuse myself from time to time. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |