EVE Search - Boost minmatar

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Boost minmatar

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 26	Posted - 2011.11.10 11:17:00 - [1] - Quote Minmatar lack disadvantages , this is the only thing they dont have and other races have. Lets give them something. What would you change for them? I would make them the least good in electronics as they should be: Lower scan res by 15-20% Lower sensor strength by 15% Lower max targeting range by 10% Increase cap recharge time by 10% These wouldnt affect their intended play style, just would give them some disadvantages.
Byteflux Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous 11	Posted - 2011.11.10 11:28:00 - [2] - Quote I see what you did there.
Shivus Tao Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild 27	Posted - 2011.11.10 12:32:00 - [3] - Quote Don't minmatar already have the worst capacitors?
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 26	Posted - 2011.11.10 12:45:00 - [4] - Quote Shivus Tao wrote: Don't minmatar already have the worst capacitors? Capacitor capacity yeah kinda ,but caldari usually has the same amount (non rail ships), except like onyx vs broadsword ,where matar has more , and maybe some others. Even then the difference between matar and gall is neglectable , and most of the time compensated but faster cap recharge for minmatar, which is rly good for quicker jumps for capitals. So in short: -they+caldari have the lowest cap capacity -difference is very small between highest and lowest, the no cap use usually gives more than the less cap recharge -smaller cap usually compensated by faster cap recharge for many ships especially capitals
Grimpak Midnight Elites Echelon Rising 133	Posted - 2011.11.10 12:50:00 - [5] - Quote I wouldn't touch on the scan rez tbh. but the rest is interesting. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img] [quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Voith Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2011.11.10 14:18:00 - [6] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: Minmatar lack disadvantages , this is the only thing they dont have and other races have. Lets give them something. What would you change for them? I would make them the least good in electronics as they should be: Lower scan res by 15-20% Lower sensor strength by 15% Lower max targeting range by 10% Increase cap recharge time by 10% These wouldnt affect their intended play style, just would give them some disadvantages. Another chump fooled into thinking "Winmatar" isn't intentional. PvE = Caldari PvP = Minmatar LOL GIMICK = Gallente/Amarr Sorry you wasted SP training useless races. Cut your losses and stop.
Vincent Gaines Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi 50	Posted - 2011.11.10 15:01:00 - [7] - Quote Voith wrote: Another chump fooled into thinking "Winmatar" isn't intentional. PvE = Caldari PvP = Minmatar LOL GIMICK = Gallente/Amarr Sorry you wasted SP training useless races. Cut your losses and stop. Troll but still think this is a quality post. 2005-2006 it was Gallente, Min was ok Caldari just got nerfed and Amarr was a joke 2007-2008 Gallente still king, Caldari became PvE race with the CNR, min was a joke until..nano. Then we get an Amarr boost, Caldari still sucks, then Minmatar super boost after the nano nerf. I just find it ironic when people used to laugh at those who had trained min/amarr.
Goose99 Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 134	Posted - 2011.11.10 15:22:00 - [8] - Quote Lower speed by 15-20%
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 26	Posted - 2011.11.10 15:36:00 - [9] - Quote Goose99 wrote: Lower speed by 15-20% Nah that would take away their style , we need something which doesnt conflict with hit&run and skirmish Having high speed for matar is fine just pay something for it, especially as their weapons were boosted up to laser lvl.
Pookoko Sigma Sagittarii Inc. 2	Posted - 2011.11.10 22:59:00 - [10] - Quote We could always apply gallente design philosophy to minmatR ships . Gallente has short rannge weapons but lack of speed to get in range, so why not give minmatar speed to kite but lack of range to hit at kiting range? ;)
Goose99 Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 142	Posted - 2011.11.11 00:59:00 - [11] - Quote Pookoko wrote: We could always apply gallente design philosophy to minmatR ships . Gallente has short rannge weapons but lack of speed to get in range, so why not give minmatar speed to kite but lack of range to hit at kiting range? ;) But then Winmatar will no longer pwn
Herr Wilkus Aggressive Salvage Services LLC Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service 41	Posted - 2011.11.11 01:34:00 - [12] - Quote Higher SP requirements. Lowest DPS for ranged. Has to fight in falloff. DAMN. PWND this thread.
Aglais Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 3	Posted - 2011.11.11 02:27:00 - [13] - Quote Idea. Nerf the **** out of projectiles. Don't change anything with Minmatar ships, there's nothing wrong with the hulls themselves AFAIK. It's projectiles that seem to be the offender. Keep the high rate of fire for autocannons, but tone down their damage per shot by a great deal. So instead of having a 473 DPS nano gank rupture (with drones) you have a 380 DPS one (happens to be the turret and launcher DPS I get out of a nano rupture with two gyro IIs and some HMLs with T2 damage missiles without drones). I don't think 380 is a terrible number, and it rather fits if you have a glass cannon skirmisher sort of cruiser setup. "Winmatar" needs to be a thing of the past. I'd much prefer "Any faction's combat ships are valid ones, just be sure to properly evaluate their role before you go off". No, before you make any remarks, "Winning" and "losing" are not roles. They are outcomes.
Zeomebuch Nova Metalworks 3	Posted - 2011.11.11 03:11:00 - [14] - Quote In my opinion, barrage should get a damage/range boost too. Moreover it is really necessary to improve the machariel by lowering its mass down to the equivalent of a destroyer class ship, otherwise small roam pvp will die. Finally i want to suggest sightly boosting the dramiel's base speed @ 100km + while also increasing its drone bay/bwidth, since it would be l33t and awesome, just like captain super-awesome, to deploy some surprise fighter bombers and strategically kill battleships and above. (killing BC has got boring). CCP, please read this.
Shivus Tao Broski Enterprises Elite Space Guild 32	Posted - 2011.11.11 04:00:00 - [15] - Quote You know, as much as fighting in falloff is supposed to be hard or a drawback, it's pretty damn easy. Much easier than getting into range with gallente.
FloppieTheBanjoClown Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 284	Posted - 2011.11.11 04:14:00 - [16] - Quote Shivus Tao wrote: Don't minmatar already have the worst capacitors? As their guns don't need cap (compare that to lasers and hybrids) that makes sense.
Mina Sebiestar Mactabilis Simplex Cursus 17	Posted - 2011.11.11 05:57:00 - [17] - Quote Another whine thread go to abyss of fail......weeeeeeeeeee...........
ElCholo BURN EDEN Northern Coalition. 2	Posted - 2011.11.11 06:08:00 - [18] - Quote Herr Wilkus wrote: Higher SP requirements. Lowest DPS for ranged. Has to fight in falloff. DAMN. PWND this thread. QFT
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts 97	Posted - 2011.11.11 09:35:00 - [19] - Quote Herr Wilkus wrote: Higher SP requirements. Lowest DPS for ranged. Has to fight in falloff. DAMN. PWND this thread. Complete myth. Caldari has the highest SP requirements.
Mfume Apocal Origin. Black Legion. 87	Posted - 2011.11.11 09:48:00 - [20] - Quote I don't know why the SP argument even comes up, it's not as if half you ******* aren't running around with 60M+
Lili Lu 22	Posted - 2011.11.11 17:05:00 - [21] - Quote Oh Naomi. It must be miserable being such a bitter Caldari chauvanist forum alt for so long. Not that projectiles aren't arguably the best weapon system atm. But I am more amazed at the serious responses you elicited in this thread. Responses that would have been more constructive in other threads with a better constructed op and reasoned argument. May you find some happiness with your chosen Caldari ships and weapons at some time. They really aren't as bad as you think. At some point maybe you will train other races and weapons and have a more wholistic view of the game's racial variations, instead of your perpetual grass is always greener presumption.
Kira Deschain Minmatar Death Squad Broken Chains Alliance 3	Posted - 2011.11.11 21:39:00 - [22] - Quote Minmatar is perfect IMO, no changes needed.
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 32	Posted - 2011.11.12 10:47:00 - [23] - Quote Okay what about , increasing matar signature? I see no reason why they need to be so small.
Goose99 Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 151	Posted - 2011.11.12 16:14:00 - [24] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: Okay what about , increasing matar signature? I see no reason why they need to be so small. Also decrease winmatar speed, given their AC having the longest range, I see no reason why they need to be also faster than everyone else.
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 184	Posted - 2011.11.12 16:19:00 - [25] - Quote Goose99 wrote: Naomi Knight wrote: Okay what about , increasing matar signature? I see no reason why they need to be so small. Also decrease winmatar speed, given their AC having the longest range, I see no reason why they need to be also faster than everyone else. Faster, better range dmg application, better dmg type selection and don't forget the so underpowered range bonus webs.
Zarnak Wulf Amok. Goonswarm Federation 85	Posted - 2011.11.12 17:49:00 - [26] - Quote Putting weapon balance to the side for a bit, Minmatar's real Achilles' heel is supposed to be ewar. I would suggest giving tracking disruptors, sensor dampeners, and target painters their own sensor strength. If the targeted ship has a smaller sensor strength then the module pointed at it, that e-war weapon gets a bonus proportional to the difference. If the targeted ship has a larger sensor strength, the module gets a penalty.
Mfume Apocal Origin. Black Legion. 88	Posted - 2011.11.13 06:33:00 - [27] - Quote Goose99 wrote: Naomi Knight wrote: Okay what about , increasing matar signature? I see no reason why they need to be so small. Also decrease winmatar speed, given their AC having the longest range, I see no reason why they need to be also faster than everyone else. How do ACs have the longest range again?
Duchess Starbuckington Starbuckington Manor 13	Posted - 2011.11.13 13:14:00 - [28] - Quote I'm onboard with Gypsio's suggestion of nerfing autocannon tracking and damage. If they're going to be that good at a distance they should be worse up close. I mean really, what exactly is the drawback to using autocannons these days? They track well, use no cap, have low fitting, selectable damage type and do solid DPS. Blasters and lasers both have negative points that need to be considered, so where is the disadvantage to using ACs?
Naomi Knight Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 37	Posted - 2011.11.13 13:31:00 - [29] - Quote Duchess Starbuckington wrote: I'm onboard with Gypsio's suggestion of nerfing autocannon tracking and damage. If they're going to be that good at a distance they should be worse up close. I mean really, what exactly is the drawback to using autocannons these days? They track well, use no cap, have low fitting, selectable damage type and do solid DPS. Blasters and lasers both have negative points that need to be considered, so where is the disadvantage to using ACs? ac disadvantage: only matar ships get bonuses for them ....
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 189	Posted - 2011.11.13 14:34:00 - [30] - Quote Naomi Knight wrote: Duchess Starbuckington wrote: I'm onboard with Gypsio's suggestion of nerfing autocannon tracking and damage. If they're going to be that good at a distance they should be worse up close. I mean really, what exactly is the drawback to using autocannons these days? They track well, use no cap, have low fitting, selectable damage type and do solid DPS. Blasters and lasers both have negative points that need to be considered, so where is the disadvantage to using ACs? ac disadvantage: only matar ships get bonuses for them .... Also: I have to OH my mwd to reduce transversal and kill ceptors with my 425mm T2 auto canons. I need some buffs CCP, don't you see my ships are nerfed? -c'mon !!

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.