EVE Search - Nerf Talos

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Nerf Talos

» 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)
Chihiro Chugakusei Traveler's accomodation 14	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:50:00 - [1] - Quote I don't think anyone would disagree that it has an edge of the other Attack battlecruisers. It seems to have more, and with out paying any cost. 1. Most cargo capacity. 2. Has moderate drones. 3. STILL has 8 turrets. 4. Has tracking speed. There is no way anyone could possible think this was balanced with the other ABCs. I don't know how this made it out of development the way it is. If this ATB is going to have drones, then it should have fewer turrets. There has to be a tradeoff. I don't care how this is fixed, just fix it.
Chihiro Chugakusei Traveler's accomodation 14	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:51:00 - [2] - Quote Anyone who opposes the talos being nerfed, with out some serious counter point, is just angry because they like how broken it is.
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. The Storm Collective 202	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:52:00 - [3] - Quote You've left a lot of room for discussion. Talos has only moderate levels of hp and if you use neuts it's dead meat. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Drake Doe SVER True Blood General Tso's Alliance 455	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:54:00 - [4] - Quote lol "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! pops more corn" ---Evernub--
Johnny Aideron Order of Rouvenor 51	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:55:00 - [5] - Quote Why don't you post on your PvP main, so that we can see where the bad Talos touched you.
Anhenka Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 173	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:55:00 - [6] - Quote Buff Talos, only ABC without a 5% and a 10%(effective) bonus. (Counting the Nados 5% falloff as 10% cause 2x falloff range calc) Look I too can spout bullshit. Are you not getting tired of me shooting down all the terrible ideas you keep spewing out?
Kenrailae Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 242	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:56:00 - [7] - Quote Chihiro Chugakusei wrote: Anyone who opposes the talos being nerfed, with out some serious counter point, is just angry because they like how broken it is. Confirming you're mad Bro. Talos isn't really in need of a Nerf. The drone bay...... I can see both sides of it. I like my drones on Talos, but I can see why they are a bit out of line. I think a better answer would be add drones to the others myself. But... the Naga tanks far better than a Talos ever could, the Oracle as well(less DPS) but better range profiles. The Nado has a far higher alpha potential than the Talos. Talos is just capable of doing the most damage. This is a staple of gallente design. Really high damage, moderate tank, moderate mobility, drones, bit limited on range engagement profiles. In my opinion, ATB's would be better balanced with naga and Nado having 2 small drones each, the Oracle 20 bandwidth but 30 drone bay, and talos at the 25's it's currently at. The Law is a point of View
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 2945	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:59:00 - [8] - Quote Chihiro Chugakusei wrote: Anyone who opposes the talos being nerfed, with out some serious counter point, is just angry because they like how broken it is. It's so abhorrently ugly it needs something to get played to fly it... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Chihiro Chugakusei Traveler's accomodation 15	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:59:00 - [9] - Quote Kenrailae wrote: Chihiro Chugakusei wrote: Anyone who opposes the talos being nerfed, with out some serious counter point, is just angry because they like how broken it is. Confirming you're mad Bro. Talos isn't really in need of a Nerf. The drone bay...... I can see both sides of it. I like my drones on Talos, but I can see why they are a bit out of line. I think a better answer would be add drones to the others myself. But... the Naga tanks far better than a Talos ever could, the Oracle as well(less DPS) but better range profiles. The Nado has a far higher alpha potential than the Talos. Talos is just capable of doing the most damage. This is a staple of gallente design. Really high damage, moderate tank, moderate mobility, drones, bit limited on range engagement profiles. In my opinion, ATB's would be better balanced with naga and Nado having 2 small drones each, the Oracle 20 bandwidth but 30 drone bay, and talos at the 25's it's currently at. I agree.
Chihiro Chugakusei Traveler's accomodation 15	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:00:00 - [10] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Chihiro Chugakusei wrote: Anyone who opposes the talos being nerfed, with out some serious counter point, is just angry because they like how broken it is. It's so abhorrently ugly it needs something to get played to fly it... lol

Chihiro Chugakusei Traveler's accomodation 15	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:01:00 - [11] - Quote Anhenka wrote: Buff Talos, only ABC without a 5% and a 10%(effective) bonus. (Counting the Nados 5% falloff as 10% cause 2x falloff range calc) Look I too can spout bullshit. Are you not getting tired of me shooting down all the terrible ideas you keep spewing out? Edit: For those who don't know, this thread is a continuation of his thread whining about how ABC's can't hit frigs at close range, so give them a 5m3 drone bay plox. P.S: The other thread was a massacre. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=324562&find=unread It's easy to complain about other people's ideas. You're just a lousy person. Anyhow, I also don't agree that that makes the talos noticeably weaker. Re-balance. Nothing big, but do something.
TehCloud Mastercard. 218	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:02:00 - [12] - Quote The reason it has Drones is simple :Gallente: My Condor costs less than that module!
Anhenka Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 174	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:02:00 - [13] - Quote If the other ships get drone bays, the Talos get's the part of it's gun bonuses that were withheld back, right? Other ships get drones, Talos goes from 7.5% per level tracking up to 10% per level, bonuses in line with the other ABC's.
Chihiro Chugakusei Traveler's accomodation 15	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:03:00 - [14] - Quote I'm out. Posted because there should be a complaint somewhere.
Anhenka Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 174	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:04:00 - [15] - Quote And absolutely nothing of any value was lost.
Rovinia Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE 196	Posted - 2014.02.24 03:04:00 - [16] - Quote Well, compared to the other ABC's, the Talos doesn't have a range bonus in its stats (yes, Oracle doesn't has one either, but thats because it's simply not needed with Laz0rs). Compared to the other "snipers", the Talos has to go closer to it's target. In some situation that doesn't matter, in others it's a pretty dangerous thing. It's a little different, but why do you want to change it?
Secret Squirrell Allied Press Intergalactic 77	Posted - 2014.02.24 04:45:00 - [17] - Quote The meta is ever changing. That the Talos is the current king of the ABCs has a lot less to do with the overall strength of the Talos, and a lot more to do with the fact that non-drone snipers are currently out of fashion. I remember a year or two ago, when sniper Naga fleets ruled the field outside of stratops, and brawling Oracles were all the rage. Then everyone decided they liked nados more for the alpha. The key is that there isn't a balance issue between ABCs, but a question of ABC utility given the balance of everything else. Nerfing the Talos wont make everyone start using the other ABCs, they will just not use the talos in favor of some non-ABC ship.
Stephanie Rosefire One Man Solo Industry 12	Posted - 2014.02.24 05:49:00 - [18] - Quote Kenrailae wrote: Chihiro Chugakusei wrote: Anyone who opposes the talos being nerfed, with out some serious counter point, is just angry because they like how broken it is. Confirming you're mad Bro. Talos isn't really in need of a Nerf. The drone bay...... I can see both sides of it. I like my drones on Talos, but I can see why they are a bit out of line. I think a better answer would be add drones to the others myself. But... the Naga tanks far better than a Talos ever could, the Oracle as well(less DPS) but better range profiles. The Nado has a far higher alpha potential than the Talos. Talos is just capable of doing the most damage. This is a staple of gallente design. Really high damage, moderate tank, moderate mobility, drones, bit limited on range engagement profiles. In my opinion, ATB's would be better balanced with naga and Nado having 2 small drones each, the Oracle 20 bandwidth but 30 drone bay, and talos at the 25's it's currently at. ^ this. the tornado is a ganking MACHINE. talos vs tornado, tornado wins, everytime. speed and alpha vs drones and high damage Oracle has the highest optimal range, making it a kiting machine. highest optimal/kite-ability vs drones and high damage. naga has monster tank (compared to the other ABC's) Tank vs high damage and drones. the drone bay was never intended for light or medium combat drones. it was ALWAYS intended for WEBBING drones. seeing that the talos has garbage range and high damage, web drones are your best friend. everything else can pick the talos apart at range. so removing the drone bay on a talos, or adding drone bays to the other ones would MURDER the talos. no one would ever use it. i personally fly an oracle, and im telling you, that drone bay is the talos' best friend.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 297	Posted - 2014.02.24 05:54:00 - [19] - Quote Another solution is just get rid of attack battlecruisers as a silly class.
Anhenka Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 176	Posted - 2014.02.24 05:55:00 - [20] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Another solution is just get rid of attack battlecruisers as a silly class. Like Camelot?

Lephia DeGrande The Scope Gallente Federation 252	Posted - 2014.02.24 07:44:00 - [21] - Quote My Problem with ABCs is that they have more fitable Highslots then BS and thats kinda stupid, after rebalancing most BS do only have 6-7 Turret/Bay Slots but ABCs which are the smaller Shipclass all do have 8? They do have the same or even more damage plus more possibilitys to fit highslots, then a BS. Sure they lack tank, but why not decrease their highslots to 4-6 and increase their Bonus so every highslot gains more value.
Anhenka Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 176	Posted - 2014.02.24 07:50:00 - [22] - Quote Lephia DeGrande wrote: My Problem with ABCs is that they have more fitable Highslots then BS and thats kinda stupid, after rebalancing most BS do only have 6-7 Turret/Bay Slots but ABCs which are the smaller Shipclass all do have 8? They do have the same or even more damage plus more possibilitys to fit highslots, then a BS. Sure they lack tank, but why not decrease their highslots to 4-6 and increase their Bonus so every highslot gains more value. A higher number of turrets with less bonuses is worse than a lower number of turrets with bonuses bringing them up to an equal level. Ex. four 100% damage bonused guns are better than eight 0% bonused guns from an ammo consumption, cost, and heat damage standpoint. That's assuming ofc that the now empty slots are removed. If they are not they can be filled with utility high mods or inactive modules to serve as heatsinks for overheating guns, resulting in a net buff. Unless you are proposing reducing the number of effective turrets to a level lower than current, which would be a nerf that would be applied to all ABC's, and honestly not one I personally feel is deserved.
Lephia DeGrande The Scope Gallente Federation 252	Posted - 2014.02.24 07:57:00 - [23] - Quote I Never meant any kind of nerf did i? Just to be clear i want to buff BS! I dont care ABCs, sry for the missunderstanding.
Anariasis Boris Johnson's Love Children Awakened. 42	Posted - 2014.02.24 12:38:00 - [24] - Quote Think the t3 BCs are pretty much well balanced. Talos - Best solo with tracking, huge DPS and drones Oracle - 700DPS from 70km, hell yeah :D Tornado - Blapping stuff from 100km :) Naga - Don't have much experience flying it, but there are quite some Naga fleets in 0.0, so I guess it's doing fine
O2 jayjay Tit-EE Sprinkles Stratagem. 9	Posted - 2014.02.24 12:49:00 - [25] - Quote I agree. The talos needs to be balanced. Those drones are way too powerful. Get rid of the drone bay and 2% of its base hit points in all areas. Add 8 more turrets and 50% speed. Make it immune to neuts and give it 45% tracking and 50% optimal along with tracking per gallente battle cruiser level. That should fix it and put it where it needs to be IMO. Those drones are too OP and it's throwing the game off. For gods sake make a tec 2 variant or a pirate variant that can fit XL turrets with 40 LG turrets with the cap of 9 moros's.
Hairpins Blueprint Paragraph 22 Aureus Alae 32	Posted - 2014.02.24 13:03:00 - [26] - Quote meh, talos can't fit 8x 425 mm Rail guns, you need to get closer to shoot witch blasters etc talos is not op ...
Dinsdale Pirannha Pirannha Corp 2298	Posted - 2014.02.24 14:28:00 - [27] - Quote Hasikan Miallok wrote: Another solution is just get rid of attack battlecruisers as a silly class. Not going to comment about the specs of the ships themselves, but the ABC's should be treated as the true BC. The 2 other "BC's" should be reclassed as the Heavy Cruisers they are, with a new SP branch on the tree, something less demanding than the true BC class. Then add a new ship to the BattleCruiser line for each race. You will end up with 2 Heavy Cruisers for each race, and 2 BC's for each race, with slightly separate skill branches for each. New Battlecruiser ship focus: For the Amarr: Drone / Missile combo, (Sacrilege as a precedent) For the Gallente: Drone heavy version (Too bad sentries are useless now) For the Caladri: Torp/Cruise focus For the Minnies: Torp/Cruise focus Maybe I should post this in a separate thread. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 650	Posted - 2014.02.24 14:44:00 - [28] - Quote i think making them T2 would help balance cost-effectiveness .. also they use oversized guns this is clearly a specialisation just like logis using oversized reps.. Then you could change 4 combat bc's to attack battlecruisers. brutix - make it like the navy version drake - switch resist bonus for missile velocity (nerf HAM range) Hurricane - switch damage bonus to falloff bonus and buff mobility Harbinger - buff mobility Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Batelle HOMELE55 1878	Posted - 2014.02.24 14:50:00 - [29] - Quote Talos has drones because its the worst sniper and the best brawler. If you take away the drones its just becomes a slight variant on the naga. The drones make it usable and more popular, but you need more justification than that to say its better Quote: Sure they lack tank, but why not decrease their highslots to 4-6 and increase their Bonus so every highslot gains more value. Because that would buff them and we've established they don't need it. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!" Never forget.
Kaerakh Obscure Joke Implied 130	Posted - 2014.02.24 15:04:00 - [30] - Quote I'd take a Naga or an Oracle over a Talos any day of the week. The extra range allows for amazing control over your engagement.



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.