EVE Search - Sticky:[Summer 2014] Pirate Faction Battleships

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Summer 2014] Pirate Faction Battleships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 42 post(s)
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 85	Posted - 2014.04.14 16:54:00 - [1] - Quote Mach steps on the vargur's toes too much IMO. In the marauder rebalancing thread, we were told that compared to pirates, marauders would have a better tank and project dmg better, while pirates were faster and had higher dps Why does the mach keep a f/o bonus matching the vargur while maintaining its speed and dps advantages.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 85	Posted - 2014.04.14 17:03:00 - [2] - Quote Reppyk wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: Mach steps on the vargur's toes too much IMO. In the marauder rebalancing thread, we were told that compared to pirates, marauders would have a better tank and project dmg better, while pirates were faster and had higher dps Why does the mach keep a f/o bonus matching the vargur while maintaining its speed and dps advantages. Show me where the machariel has the tracking bonus of the vargur and the range bonus from the bastion module... Show me where a tracking advantage was ever promised to distinguish the ship, or where the mach's dps advantage can't overshadow bastion's projection bonus.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 89	Posted - 2014.04.14 17:17:00 - [3] - Quote Naomi Anthar wrote: Ralph King-Griffin wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: Mach steps on the vargur's toes too much IMO. In the marauder rebalancing thread, we were told that compared to pirates, marauders would have a better tank and project dmg better, while pirates were faster and had higher dps Why does the mach keep a f/o bonus matching the vargur while maintaining its speed and dps advantages. this is true Actually completly false. If you cannot fit Vargur to tank more than Mach then yeah ... you are bad . YES include bastion. Because why not ? And yeah projecting damage is same story - i also would like to add that Bastion save you from EWAR like TD/damp aswell. Seriously i see no problem on line Mach/Vargur. Vargur can shoot at longer ranges and tank WAY more. But is going to be slower/less agile/warps slower. Working as intended. I'm afraid you were just trying to get unjustified buff to Vargur out there... not a chance. Not even small. Take a looks at the nightmare and vindi compared to thepally and kronos. Those marauders get clear projection advantages over their pirate counterparts. This isn't about a buff/nerf its about making increasing the number of differences between the hulls.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 90	Posted - 2014.04.14 19:53:00 - [4] - Quote Angsty Teenager wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: Mach steps on the vargur's toes too much IMO. In the marauder rebalancing thread, we were told that compared to pirates, marauders would have a better tank and project dmg better, while pirates were faster and had higher dps Why does the mach keep a f/o bonus matching the vargur while maintaining its speed and dps advantages. You're dumb, and you're the reason we get such ****** balance changes. Stop spreading stupidity. U mad brah?
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 90	Posted - 2014.04.14 22:35:00 - [5] - Quote Kusum Fawn wrote: epicurus ataraxia wrote: Kitty Bear wrote: Callic Veratar wrote: I'm a little disappointed that the rattlesnake stays at 7.5 effective drones, though 375% of a heavy drone is pretty nasty. I can understand the reasoning with sentries included, since anything bigger would have just wiped everything off grid. Hooray for the extra launcher and damage bonus to missiles, that should improve it's presence some. but less range on them - the velocity bonus is gone. and once again, the versatility of 5 utility/support drones is GONE 275% of 2 is not 7.5, it's 5.5 5.5+2= 7.5 what is this +2 that you are adding? i see 50 mb which is two sentries, two sentries @ 275% damage gives 550% damage. which was the same for the 5 sentries with 10% damage bonus beforehand. what is the +2? Eve bonuses. 2 drones * 275% = 5.5, but u add the 2 drones u started with, so 7.5 or a 375% total change
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 90	Posted - 2014.04.15 04:08:00 - [6] - Quote Viribus wrote: I like how people are praising the Machariel "buff" when really it's just being put back to where it was before the warp speed changes, minus 25 scan res and some agility. Can we get something unique from the Angel ships pls, instead of them just being upgrades/sidegrades/downgrades of existing Minmatar ships Just spitballing: * Tracking instead of f/o + lower sig, better agility/speed. * heat bonuses * AB/MWD cap reductions * ewar drone effectiveness * drone RoF * Weapon signature resolution. * nos / nuet resistance * web resistance * festival launch bonus xD
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 08:17:00 - [7] - Quote Vinyl 41 wrote: if you keep asking for some unique features to angels we might get trolled by CCP doing smt like making angels into caldari - matar hybrid with bonuses to missles and projectiles similar to navy Phoon - imagine that uproar Personally I wouldn't care, just so long as it doesn't step on the toes of the tfi. It needs a change. There was quite a bit of discussion going on the Marauder rebal concerning vargur and mach similarities. CCP ytterbium made a post specifically addressing it. Here's the snippet: CCP Ytterbium wrote: regarding their comparison with Pirate Battleships, especially the Machariel, please remember we have stated many times Pirate hulls were due for a rebalance, with Angel Cartel being on the front line for tuning changes. What's happening... Mach stays relatively untouched + gains warp speed greater than the vargurs... Well played CCP
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 08:37:00 - [8] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: What's happening... Mach stays relatively untouched + gains warp speed greater than the vargurs... Well played CCP What part of "tuning changes" doesn't apply? Less agility, less align time, greater signature and less scan resolution. If that isn't the very definition of "tuning" I'm not sure what is... It's the context. Complaints on mach v vargur weren't about the signature, etc
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 08:58:00 - [9] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: It's the context. Complaints on mach v vargur weren't about the signature, etc What does this have to do with the Machariel? Vargurs were already rebalanced and are considered one of (if not the) best Marauders. If you're suggesting that the Machariel needs to be further nerfed to continue to justify your Vargur's existence, then I suspect you won't have much of a following... As I've said prior, its not about nerf/buff, its about increasing the number of differences between hulls.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 13:15:00 - [10] - Quote Myrthiis wrote: "chaosgrimm" wrote: As I've said prior, its not about nerf/buff, its about increasing the number of differences between hulls. If u one found one day a mach who can sustain 4734 defense omni during 10 m without implants and with t2 mod .I ll begin to think maybe u are right until then ... Different isn't necessarily mean nerf / buff, and tank isn't the defining feature for other ships. They get more than that to make them unique. If we compare differences on the offensive side. = Vindi v Kronos = Vindi gets tracking, dps, web Kronos gets tracking, dps, falloff Offensively, these ships are unique in the way they are used as well as defensively. The tradeoffs are interesting here on both sides of the spectrum. You get more speed and deeps on the vindi, but to apply it you gotta be closer to your target than the kronos, which is something to consider given the vindi's lighter tank. = nm v Pally = Nm gets tracking, dps Pally gets falloff, dps Again these weapon systems are use very differently. You have an offensive decision to make, do you want better applied dmg via the nm's tracking and speed, but at the expensive of a lighter tank + needing to be closer to the target. = Mach v Vargur = Mach gets dps, falloff Vargur gets dps, tracking, falloff On the offensive side, where is the decision here? The mach has highet dps. It doesn't need to risk being closer than the varg to apply it's dps. The biggest difference here is the tracking, which the mach adjust for with its superior mobility. Furthermore, the mobility perks are great for a wep system that wep system that works in falloff. Lastly: CCP Rise wrote: The biggest problem Angels face is direct competition with other Minmatar ships and a light case of OP.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 17:11:00 - [11] - Quote Daniel Plain wrote: i will not read the entire topic lest it eats my brain and entrails. the changes overall are pretty nice, but there are a few minor things i would like to criticize: - the machariel warp speed buff is a little too strong given its excellent performance even without it. i would propose lowering the warp speed bonus to the base line of marauders or lowering the dps to roughly the level of the vargur. - i agree with the criticism of role bonuses versus battleship skill bonuses. it's kind of silly that a paladin with Marauders IV deals less dps than a nightmare with Caldari and Gallente Battleship I (disregarding the range bonuses ofc.). in my opinion there is nothing wrong with splitting the bonuses into one basic part and one scaling part and have the hulls get three or even four scaling bonuses total. - come on, fix the asymmetries in the mach hull already. i'm sick and tired of asking myself why it has the vestigial propulsion engine on one side and not the other, and the seven turret slots do not help. Concerning the comments on the mach, I think they might make the decision between mach/vargur more difficult, which is a good thing... but it would do it by making them more similar, which is a bad thing. IMO mach needs to be more unqiue on the offensive side. One example might be: vargur gets better dmg at rng, while the mach gets higher paper dps i.e. swapping mach's falloff bonus with a tracking bonus or increasing the vargur's projection
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 17:38:00 - [12] - Quote Vinyl 41 wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: Concerning the comments on the mach, I think they might make the decision between mach/vargur more difficult, which is a good thing... but it would do it by making them more similar, which is a bad thing. IMO mach needs to be more unqiue on the offensive side. One example might be: vargur gets better dmg at rng, while the mach gets higher paper dps i.e. swapping mach's falloff bonus with a tracking bonus or increasing the vargur's projection the mach already has the higher paper dps and remowing the falloff bonus would downgrade the ship to fleet pest level and we dont want that anyways if we get the turret disproposal fixed as a bonus i think most mach users will be happy - besides those poor guys from incursions I am aware the Machs dps is higher, I was referring to Daniel Plains post I quoted, where he suggested reducing the Machs dps. I do not support that. Tracking in place of f/o would be better IMO. Simply because to take advantage of the dps lead, u gotta be closer than the marauder counterparts, much in the same way as the vindi v kronos. Or to a lesser extent nm and pally. Because the mach would need to be closer, some hull buff might be in order, but at least in this scenario the offensive sides of the vargur and mach are unique
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 91	Posted - 2014.04.15 22:20:00 - [13] - Quote Myrthiis wrote: Once against numbers says ur wrong 800 MM track at 0.0594 for 1003 dps ,megapulse laser track at 0.0693 for 1051 dps ,and they can fit 2 sebo with scan resolution script meaning they lock faster without even reducing their tank or their mobility . To be fair you are comparing a tracking bonus to a falloff bonus and wanting changes so that the mach can be more like a nm is just silly. If the mach had a tracking bonus instead of falloff bonus + maybe a few hull attr buffs to compensate for the reduced range, u'd have a ship uniquely different than the other pirates and the vargur, rather than a half baked nm clone
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 92	Posted - 2014.04.16 01:26:00 - [14] - Quote Myrthiis wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: To be fair you are comparing a tracking bonus to a falloff bonus and wanting changes so that the mach can be more like a nm is just silly. If the mach had a tracking bonus instead of falloff bonus + maybe a few hull attr buffs to compensate for the reduced range, u'd have a ship uniquely different than the other pirates and the vargur, rather than a half baked nm clone No in fact it is the total opposite . you beg to differ: Myrthiis wrote: ... it ll just free mach pilot from the obligation to plug for a full genolution set + a 6 % grid implants just to match the range and the dps of the NM . Myrthiis wrote: There is no other Bs who need a 16 % grid plugging to work decently , as far as balance and variety matter those changes doesnt remove anything from anyone and will give a chance to the machariel to find a niche he was always designed for. How is the Mach much different from other's hulls in the minmatar lines that cant fit 1400s without fitting modules / implants? If you want to argue that 1400s use too much powergrid, it should be in a thread about large artillery. If you just to get your grid solely through implants that's up to you.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 92	Posted - 2014.04.16 04:43:00 - [15] - Quote Myrthiis wrote: i think u are trolling every BS in the minnmatar line can fit a full rack of 1400 MM + a 100 MWD without pg mod or implant at very exception of the maelstrom who need a +3% implants or mod to fit but he has a 6 mid 6 low set up whose ease this quite a bit. Data is off somewhere, I'm using EFT 2.22.2 for this. For your above example, ill use a full rack of T2 1400s with a Prototype 100MN MWD, not fitting any other mods or rigs, no implants, all skills @ V, the following ships cannot fit what ur asking: Maelstrom: +3% Tempest: +3% Typhoon: + approx 32% Typhoon Fleet Issue: + approx 27% Panther: + approx 9% Machariel: +6% Why should the Machariel be an exception? And not only an exception ur asking for approx 3217.5 additional power grid via eliminating a high. that's approx 14.34%. What is the justification for the Mach over the others listed here. You say yourself: Myrthiis wrote: they lack the offensive bonus of their pirate counter part . If anything, that is a good reason for another ship to have fewer fitting problems. Myrthiis wrote: Every others pirate battle ships have better fitting capability than their t1 or navy counterpart at the very exception of the mach . Any change made to the mach would not change the above.... the mach doesnt have a t1 / navy counterpart Myrthiis wrote: Does he have today something to offer ,yes a nice agility tomorrow not so much with the nerf to its agility and align time .So yes i think it deserve to have : Special ability +37.5% to large projectile turret damage Minmatar bonus :+5% to Rof Gallente bonus +10 % falloff even a +5 % would make the deal A layout with 7H 6T 5 M 7 L The falloff bonus is really the only thing that I dont like again, just because its too similar to the vargur. Would you be up for: Special ability +37.5% to large projectile turret damage Minmatar bonus :+5% to Rof Gallente bonus +7.5% tracking A layout with 7H 6T 5 M 7 L keeps majority of saved PG + any combination of buffs to the hulls other attributes like sig, mobility, ehp, etc. to help make up for losing falloff
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 93	Posted - 2014.04.22 16:29:00 - [16] - Quote Not that I have issues with the new snake, but if the changes to its drone bonuses are to better distinguish the snake from other drone boats, why can't the mach's offensive profile contain a tracking bonus instead a f/o bonus to help distinguish it from both the vargur and t1 minmatar?
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 93	Posted - 2014.04.22 19:55:00 - [17] - Quote Cassandra Aurilien wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: Not that I have issues with the new snake, but if the changes to its drone bonuses are to better distinguish the snake from other drone boats, why can't the mach's offensive profile contain a tracking bonus instead a f/o bonus to help distinguish it from both the vargur and t1 minmatar? The Vargur has a tracking bonus... Not sure how that would help distinguish it... Most (but not all) hulls with a tracking bonus are built around long range weapon systems. The Mach being unable to fit 1400's without making pretty major fitting concessions and being given a tracking bonus is weird. (You don't really need the bonus with AC's.) Edit: The Nightmare is a good example of the effects of the tracking bonus on a long range weapon system. It makes Tach's useful at mid-range. The Mach is arguably the best BS arty platform in the game. By ur logic it should have a tracking tracking bonus. IMO the roles of pirates aren't restricted to long range short v range wep platforms, but high dmg/application/speed while running a riskier tank Part of the risky tank concept is having to be at a closer ranges with a given wep platform. For example kronos v vindi and to a lesser extent pally v nm. The Machs projection bonus increases allows it to keep distance / increase survivability. The speed and agility help w/ dmg application through both f/o and angular. If it had a tracking bonus, it would be better at applying dmg at closer ranges, but in order to maintain its "king of BS projectile DPS" title, it would need to assume a more risk. In other words, the mach currently doesn't sacrifice much to be the king of projectiles. Switching to a tracking bonus would give it some new advantages + disadvantages, wouldn't ruin the hull, and further distinguish it from other projectile alternatives
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 93	Posted - 2014.04.22 20:06:00 - [18] - Quote Cassandra Aurilien wrote: elitatwo wrote: Cassandra Aurilien wrote: chaosgrimm wrote: Not that I have issues with the new snake, but if the changes to its drone bonuses are to better distinguish the snake from other drone boats, why can't the mach's offensive profile contain a tracking bonus instead a f/o bonus to help distinguish it from both the vargur and t1 minmatar? The Vargur has a tracking bonus... Not sure how that would help distinguish it... Most (but not all) hulls with a tracking bonus are built around long range weapon systems. The Mach being unable to fit 1400's without making pretty major fitting concessions and being given a tracking bonus is weird. (You don't really need the bonus with AC's.) Edit: The Nightmare is a good example of the effects of the tracking bonus on a long range weapon system. It makes Tach's useful at mid-range. I am sorry to tell you this but they already are. Now with those changes to the Nightmare, you can taychon-kite with the Nightmare which sounds like really cool idea. I will give it a try with the Phantasm as soon as it get on SiSi. That's my point. I fly a MWD Tach Nightmare now... Can't wait for the AB bonus. The tracking bonus on it is great for that very reason. On a AC Mach though, the tracking bonus would be worthless. If the tracking bonus would be worthless on a mach, how does the vargur have an advantage over the mach by having it? If its worthless as you say, the vargur and the mach essentially have the same offensive profile, which in itself is a reason to focus on a rebalance that would further distinguish them.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 93	Posted - 2014.04.22 20:15:00 - [19] - Quote baltec1 wrote: The mach is one the the most mobile battleships while the vargur is stationary. Maybe I'm off base here but is this like saying: The mach uses its mobility in lieu of a tracking bonus? And/Or The vargur uses tracking in lieu of mobility? If this is the case, does that not make these offensive profiles very similar?
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 93	Posted - 2014.04.22 21:23:00 - [20] - Quote Cassandra Aurilien wrote: At the range where a tracking bonus would actually accomplish anything on a AC Mach - you'd be better off bringing a blaster boat. In mid-falloff range (even with the lower falloff you are suggesting) tracking simply isn't an issue against most targets. Almost any other bonus would make more sense. For PVE, I run my Mach quite close to it's targets as it is, if you are flying it rather than orbiting, it has no issues hitting NPC BS's under 10KM. In order to fit the Mach as the best arty platform, you have to make sacrifices in terms of what you are fitting, more so than just about any other Faction BS when fitted for range. (Much earlier in the thread there were people complaining about that, using 6% implants, etc...) The Vargur is a more natural arty platform, in my opinion. Lol no.... Mach will almost always be able to make use of that tracking bonus given its speed, if not anything else. Because ur talking about PvE, mach is def the better arty platform. Even if u wanna give up a low for fitting, you arnt going to fit more than 4 gyros, and maybe 1 te. still gives u a slot left for whatever. The cycle time is low for 1400s and you can split the dmg across 7 turrets to lower your overkill. Not to mention, mach has much better turret dps and better drone bandwidth.
chaosgrimm Universal Production and Networking Services 93	Posted - 2014.04.22 21:50:00 - [21] - Quote Cassandra Aurilien wrote: .... Their offensive profile is similar, but in terms of their use, they are not similar. Sorry for keeping this going but I do enjoy forum discussions xD. So you are in agreement that the offensive profiles are similar. But now look at the differences in the offensive profiles between the pally and the nm as well as the kronos and the vindi. Don't the mach and the vargur deserve that lvl of uniqueness?