| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
112
   |
Posted - 2014.05.12 16:59:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm Disappointed in the slot layout on the BS 6 Mids when it's designed to have a point means your going to be trying to fit a 4 slot tank (after prop mod & point ) CCP please drop the ultility High a give it another Mid |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
113
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 17:18:00 -
[2] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Vulfen wrote:I'm Disappointed in the slot layout on the BS 6 Mids when it's designed to have a point means your going to be trying to fit a 4 slot tank (after prop mod & point ) CCP please drop the ultility High a give it another Mid the mach seems too do fine with 5 mids..
The mach is better armour tanked due to the 7 lows. |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
113
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 18:17:00 -
[3] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Michael Harari wrote:I have some estamel torp launchers to sell you That's funny. How much over $50-million/each do you want? 
It's not gona have the PG to fit torps |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
116
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 09:26:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP the BS needs looking at.
I hate that your going to be giving this a non-symmetrical look for turrets/launchers (like the mach)
Please change to a 7.5% damage bonus per level with 6 launchers. I like my ship to look symmetrical, especially when the designs you have shown us show a completely symmetrical ship!
This will mean the loss of 1 high slot aswell, I believe this slot should then be reallocated to either a low or a mid.
Please don't ruin the very nice designs with simple things that just make it look worse.
Thanks |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
116
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 11:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:
These ships are PERFECT for PVP and mordus as head hunters mercanary should be PVP ships.
these ships are far from perfect for PVP - the frig and cruiser have nice bonuses & will make good kiting ships, however the BS is lacking. Noone will want to fly a ship likely to cost 1 bill + with the weak shield tank it can currently field. armour tanking this ship, will give you a viable tank, with good utilities, however you have to sacrifice any damage mods in order to create the tank, making it just suck.
For that reason please for god sake allocate another low slot, make it a truly viable missile armour BS, unrivalled in class and truly a unique ship!
For the addition of a low slot, I would like to see the loss of the utility high. or a change to 6 launchers (with a mod to the damage bonus) to make the ship look nice. Or you could bring it's slot arrangement in line with the mach, which is the ship it will be in direct competition with currently. |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
121
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 14:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Gustav Mannfred wrote:
Another suggestion is to remove one launcher slot on the barghest, but increase the missile damage bonus to 12.5% per level, so it then has 10.05 effective launchers (now it has 8.75), then remove 2 hi-slots and add one med and low slot (6/7/7 slot layout). This allows to choose the tank and still do good damage. For example mission runners would fly this ship more with shield tank and use the low slots for capacitor modules and pvp pilots will fly that ship more with armor tank and use the mids for a lot of ewar/support modules.
I cant agree with 7 mids on this ship, the 6 midsetup is fine, but another low is required |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
122
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 06:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Another bonus is an option, but really I'd much prefer improvements to the Paper and Applied DPS, vs some new "special" trait. Yes, I think the general consensus is that the Barghest could stand a slight increase in damage to 7.5% per level from 5%. If it had another low it would be a riot to armor tank it... I suppose you could make it work with 3 lows, but it would be a tight fit.
It definitely needs that 7th low slot or the increase to 7.5%.
Personally i think the DPS on a shield tanked fit is almost at that perfect level, so im not sure a 7.5% buff would be right, id rather see a 10% buff and the loss of a launcher & high slot in favor for a Low, this works out then as 9 effective launchers and an extra 50 or so dps, but it would allow the ship to possess an armour tank that will work while having a DPS mod in the lows (matching the Mach) |
Vulfen
Snuff Box
123
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 15:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Xuixien wrote:Quote:Role Bonus:
200% bonus to missile velocity
50% penalty to missile flight time Why not just make it a 150% bonus to velocity and cut out the redundant penalty to flight time? Because that would take it from a total range bonus of +50% to a range bonus of 150%? Current stats take an unbonused light missile and increase its range from 18750 to 28,125. A 150% velocity bonus would bring the range to 46,875.
That bonus that CCP have chosen is perfect, what i basically does is mean that most missiles will land at their target before the next cycle is launched, (like a gun). |
| |
|