EVE Search - Blog conclusions

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Blog conclusions

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Double TaP The Establishment	Posted - 2006.08.02 22:52:00 - [61] Fleet battles are dandy but in terms of ship balancing they should only look at fleet battles more than they look at npc'ing. The boost bonus on the mael will be AWESOME is small and medium sized skirmishes, which is pretty much nearly all EVE pvp.
Naughty Boy	Posted - 2006.08.02 22:54:00 - [62] Originally by: Double TaP Fleet battles are dandy but in terms of ship balancing they should only look at fleet battles more than they look at npc'ing. The boost bonus on the mael will be AWESOME is small and medium sized skirmishes, which is pretty much nearly all EVE pvp. You can have it, it's worse than the resistance bonus even in 1 vs 1 and gets worse with increasing numbers. NB.
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:01:00 - [63] Originally by: Grimpak about the maelstorm: instead a shield boosting bonus, add a shield HP ammount bonus? let's say 10% per level? Switching the RoF bonus for a straight damage bonus is interesting, but as Sarmaul (?) pointed out, 7000 alpha dmg with quake seems a bit unbalanced. I'm a big fan of hit point amount bonuses. Too bad people haven't commented on it more. Oh, and it'd also be a christmasgift for Pottsey, I guess... Dark skies torn apart Heavens open before me I, the light of death
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:05:00 - [64] Originally by: Sarmaul I said fleet work, which consists of loading up with sensor boosters, tracking computers, gyrostabs, artillery and hoping to you have enough grid for a single armour rep. mmm so i think you will not gain much from an armor tanked mael, you don't really need 6 mids, 2 sensor + 3 tracking is enought and 2 more 1400mm will need around 6500 more grid. if the ship is tought to be i shield tank i suspect it will have "poor" grid and "good" cpu so i'm not that sure it will have 22k grid
Sarmaul 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:07:00 - [65] Originally by: Ath Amon Originally by: Sarmaul I said fleet work, which consists of loading up with sensor boosters, tracking computers, gyrostabs, artillery and hoping to you have enough grid for a single armour rep. mmm so i think you will not gain much from an armor tanked mael, you don't really need 6 mids, 2 sensor + 3 tracking is enought and 2 more 1400mm will need around 6500 more grid. if the ship is tought to be i shield tank i suspect it will have "poor" grid and "good" cpu so i'm not that sure it will have 22k grid I'm expecting 1400mm II x 8 MWD x 0-1 (for getting out of bubbles - very handy in 0.0) Sensor Booster II x 3 Tracking Computer II x 2 Gyrostab II x 3 RCU II x 1 Whatever Rep fits x 1 Tracking Enhancer II x 1 TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust -
ProphetGuru Gallente Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:27:00 - [66] Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 02/08/2006 21:16:45 Its so simple really. Make the ship 8/5/7, drop the shield tanking bonus and give it armor resists instead. It would allow for damage mods, plates and EANM in the lows, sensor boosters and tracking computers in the meds. The reason the ship doesnt work is because its a stupid shield tanker. Dont you see how perfect it would function if it was a armor tanker? I was about to post this exactly when I noticed you beat me to it :) THis IS the fix that I'd like to see, and fits more in line with how other minnie BS are currently designed. Running an active 2rep tank would be very good, for smaller fights, and running a plated up fleet setup would work as well. Evolution..... Just when you thought you were winning.
Vera Nosfyu Minmatar Stormriders	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:30:00 - [67] I suggest making it a heavy skirmish boat instead. Keep the bonuses the same, but lower the HP, mass, and raise the speed. Next make the tempest heavier (more HP, mass, lower speed) and give it 10% damage instead of 5% RoF, 5% Damage. The 'Pest is the fleet BS, the Mael is better for small gangs. The 'Pest being all around better for fleet combat with more HP and a higher alpha (9 effective turrets) while the Mael would be better for small scale work with a higher DOT (10 effective turrets, but only 8 effective turrets of Alpha) and being able to close range and align warp faster. ----------------------------------------------------------- "Violence solves all problems, no man, no problem." --Josef Stalin
Kazaam Caldari Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:49:00 - [68] I simply think CCP doesn't meant the Maelstrom to be a soloer. As Tux said, "it relies on other ships to get a tackle". So basically, I'd say Tempest still for solo/gank, and then Maelstrom for fleets. No ? _________________________________________
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.08.02 23:57:00 - [69] Originally by: Kazaam I simply think CCP doesn't meant the Maelstrom to be a soloer. As Tux said, "it relies on other ships to get a tackle". So basically, I'd say Tempest still for solo/gank, and then Maelstrom for fleets. No ? no, the problem here is quite different, is not that we are saying that the mael is not good because it can't solo... what we are saying is that with its current bonuses (shield boost + rof) and a 8/6/6 slot allocation will fail in its role of fleet (shield tank) ship. if you read various post in the 3d you will see various motivations (shield vs amor, comparsion to tempest and other ships, fitting needed)
Johnny Bravo	Posted - 2006.08.03 00:37:00 - [70] Originally by: Vera Nosfyu I suggest making it a heavy skirmish boat instead. Keep the bonuses the same, but lower the HP, mass, and raise the speed. Next make the tempest heavier (more HP, mass, lower speed) and give it 10% damage instead of 5% RoF, 5% Damage. The 'Pest is the fleet BS, the Mael is better for small gangs. The 'Pest being all around better for fleet combat with more HP and a higher alpha (9 effective turrets) while the Mael would be better for small scale work with a higher DOT (10 effective turrets, but only 8 effective turrets of Alpha) and being able to close range and align warp faster. See? You already started to think how to nerf Tempest to get something good out of Maelstrom. Lets put it clear: We want a ship BETTER than Tempest, NOT a Tempest worse than that ship.
Crux Australis MotorSaikol LadrUNZ	Posted - 2006.08.03 01:06:00 - [71] Since it is still not set in stone, here is my 0.02 isk. Shield tanked artillery platform = lol (with 'few' meds = lol¦) Solution -> please, throw this (****ty) concept in the trash bin and gimmeh my armor tanked missile boat. P.S. That small blog made the liiiiittle baby jesus living inside me unable to stop crying. P.P.S. Don't even try to argue my idea because it is teh win.
Kldraina	Posted - 2006.08.03 03:41:00 - [72] If I'm reading this right, it sounds like people think designing a ship (maelstrom) to fight in the 35-70km range is pointless.
Vera Nosfyu Minmatar Stormriders	Posted - 2006.08.03 04:04:00 - [73] Originally by: Johnny Bravo Originally by: Vera Nosfyu I suggest making it a heavy skirmish boat instead. Keep the bonuses the same, but lower the HP, mass, and raise the speed. Next make the tempest heavier (more HP, mass, lower speed) and give it 10% damage instead of 5% RoF, 5% Damage. The 'Pest is the fleet BS, the Mael is better for small gangs. The 'Pest being all around better for fleet combat with more HP and a higher alpha (9 effective turrets) while the Mael would be better for small scale work with a higher DOT (10 effective turrets, but only 8 effective turrets of Alpha) and being able to close range and align warp faster. See? You already started to think how to nerf Tempest to get something good out of Maelstrom. Lets put it clear: We want a ship BETTER than Tempest, NOT a Tempest worse than that ship. Actually this doesn't nerf the Tempest. It makes the Tempest a worse AC boat and a better Fleet Artillery boat. My suggested Tempest has BETTER Alpha, equal DoT and more armor and shields. It loses speed. The Maelstorm would have worse armor/shields but would have better speed, making it a good AC boat and skirmish artillery boat. ----------------------------------------------------------- "Violence solves all problems, no man, no problem." --Josef Stalin
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age	Posted - 2006.08.03 04:30:00 - [74] Originally by: Sarmaul 1) If the Maelstrom only needs 6 mids to be effective then so does the Rokh as they do exactly the same thing (except of course, the Rokh will no doubt get larger shields to begin and it's resistance bonus will fit perfectly for fleets) Agreed. If the Rohk gets 7 mids I would really like an explanation from Tux why.
Rigsta Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2006.08.03 04:34:00 - [75] GAAAAH It's not FINISHED! Other changes are being introduced as well as these new ships! It's too early to be drawing conclusions. In fact, using the word conclusion is rather pretensive. Everyone talking about these ships knows next to nothing about their current state. You're just making wild guesses. Please wait til the damn thing's on Sisi (ie. nearly ready) ----------------------------------------------- CRY HAVOC! And let slip the combat drones! To meander aimlessly towards your target... Perhaps stopping for a picnic along the way... And then turn
Kelhund	Posted - 2006.08.03 05:58:00 - [76] Actually, as Tux's latest blog points out, all of this seemingly meaningless prattle may actually have a bearing on what happens. Besides, it gives us something more constructive to do than picket CCP HQ over in Rekjavik hehe. RailRokh FTW
Hllaxiu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.08.03 06:47:00 - [77] Originally by: Rigsta GAAAAH It's not FINISHED! Other changes are being introduced as well as these new ships! It's too early to be drawing conclusions. In fact, using the word conclusion is rather pretensive. Everyone talking about these ships knows next to nothing about their current state. You're just making wild guesses. Think about it: all you know about the current design is some little tidbits that Tux has mentioned on the Dev blog - it might have 15K shields for all you know. Please wait til the damn thing's on Sisi (ie. nearly ready) Tuxford actually asked for these threads, and Hammer actually posted on the third party "scrapheap challenge" board on these ships - they're certainly reading these threads for ideas, and probably looking at the math so they don't have to do it themselves too. --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Nova Strikes STK Scientific Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.03 07:25:00 - [78] Originally by: Jim McGregor Ok, after reading the latest tuxford blog, I think Maelstrom is basicly doomed to fail. Nuff said, really. Hyperion with a mass reduction bonus will enable it to be really fast, specially fitted with those new internal stabilizers that decrease mass even more. And with that kind of damage up close, well, lets just say Im not taking my minmatar skills to battleship level until we have a proper battleship. I have no idea why he doesnt say one word about the Rohk. Guess he feels its fine. Add your comments please, always nice to see what people think. As Caldari heading for a Rohk in the future.. Im still getting mixed signals tho from you mini's? What do you mini's want? A fleet ship, snipe with shield tank like Tux is trying to make? A AC boat fast an agile with armor/shields tank? An altogether different ship like some said, Missile boat with an armor tank? (sounds interesting to me) And if you are happy with what Tux is outlining but you just want that 7th med and a passive shields bonus that compilements fleet work...then ok.. if it doesnt give you an uber ship totally out classing the other 3 then..Give em what they want! Lets find out if it fits in alright. Doesnt sound like to much to ask for from my point of view, ye sure us Cladari are the meds guys but lets see if the mini can actually put together a good shield tank for once lol.
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.03 07:54:00 - [79] I do not know who mentioned the shield HP bonus, but that idea sounds good to me. For a fleet ship, effective HP is what counts, and outside of fleet, it could mount a nice passive tank for a bs. However I do not use Minmatar ships, so cannot comment much. ------------------------------ at least fit ECCM before you start crying how overpowered ECM is.
Wilfan Ret'nub Omega Corp	Posted - 2006.08.03 09:06:00 - [80] Originally by: Nova Strikes What do you mini's want? A non-sucky ship. Our standards have become pretty low with time ... Originally by: Nova Strikes A fleet ship, snipe with shield tank like Tux is trying to make? That's what Tux wants. It's looks unworkable, though. Active tank has too much "delay" to be usefull in fleet. It takes time to boost shields to the effective ammount extenders/hardeners give. There's also lag. Also, mids are too crowded with the standard sniper mids of 3 sensor booster, 2 tracking computer. That's why you hear "Maelstrom needs 7 mids" (in comparison, Rokh doesn't need tracking computers). Originally by: Nova Strikes A AC boat fast an agile with armor/shields tank? The motivation here is: if Tux is so hellbent on active shield tanking, go for a (secondary) role that can actually use it. That menas AC boat. Less incoming DPS means you can sustain the tank and you need only 3-4 mids (MWD, web, scram, 4 if you don't count cap booster as tank). Also, AC Tempest is going to be obsolete (to put it mildly) by the Hyperion and ECM/Nos changes, so a better AC boat is needed. Originally by: Nova Strikes An altogether different ship like some said, Missile boat with an armor tank? (sounds interesting to me) Another option that would make a usefull ship. It would even fit into the big picture - Tempest projectiles, Maelstrom missiles, Typhoon the ugly half-bred mutt. Originally by: Nova Strikes Doesnt sound like to much to ask for from my point of view, ye sure us Cladari are the meds guys but lets see if the mini can actually put together a good shield tank for once lol. With less mids, lower shield HP and lower cap? No problem, just give Maelstrom +50% per level shield boost bonus... My personal favourite - Typhoon gets +1 missile slot, Maelstrom gets 5% damage/something bonuses (something being 10% shield HP, tracking or fallof). Then you have missile boat (Typhoon), DPS projectiles boat (Tempest, though DPS and projectiles is contradiction in terms) and alpha strike projectile boat (Maelstrom, salvos for eleventy billion damage with Quake be damned - if it bothers anyone, fix T2 ammo).
Valea Silpha Cereal Killerz Chimaera Pact	Posted - 2006.08.03 10:58:00 - [81] Originally by: Wilfan Ret'nub Originally by: Nova Strikes What do you mini's want? A non-sucky ship. Our standards have become pretty low with time ... Quote for truth. If you insist on active shield tanking, just give us the slots to do it rather than a bonus that is doomed to be loathed. The thing is that shield tanking (ie massive cap use) is not compatable with close range no matter which way you cut it. Even if we got a shield tanking AC boat, it would be fraught with problems based on the cap penalty of MWD combined with inherent problem of not being able to mount nos on top of eight turrets. I'd go for an armor tanking missile boat. That would at least be new and interesting. It wouldn't put the raven out of buisness, as armor tanks are more about sustainability than sustaining vast amounts of damage in the short term, however with 7-8 missile points, but no missile damage bonus, it wouldn't out damage the raven by much, and leave us our meds to target paint, and thus the much maligned target painter bonus of the belicose might become useful. <Hammerhead> TomB is doing the nerfing <Hammerhead> I just stand behind him, look at his monitor and shake my head
Soraya Silvermoon	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:02:00 - [82] THe tempest is perfect as it is... My suggestion for a concept would be: Make the typhoon a missile boat. its useless as it is. and noone enjoy its sniping bonus. Then make the maelstrom an AC boat and I would ve a very happy minmatar bs pilot.
Sarmaul 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:14:00 - [83] Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Make the typhoon a missile boat. its useless as it is. and noone enjoy its sniping bonus. The sniping bonus was changed into a launcher ROF bonus quite a while ago... TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust -
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:36:00 - [84] 8/4/7 6 missiles/3 turrets, 5% missile rof, 5% to speed (or maybe even TP bonus) it will be so nice to have it like that... sad the crappy 4/4 missile/turret allocation is still there :(
Sarmaul 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:39:00 - [85] The only thing wrong with the current phoon is it's PG and CPU - everything else is fine. TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust -
Pesadel0	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:43:00 - [86] How about a 8/6/6 5 turret slots and 5 missile slots,bonus to launcher ROF and target painter bonus?If tux wants us "caldaris" make us true killers. One thing is for sure i will not bring the current maelstrom to fleet gangs,my tempest will do much better.
Maya Rkell Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:47:00 - [87] Originally by: Merv Tring EDIT: And what was that about Assault missiles needing more grid but less CPU? Are they changing the assault launchers (removing a decently effective anti-frig weapon from cruisers) or are they adding a whole new launcher? Probably removing.. I said they shouldn't a LONG time ago. And yes, I was right on the fitting...
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.08.03 12:48:00 - [88] yup PG is quite terrible... but imo also is the 4/4... for the rest the ship is nice, good sign, quite fast, good drone bay... can even fit a decent tank... but really that 4/4 is terrible imo, extremely inefficent both dps and range wise... the only real efficent config i see is as half nos boat, there it perform well... but for the rest...
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.03 13:32:00 - [89] Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Edited by: Soraya Silvermoon on 03/08/2006 13:31:11 Originally by: Sarmaul Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Make the typhoon a missile boat. its useless as it is. and noone enjoy its sniping bonus. The sniping bonus was changed into a launcher ROF bonus quite a while ago... lol I must have been away during that patch.. excellent now gimme an AC boat :) AC Tempest. :) --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Wrayeth Inexorable Retribution	Posted - 2006.08.03 13:38:00 - [90] Edited by: Wrayeth on 03/08/2006 13:39:05 Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Edited by: Soraya Silvermoon on 03/08/2006 13:31:11 Originally by: Sarmaul Originally by: Soraya Silvermoon Make the typhoon a missile boat. its useless as it is. and noone enjoy its sniping bonus. The sniping bonus was changed into a launcher ROF bonus quite a while ago... lol I must have been away during that patch.. excellent now gimme an AC boat :) AC Tempest. :) Except the AC tempest is gonna be useless once the hyperion hits the scene. Even now, blasterthrons generally kill AC tempests or get away from them thanks to Null, Void, and good piloting skills. EDIT: Oh, not to mention the EW nerf. Once the tempest can no longer fit a single multispec as a DPS equalizer, it will fall to ravens, too. -Wrayeth "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.