| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
   |
Posted - 2006.08.06 14:58:00 -
[1]
No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and...
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.06 19:02:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 06/08/2006 19:02:59
 Originally by: Double TaP
Edited by: Double TaP on 06/08/2006 16:38:08
Originally by: Maya Rkell
No, not really. It should have its damage brought up with the Cerb, yes. Then the others have their damage nerfed down to the equivalent HAC, too. They can tank far better, improve their actual command capacity, and...
Why nerf 3 things and depress hoardes of people when you could just boost one and make a lot of people happy.
Because they're brokenly powerful. And not used for command. They're CBC's, not HAC Mk II's.
It's not about "ruining" any ship - HAC's allready do a LOT of damage, and backed by the seriously better tank of the CBC and true command capacity they'll still be very nasty and worthwhile ships.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.06 21:09:00 -
[3]
Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2.
I don't.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.06 22:32:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Outa Rileau
what's wrong with HAC MK II 
Because it's a Command Battlecruiser? Because it should COMMAND, not gank! We have enough ships for ganking.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.06 22:43:00 -
[5]
No, it's not a "crap argument". It's a point of view.
I'm arguing that CCP's design of them is wrong.
5% bonus per level to one sort of command modules.
One on the Field BC. Three and a cap use bonus on the Fleet BC.
REAL command abilities!
I don't think they're anything except what they are...I'm fully aware of their current capacitys. I just disagree that having a CBC with better firepower than a HAC is a good idea.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 02:44:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:52:49
Edited by: Maya Rkell on 07/08/2006 02:48:43
...
I was right on interceptors. A ship class I don't really even FLY anymore. Any problems you have with this, take it up with Tux. I'm not the one making changes, I was just right on my reasoning on why they were not going to alter the inty or add a 4th AF bonus.
And yes, shock, I agree with CCP on some things and not on others. Moreover, this is entirly relevant, since HAC's were brought up for comparison. People want to make the NH a better DPS dealer than the Cerb, I disagree. I'm NOT saying it's fine at present.
I'm not asking you to agree. I'm making a point. This is a point which has been made by a lot of other people in the past. If you don't like it, then I'd suggest a better response then "because that's why it should be".
Nikolai, and Interdictors are super interceptors because they require inty skill? No.
Kaylana Syi, so you're saying that HAC's don't have tanking and weapon bonuses. That CovOps don't have probe bonuses. That ships don't have FUNCTION RELATED bonuses. Well, a Command Ship's function is to COMMAND. Ships DO, and Command ships should have Command bonuses. This isn't "bland", this is making a T2 ship fill the role for which it was created.
I'm not suggesting that they be BAD combat ships. Unless you want to call a ship which can equal a HAC in firepower, tank better AND use command modules "bad". Because I'd be perfectly happy to fly one.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 04:00:00 -
[7]
Nikolai Nuvolari,
No, they have FAR more common more with destroyers and AF's than interceptors. They don't even share the speed-as-a-defence with them, have drastically higher ranges, and so on.
And you'd STILL be able to use them like a HAC...with the same damage and better tanking. I'm not suggesting they be ANY worse in general combat than a HAC.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 12:53:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Darkrydar
Edited by: Darkrydar on 07/08/2006 09:43:29
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Only if you work off the assumption that CBC == HAC Mk 2.
I don't.
Except for the fact that its about as fast as a battleship. HAC's combine speed+firepower+tank. Yes, command ships out dmg (mostly) and tank them, but have you ever looked at them? The have huge sig radius and are very slow.
Add: I shouldn;t have even posted. I forgot you RP Eve's Contrarian.
Hardly. I agree with just as much as I disagree with. And even WITH the sig radius, CBC's have a considerably better tank. What the field command ships DON'T do is... command. And they are CBC's. If you want to keep them as present, they need the name and skill preqs changing.
welsh wizard, yep... in-line. Where that line is drawn, well, I disagree with the "consensus". But something DOES need to be done.
|
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.07 19:00:00 -
[9]
Hugh Ruka, change the name, change the skills and so on and sure. Attack BC's or whatever.
Note that at NO point in this thread have I said the NH is fine. It's not. Regardless of other changes, it needs boosting.
|
| |
|