Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
66
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 23:29:59 -
[121] - Quote
Dalilus wrote:Looks Caldari.......not much Minnie flavor to it. Give it a coat of rust and it'll look right. |
Nahzgul
Greater Order Of Destruction
20
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 23:46:21 -
[122] - Quote
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.
I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.
As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously? |
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance
8582
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 23:54:08 -
[123] - Quote
holy ****
"I'm also quite confident that you are laughing
and it's the kind of laugh that gives normal people shivers."
=]I[=
|
James Zimmer
Furtherance.
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 01:20:17 -
[124] - Quote
Kynric wrote: Whatever way I piece it together it seems to come out confused rather than flexible.
Couldn't agree more.
Defense mode: The only way I can think to fly this mode and take advantage of the bonuses is with a long-point and orbit (assuming it has the agility to get away with this). At that range, unless I'm missing something, small auto-cannons won't have the range to do anything useful and the arty will lack the tracking (I wonder if I could fit it with beams and still be cap stable?). It will be a SUPER-tanky ceptor, but it won't have teeth at all. Speaking of tank, with the double resist bonuses, this could get dangerously tanky. I haven't run the numbers, but the fact that I'm even considering running an armor repper AND and shield repper should be concerning.
Propulsion mode: This mode makes sense, it's going to be fast.
Sniper Mode: This is clearly an arty bonus, since tracking of small auto-cannons will almost never be an issue. in theory you should be able to kite a little better with this and still apply damage, but if you're doing that, why not just super-buff your tank in defense mode and bring your transversal down? As a gank ship, it will have a crazy fast lock, and it will still have a decent tank. I suspect this is where it will make its money. but, as some others have noted, this will fall behind the Thrasher for damage application (33% bonus to tracking vs. 50% for the Thrasher).
So all in all, I see a tanky ceptor and a stupid fast locking gank ship. Good on the extreme ends of the spectrum, unimpressive or worse everywhere else. I was excited about this, but I think I'll just train to a Confessor instead.
Finally, prop mode looks awesome. Vertical modes look terrible. My mind revolts against the obvious center-of-gravity issues that a ship shaped like this would have if it wasn't just made of pixels. |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
985
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 02:44:09 -
[125] - Quote
why would anyone fly this in a fleet over a harpy
a: they wont
plz put some thought into fleet based ships because the meta is pretty stale atm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
985
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 02:56:02 -
[126] - Quote
i mean i guess its cool for camping gates but who really cares
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
113
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 03:26:44 -
[127] - Quote
ergherhdfgh wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Arty changes are good. Though i have a question.
If rails are dps orientated and arty about alpha, why does arty also suffer from horrendous fitting? The risk/reward is already in the weapon system. Less tracking and very long RoF. Why are they (small and med arty) also hard as **** to fit?
For example, lets say youre trying to track a frig with medium rails/arty. If rails miss, its only 3-5 seconds till their next shot. If arty misses, its 7-10s (depending on ship/fit). That is a lot of time for a frig to get under your guns and ruin your day. So, you are completely vulnerable in that time frame. Yet, then they take a large amount of grid to fit, so you have less tank and utility for defense/survivability in that encounter.
Also, 650 arty is garbage. We dont need a "dps" orientated arty. Arty is alpha. 650s should have much better alpha than they do now to distance them from rails. 250s are only a few hundred volley away from 650 alpha.
Anyway, off topic there.
I agree, needs an optimal + falloff bonus to make ac and arty fits viable. That would actually let arty extend close to its sniper mode ranges. The largest beam Lazors are also very hard to fit. Alpha is alpha and it has it's good points but also it's bad. I am most familiar with large turrets so not sure if this scales but here we go: So 1400mm attys have half the clip size of 1200s and have **** tracking and also as you have pointed out crazy high cycle time. Because of that in most PvE situations the 1200's are a much better option. They have a 10 second reload less often. Have less overkill with the lower alpha and hit much better due to the tracking. So the 1200s are far from useless as a matter of fact I would say the 1400's are more of a niche thing that are good in PvP Alpha fleets and not much else. I am assuming it is something similar with the medium and small attys.
Not true about 1200's. 1400's are still better in PvE. Because they have such ungodly amounts of alpha, you split your guns. My 1400 mach i used run anom's in could kill 3-4 ships per volley just by splitting the guns. My mach got close to 1k dps with 1400 arty and sentries. So 1400's are just as viable for PvE.
Large arty isn't too bad, mainly medium and now to a lesser extent, smalls. The lower tier arty is worthless except in a few minor niche` fits. Its only use is better tracking. Arty should not be dps orientated, it should be alpha. smaller tier arty should keep the good tracking, gain more damage, and maybe a slightly slower RoF (but not as slow as 280/720/1400). That way you are not shooting for rail damage with arty RoF, alpha is still respectable.
I am very interested in this, and can't wait to test it out on SiSi to see what its capable of. I've flown arty jags a lot, and their pretty fun, just need skill to fly (and kinda expensive due to faction/t2 PG mods/rigs to fit arty). Optimal bonus is useful for artillery, so for those trying to get rid of it, don't be dumb. Both weapon systems should be viable, not just one or the other.
I much prefer arty to have optimal bonus, it already has a large fall-off, no need to shorten the dps cliff anymore than it already is. This is why a 10% bonus to optimal/fall-off would be reasonable. On small artillery, i don't see that being game breaking. Would actually make them semi viable to kill all the f'n garmur's out there. But on small a/c's, it would at least allow them to project semi-decently, and optimal bonus would barely have any effect on a/c's, so that checks itself.
|
M'pact
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 04:08:19 -
[128] - Quote
LOVE the looks of the modes.
Bonuses are a bit iffy. Hull bonus to fallofff would be better than current optimal bonus.
When I finally do make an impact on this universe, it will reverberate across the entirety of it, and no one will be able to truthfully claim they don't know me.
-
-
Until then, I'll just sit quietly over here, minding my own business...
|
Captain Stern
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 06:28:18 -
[129] - Quote
I was all for the clone thing, the ship make overs, and most of the new ships up to this point, but Transformers? Really?
Really? |
Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
1823
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 07:08:32 -
[130] - Quote
If this were to roll out as is - I'd be interested in trying out a dual prop fit with a rack of 280's. A T2 ACR rig would allow for an active armor tank possibility. Sniper mode for applying damage. Defensive mode if yellow boxed. Propulsion mode if you get your MWD turned off and need the AB. The bonuses are still a mess imho. |
|
Yngvar ayShorn
Unknown Dimension Alpha Volley Union
10
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 07:25:32 -
[131] - Quote
Chessur wrote:The Minny T3:
Why are we placing the MWD sig bonus in the defensive mode, and not leaving it intact for speed? So much more useful there- and useless in defense.
Using MWD only on this ship is really a let down. Confessor is so strong because of its ability to fit 10MN abs, to try and make up for the ****** speed / sig ratio that all destroyers (With out innate sig reduction) share. I am not sure the minny version is going to like being shoehorned into MWD only, if it wants to take advantage of all its ship bonuses.
I am concerned with no range increase, or falloff bonuses while in sniper. Also really concerned about no falloff bonus in general. Are we ok with forcing this into arty only alpha thrasher T2?
Doesn't have enough grid. 1mn MWD with a full rack of 280's is already 85.2 PWG. T3 gets 78 base? Are you kidding?
As for the projectile changes.
Arty changes look ok.
Ac changes on the other hand....
They need so much more love than 7.5% base falloff increase. This is not going to fix Medium AC's or small AC's. At the end of they day, they do such little damage up close- and are anemic at range. Please don't try and hit me with 'selectable damage' as a huge pro. Because that is just simply not the case when you are kiting with AC's. These paltry changes (even on falloff boats like the stabber / vaga / cyna) Are still not going to make up for the fact that they have anemic DPS at 24+K and because of that are forced to use barrage. The barrage changes are not helping the matter, if range / dps is staying similar. While a step in the right direction, WAY more needs to be done in order to address Small and medium AC's. The only thing this change will have, is give Large AC's (Tornado and particularly the Mach) A slight boost.
+1 for this post!
Minmatar T3: +1 for falloff-bonus (so you can fly it with AC's) +1 for change mwd-Bonus to speedmodus +1 for some needful bonus to snipermode +1 for some little bit more pg
Please rethink some of the suggestions mentioned in this thread. Svipul needs some love just bevor launching
14 Tage EVE testen? 21 Tage EVE testen! -á-->> Klick mich <<--
|
Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
851
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 11:11:00 -
[132] - Quote
Oh look, an another ship which is bonused towards a weapon system it cannot fit without a fitting mod or 3.
Minmatar was relieved from Amarr tyranny so they can make ships which don't suffer form amarr-itis. |
Gregor Parud
Ordo Ardish
939
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 11:25:17 -
[133] - Quote
I'm liking the falloff changes, it kinda reverses the TE nerf from a while back (which really hurt projectiles) making them much more competitive.
I'm not so sure on the ship design but texturing can do a lot of good I guess. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
5885
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 13:43:06 -
[134] - Quote
Personally, I'd give those tactical destroyers much more faction flavour, allowing them to dynamically deploy the faction's favoured tactics. Just brainstorming.
Minmatar: Kite, Brawl, GTFO [hit and run] Caldari: Snipe, Cloak (non-covops), ECM [electronic superiority] Amarr: Cleanse, Endure, Purge (capwar) [just like in the scriptures] Gallente: Approach, Pin, Blast (face melting)
You have such a versatile platform to express the personality of the factions, yet you still make it basically four times the same ship.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
Luscius Uta
125
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 14:02:36 -
[135] - Quote
Like most other people, I would prefer optimal bonus changed to falloff. Optimal bonus could possibly be added to the sharpshooter mode, not to the hull itself. I also don't like bonuses to both shield and armour resistances, as bonuses to shield boost amount and signature reduction would be more Minmatar-ish (just like I expect the Gallente Tactical Destroyer to have Armour repair bonus in defensive mode).
I'm not fat, I'm just over-tanked!
|
Komodo Askold
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
279
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 14:38:17 -
[136] - Quote
It is vertical/diagonal 2/3 of the time! All praise I'm so glad to see my topic was useful after all!
The ship looks amazing both in model and stats, can't wait to fly it.
I'm also very happy about those projectile changes.
Tiamat promises amazing |
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
17
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 15:15:45 -
[137] - Quote
This ship has an optimal bonus for the same reason the confessor has a turret cap bonus, to prenerf....I mean, to keep them balanced. |
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1050
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 16:48:21 -
[138] - Quote
Any reason we can't get an optimal+falloff bonus on this? If the objective is to get it to be flexible, then an optimal and falloff bonus would be more appropriate.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
362
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 16:56:05 -
[139] - Quote
Nahzgul wrote:Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.
I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.
As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?
As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried.
Or something.
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1420
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 17:31:59 -
[140] - Quote
I think CCP is disregarding Power Creep, T3 destroyers are ludicrous overpowered.
The Tears Must Flow
|
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
114
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 17:36:57 -
[141] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Nahzgul wrote:Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.
I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.
As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously? As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried. Or something.
You should scram kite with jag. Its pretty potent. Or thrasher. 1k alpha, decent mobility. Hold at scram range and blap away. Arty can be brutal in scram range, as long as you have a tracking bonus and web(s).
|
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1937
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 18:01:45 -
[142] - Quote
I've been through the whole thread and it seems that both tank and projectile bonuses are perceived to be borked. Good luck in getting those changed.
As for the model itself, it looks great but I'm worried that the ship thrusters will look completely unbalanced in a vertical mode. Looking forward to seeing more. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1087
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 18:23:05 -
[143] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:I think CCP is disregarding Power Creep, T3 destroyers are ludicrous overpowered.
they are eerily like T3 cruisers
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 ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
993
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 18:56:06 -
[144] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Nahzgul wrote:Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.
I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.
As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously? As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried. Or something. You should scram kite with jag. Its pretty potent. Or thrasher. 1k alpha, decent mobility. Hold at scram range and blap away. Arty can be brutal in scram range, as long as you have a tracking bonus and web(s).
jaguars are laughable. 3 guns and a wasted bonus? it has no dps at all. and ccp tried to fix it by giving it an extra slot, even though the obvious thing it lacks compared to all other AFs is a gun. |
J A Aloysiusz
Precision Strike Brigade Easily Excited
97
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 19:11:52 -
[145] - Quote
+1 on the svipul and the projectile changes.
but really, "...while reducing the reliance on the excellent Barrage T2 ammo type."
Do you even eve? Barrage is almost never the correct ammo choice. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
114
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 19:22:49 -
[146] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Nahzgul wrote:Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.
I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.
As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously? As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried. Or something. You should scram kite with jag. Its pretty potent. Or thrasher. 1k alpha, decent mobility. Hold at scram range and blap away. Arty can be brutal in scram range, as long as you have a tracking bonus and web(s). jaguars are laughable. 3 guns and a wasted bonus? it has no dps at all. and ccp tried to fix it by giving it an extra slot, even though the obvious thing it lacks compared to all other AFs is a gun.
What wasted bonus? Optimal? Its an arty boat, not an ac boat. Optimal works well with small scram/kite arty. Arty isnt meant for dps, but alpha. My 280 jag hits for about 1k, but does like 160dps. Still projects out to long point range as well.That translates to curb stomping dual rep incursus or breachers. As you alpha straight through their reps. Can go double web aar, or single web/mse. Course you need 2PG mods and an implant to do that. Thats why arty really needs a reduction in PG. Least for small/medium.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2261
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 21:29:02 -
[147] - Quote
Looking forward to the Svipul!
I feel that the autocannon ammo rebalance is heading in the wrong direction and ignoring the heart of the problem. The true imbalance lies in the tech 1 ammo, as tech 1 projectile ammo does not balance alongside other turrets the way tech 2 ammo does. This causes tech 2 ammo to compare with tech 1 faction navy ammo very differently in some cases than in others.
Here are the major changes that happen when you switch from tech 1 medium range ammo to: Tech 1 short range ammo: Pulse Lasers: high damage at heavy cost to range Blasters: high damage at moderate cost to range Autocannons: high damage at almost no cost to range - but instead they sacrifice tracking
Tech 1 long range ammo: Pulse Lasers: much longer range at heavy cost to damage Blasters: significantly longer range at heavy cost to damage Autocannons: insignificantly longer range at heavy cost to damage, also lower tracking (useless ammo for autocannons)
Now the major changes that happen when you switch from: Navy short range to Tech 2 short range ammo: Pulse Lasers: higher damage at same range, cost is instead to tracking and capacitor cost Blasters: higher damage at a bit less range, also loses tracking and costs more capacitor Autocannons: higher damage at a bit less range, also loses tracking
**this is where you see the imbalance** Navy long range to Tech 2 long range ammo: Pulse Lasers: less tracking and slightly less range at tremendous gain to damage Blasters: less tracking and slightly more range with tremendous gain to damage Autocannons: less tracking and significantly more range with tremendous gain to damage
When you look at it this way, you see a range imbalance in the tech 2 ammo. But I submit to you that the range imbalance exists in tech 1 and manifests in tech 2 when you switch from tech 1 to tech 2. This results in Barrage being a staple of autocannon ammo because it is the only viable long range option for autocannons. Choosing longer range variants within tech 1 and faction ammo just doesn't affect the range much.
My solution? Give tech 1 long range projectile ammo a falloff bonus, and cut its optimal bonus a bit to keep artillery at the same range as before. Now people actually put Proton in an autocannon because it actually boosts range over heavier-hitting and faster-tracking Depleted Uranium.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
640
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 22:23:22 -
[148] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Words and things
The problem here is you're comparing Navy Radio to Pulse, and Iron to Null. Nobody uses Radio or Iron unless they don't have T2 weapons, in which case this comparison is useless.
If you compare Multifrequency to Scorch, Antimatter to null, and EMP to Barrage, you'll see that your worries are unfounded. Most people only carry two or three ammos (EMP and Barrage/Multifreq and Scorch/Antimatter, Void and Null)
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2261
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 22:38:53 -
[149] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:If you compare Multifrequency to Scorch, Antimatter to null, and EMP to Barrage, you'll see that your worries are unfounded. That's based on the assumption that T1 short range ammo is already balanced. If it is, then t1 medium range isn't.
CSM X: Sabriz Adoudel, Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
640
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 23:10:02 -
[150] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:If you compare Multifrequency to Scorch, Antimatter to null, and EMP to Barrage, you'll see that your worries are unfounded. That's based on the assumption that T1 short range ammo is already balanced. If it is, then t1 medium range isn't.
Well since T1/Faction short range ammo hasn't seen a balance pass, or any complaints, in my EVE career I think it's fairly safe to assume it is balanced.
Whether medium projectile ammo is balanced, I don't have a problem with it. Autocannons aren't unbalanced because of it. (It may be a problem for people with T1 autos, but people agree that the train into T2s is required for all weapons systems anyway.)
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |