Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12423
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:37:12 -
[1] - Quote
Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks.
The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits.
We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates.
Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core
These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2776
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:38:41 -
[2] - Quote
Should help
Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
|
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
7539
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:39:50 -
[3] - Quote
These are really small changes, I'm not sure what sort of effect it'll have yet on fitting but none of these changes seem to gimp the ships too much, (at a glance).
Fear and Loathing in Internet Spaceships
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1919
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:42:24 -
[4] - Quote
Excellent, I'm very glad the balance happened before the other two came out. It was getting ridiculous.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
482
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:48:17 -
[5] - Quote
much needed. thanks.
now I'll read the particulars
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1240
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:49:14 -
[6] - Quote
Saede Riordan wrote:These are really small changes, I'm not sure what sort of effect it'll have yet on fitting but none of these changes seem to gimp the ships too much, (at a glance).
That's actually a larger hit than you think. These ships run on very narrow margins with the oversize modules they tend to fit.
Choices will have to be made.
Yaay!!!!
|
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
20925
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:52:15 -
[7] - Quote
Much needed tweaks. Cant wait until tomorrow so I can believe them.
CCP Fozzie wrote:We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
Still trying to balance with price huh... thought you learned that lesson..
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
|
Red MCallum
Appetite 4 Destruction
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:54:04 -
[8] - Quote
I would say this is overall a good change, but I'm not a big fan of the material cost increase. I would prefer that the other changes go though and wait on the material changes because its harder to go back on them without messing with the market. |
Sir Livingston
Club Deadspace
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 22:56:00 -
[9] - Quote
svipul & confessor usage must be high
EVE Online videos to inform and inspire
http://www.youtube.com/JonnyPew
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12439
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:00:28 -
[10] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Much needed tweaks. Cant wait until tomorrow so I can believe them. CCP Fozzie wrote:We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
Still trying to balance with price huh... thought you learned that lesson..
That term "balance with price" is very often misused by players. It's largely our fault though since we've repeatedly oversimplified when talking about past mistakes.
Cost is definitely a viable part of ship balance. It's only one small part, and it can never be used to justify an overpowered ship, but having different ships at different price points with somewhat different capabilities is a part of a healthy ship meta. Power in EVE should never increase linearly with cost, but it's absurd to suggest for instance that we need to make Vindicator and Megathrons exactly equal in power to avoid "balancing with price".
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
Bastion Arzi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
220
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:03:19 -
[11] - Quote
good +1 |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
437
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:05:08 -
[12] - Quote
Nice changes.
Now if you would just block them from small plexes :) |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:05:32 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks. The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits. We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable. The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates. Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
GûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûä GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûä GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûêGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûÇGûÆGûäGûäGûäGûÆGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûêGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûÆGûäGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûÆGûê GûæGûêGûÇGûäGûæGûêGûäGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÇGûæGûÇGûÇGûæGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûÇGûêGûäGûäGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûêGûÇGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûêGûêGûæGûæGûÇGûêGûäGûäGûäGûêGûäGûäGûêGûäGûêGûêGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûê
Good poast, CCP Fozzie.
The metagaem will chance for the better now that these hulls won't be able to fit 10MN ABs, or at least I hope the PG reduction is enough; haven't done the math yet.
Quote:Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core
This increases the build cost by 12.3 mil ISK - But I wouldn't rush to buy up the ready hulls, as the profit margin on the T3Ds is still around 11 mln ISK, plus account for the above nerf.
P.S. They're already in 54 mil up from 37 mil in Amarr.
GûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûä GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûä GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûêGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûÇGûÆGûäGûäGûäGûÆGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûêGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûÆGûäGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûÆGûê GûæGûêGûÇGûäGûæGûêGûäGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÇGûæGûÇGûÇGûæGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûÇGûêGûäGûäGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûêGûÇGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûêGûêGûæGûæGûÇGûêGûäGûäGûäGûêGûäGûäGûêGûäGûêGûêGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûê
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Anthar Thebess
991
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:31:57 -
[14] - Quote
Can we reduce sensor strength on all T3 destroyers? So they greatest weakness could be jammers and enemy probes?
This way we could create new meta for fighting them.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:40:10 -
[15] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Can we reduce sensor strength on all T3 destroyers? So they greatest weakness could be jammers and enemy probes?
This way we could create new meta for fighting them.
A Confessor can be jammed by a Griffin - found out the hard way. Unless you're in Sharpshooter mode, of course.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1463
|
Posted - 2015.04.01 23:44:55 -
[16] - Quote
Finally...
The Tears Must Flow
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1461
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:07:28 -
[17] - Quote
So with skills, looking at around 90ish PG for both the Confessor and the Svipul?
I like it.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Wild Things
Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:09:57 -
[18] - Quote
What's the reasoning behind buffing the cap and shield regen? Seems stupid to me. Passive svipul is already OP, and both ships are prime examples of capacitor creep.
I'd also like to see the agility nerf you talked about on the o7 show...
All in all, fantastic job recognizing a problem and taking steps to balance it in a timely manner. Love the direction the team is headed.
In this moment, I am euphoric.
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1461
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:28:54 -
[19] - Quote
Wild Things wrote:What's the reasoning behind buffing the cap and shield regen?
Unless I've been reading these things wrong, it will take longer for the shields and cap to recharge.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Suitonia
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
487
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:29:03 -
[20] - Quote
Wild Things wrote:What's the reasoning behind buffing the cap and shield regen? Seems stupid to me. Passive svipul is already OP, and both ships are prime examples of capacitor creep.
I'd also like to see the agility nerf you talked about on the o7 show...
All in all, fantastic job recognizing a problem and taking steps to balance it in a timely manner. Love the direction the team is headed.
The shield regen time is being increased, which makes them regenerate less HP per second. Which is a nerf. This is a great change, Svipuls had completely destroyed the metagame for Destroyers and Sub Below Ships. Thank you.
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
|
Suitonia
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
487
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:30:41 -
[21] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Much needed tweaks. Cant wait until tomorrow so I can believe them. CCP Fozzie wrote:We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
Still trying to balance with price huh... thought you learned that lesson..
Well, When Insured T3D hulls cost less to lose than a Tech II Frigate, there is obviously some problem with the price. Fozzie's response to you is also a great explanation.
Contributer to Eve is Easy:
https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos
Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
|
hammerdick 7
Perkone Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:32:00 -
[22] - Quote
hahah good april fools joke. |
Drew Li
Space Exploitation Inc The Bastion
54
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:36:02 -
[23] - Quote
Slightly off topic, but could you add a rig that reduces the powergrid of propulsion modules? That could allow a handful of ships to fit oversized prop mods, possibly even 100mn battlecruisers. That would still allow 10mn T3 destroyers, but they would be giving up rig slots to do so. The rigs would have to be more effective than stacking on a bunch of current routers and reactor controls to get grid. |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1461
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:41:10 -
[24] - Quote
Drew Li wrote:Slightly off topic, but could you add a rig that reduces the powergrid of propulsion modules? That could allow a handful of ships to fit oversized prop mods, possibly even 100mn battlecruisers. That would still allow 10mn T3 destroyers, but they would be giving up rig slots to do so. The rigs would have to be more effective than stacking on a bunch of current routers and reactor controls to get grid.
..............you can't be serious.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
741
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:49:55 -
[25] - Quote
Sir Livingston wrote:svipul & confessor usage must be high
Number one and number three ships on Zkill. Sabre is number 2.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Wild Things
Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:55:20 -
[26] - Quote
Suitonia wrote:Wild Things wrote:What's the reasoning behind buffing the cap and shield regen? Seems stupid to me. Passive svipul is already OP, and both ships are prime examples of capacitor creep.
I'd also like to see the agility nerf you talked about on the o7 show...
All in all, fantastic job recognizing a problem and taking steps to balance it in a timely manner. Love the direction the team is headed. The shield regen time is being increased, which makes them regenerate less HP per second. Which is a nerf. This is a great change, Svipuls had completely destroyed the metagame for Destroyers and Sub Below Ships. Thank you.
I already caught it and edited it ))
In this moment, I am euphoric.
|
Jordan Alfrir
AST Incorporated
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:56:34 -
[27] - Quote
Good, though I love the Svipul it was getting a bit out of hand. Fortunately I can still use my preferred fit if I switch one rig with a ancillary power rig. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
324
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 00:57:28 -
[28] - Quote
Wild Things wrote:I'd also love to see the agility nerf you talked about on the o7 show!
All in all, fantastic job recognizing a problem and taking steps to balance it in a timely manner. Love the direction the team is headed.
I believe that would be the Intertia increase on the Confessor. |
Wild Things
Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 01:04:48 -
[29] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Wild Things wrote:I'd also love to see the agility nerf you talked about on the o7 show!
All in all, fantastic job recognizing a problem and taking steps to balance it in a timely manner. Love the direction the team is headed. I believe that would be the Intertia increase on the Confessor.
I should just delete my post, there's literally nothing correct about it.
Great job balance team.
In this moment, I am euphoric.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
603
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 01:06:36 -
[30] - Quote
While I always like nerfs to the barbarian rust-buckets, my Confessor most certainly doesn't need one.
Maybe most of you do not know this but laser turrets and armor reps are taxing very heavy on your capacitor and I don't see a reason to nerf a boat that is doing it's job correctly.
signature
|
|
Aliah Proudmoore
The Dragon Hoard
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 01:22:10 -
[31] - Quote
Looks like a good change to me. 10MN Confessor will still be perfectly doable but you will have to give up some damage or tank for it. Fitting where you need to make sacrifices is much more fun. Currently its almost just a case of whacking on whatever you want and it pretty much fits. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1112
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 02:04:22 -
[32] - Quote
i'm still not enamored with the T2 resists, seems like a T2 thing too me, also the really high bonuses for each mode looks like too much.
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 sentries.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
Strangelove Utama
The Maythorn
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 02:08:16 -
[33] - Quote
Fantastic that the devs are listening and are prepared to make small balance changes as they need them rather than wait for months before doing anything. +1 from me. |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1092
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 02:11:56 -
[34] - Quote
think the speed on the confessor is a bit overkill
good to see changes none the less
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Tiddle Jr
Galvanized Inc.
88
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 02:12:01 -
[35] - Quote
What a shame nerf |
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
214
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 02:18:48 -
[36] - Quote
What's the reasoning on why the confessor was nerfed even harder than the svipul? Unless the powergrid change hits the svipul much harder than the confessor. There is that, I suppose. Still, the fact that one got an agility nerf and the other did not, is odd. |
Escobar Slim III
YOLOSWAGHASHTAGDOLLARBILLZSWIMMINGPOOLICECREAMS
130
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 02:48:20 -
[37] - Quote
LIKE DID IF U CRY EVER TIME |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3227
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:18:51 -
[38] - Quote
i think you overnerfed the grid on the confessor. If you compare the powerlevel of them both they don't deserve equal treatment IMO
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1463
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:32:16 -
[39] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:i think you overnerfed the grid on the confessor. If you compare the powerlevel of them both they don't deserve equal treatment IMO
The whole point is to kill 10mn AB fits. It doesn't matter how they compare to each other in that regard.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1463
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:33:24 -
[40] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:i'm still not enamored with the T2 resists, seems like a T2 thing too me, also the really high bonuses for each mode looks like too much.
The base resist profile could stand a tweek, but the really high bonuses in each mode is kind of the point of the ship.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
|
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
18
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:38:45 -
[41] - Quote
Just doing some quick numbers on my personal fits, the biggest nerf here is the speed and agility nerf to the confessor, by a _long_ shot. If we are looking at usage metrics the svipul is being used more than twice as much as the confessor is at least from looking at zkill. This would seem to indicate the svipul is a much bigger problem ship. From a personal perspective the main issue I see with the svipul is that it just does _too much damage_ comparatively. It is easily pushing cruiser level dps with a decent tank and a tiny pricetag.
The confessor is going to be much _much_ less nimble than before which may see a significant drop in its usage (alas sweet confessor you will dance no more), but the svipul is still going to be a monster of a brawler. As has been mentioned, lasers and armor tanks are very PG intensive so the relatively even ending numbers on these two ships don't make a lot of sense. In fact, I don't feel these numbers probably go far enough to curtail current fits (they don't change mine a lot fitting wise). In addition, the cost increase seems laughable. Why would I ever spend 25mil on an assault frigate when I can get one of these for 50? If these ships were more on the order of 100mil you would definitely see some price balance kick in.
Overall would like to see a little more batting of the svipul, and maybe a little less on the confessor, but a good start. |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1464
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:45:15 -
[42] - Quote
The Sabre is more used than the Heretic.
That has a lot to do with why the Svipul is used more than the Confessor.
If you look at them both individually, they have a roughly 10 to 1 kill to death ratio. They're in pretty much the same place.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Zakatka Night
675
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:46:34 -
[43] - Quote
nerf 10mn ab please - they give too much speed and are immune to scramble |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1464
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:49:04 -
[44] - Quote
Zakatka Night wrote:nerf 10mn ab please - they give too much speed and are immune to scramble
Think about what you just said.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
PanykButton
SergalJerk Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:49:53 -
[45] - Quote
I mean, call me crazy, but wasn't the initial price goal 40m isk? |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1464
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:51:54 -
[46] - Quote
PanykButton wrote:I mean, call me crazy, but wasn't the initial price goal 40m isk?
IIRC, 60 mil.
And plenty of people said they were insane for thinking that once the build requirements were revealed.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3227
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 03:59:40 -
[47] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Bienator II wrote:i think you overnerfed the grid on the confessor. If you compare the powerlevel of them both they don't deserve equal treatment IMO The whole point is to kill 10mn AB fits. It doesn't matter how they compare to each other in that regard. it does
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1464
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:03:36 -
[48] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Bienator II wrote:i think you overnerfed the grid on the confessor. If you compare the powerlevel of them both they don't deserve equal treatment IMO The whole point is to kill 10mn AB fits. It doesn't matter how they compare to each other in that regard. it does
The Confessor will have more PG than the Svipul and will be able to fit Guns, Prop, and Tank with proper skills. What's the problem?
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
18
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:06:43 -
[49] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:The Sabre is more used than the Heretic.
That has a lot to do with why the Svipul is used more than the Confessor.
If you look at them both individually, they have a roughly 10 to 1 kill to death ratio. They're in pretty much the same place.
The sabre is better than the heretic??? The margins between those two ships are more extreme than the svipul and confessor by the way. There are also ships with higher success ratios than both of the t3 destroyers *cough* mordu ships *cough* but those are clearly balanced. |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1464
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:09:53 -
[50] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:The Sabre is more used than the Heretic.
That has a lot to do with why the Svipul is used more than the Confessor.
If you look at them both individually, they have a roughly 10 to 1 kill to death ratio. They're in pretty much the same place. The sabre is better than the heretic??? The margins between those two ships are more extreme than the svipul and confessor by the way. There are also ships with higher success ratios than both of the t3 destroyers *cough* mordu ships *cough* but those are clearly balanced.
The Sabre is more used than the Heretic. Never said it was better.
EDIT: Actually, I take this back. Interdictors kill way more than they lose.
Faction ships have nothing to do with this discussion.
Anything else?
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
|
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
18
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:17:57 -
[51] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:
The Sabre is more used than the Heretic.
That has a lot to do with why the Svipul is used more than the Confessor.
Explain
Ned Thomas wrote:If you look at them both individually, they have a roughly 10 to 1 kill to death ratio.
This brings in any ship's effectiveness really.
Just to clarify.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1700
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:50:18 -
[52] - Quote
Well that's.. Harsh, to say the least!
I completely agree about the price change, but the rebanlance here? Not so much. Saying that T3Ds were able to fit 10MN a bit too easily is quite false as these choices where made at the cost of the ability to fit the best guns. Or by fitting autocannons, but I'd like to remind you that the svipul was never made for ACs, which is by itself another drawback.
I do understand the need to tune them down, but while I flew them a lot, in practice I never thought there were "OP". We are talking about the only T2 destroyer really made for (and only viable in) combat. OF COURSE they are a bit more powerful that interdictors, otherwise what's the point?
The good thing about T3 dessies is that they are... dessies. You cannot blob with them and expect to steamroll everything, simply because they do not win as much against larger ships. With the enthosis stuff happening soon, I can understand that they become a concern... But that's still harsh
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
760
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:51:11 -
[53] - Quote
The Confessor changes are *okay*. I'd much prefer the ship to be slower still.
The Svipul changes are a joke. The grid nerf does very little other than hinder artillery fits. AC fits are still broken as ****. The speed nerf is laughable. What is that, 10% when overloaded in speed mode? The Svipul needs to be SLAPPED.
Perhaps the more important question is, what the hell are these ships supposed to be comparable to? Even @ 50mil, the insurance payout makes them comparable to T1 Cruisers (with T2 mods), which other than a gimp fit, are woefully inept when it comes to taking on even a single T3D.
Hell, even with dual webs, a vanilla Svipul can still chug along @ 400+m/s in defensive mode No cruiser is tracking that.
And you want to give us more? Keep the nerfs coming.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Triksterism
Disconnect.
18
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 04:55:14 -
[54] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:The Confessor changes are *okay*. I'd much prefer the ship to be slower still.
The Svipul changes are a joke. The grid nerf does very little other than hinder artillery fits. AC fits are still broken as ****. The speed nerf is laughable. What is that, 10% when overloaded in speed mode? The Svipul needs to be SLAPPED.
Perhaps the more important question is, what the hell are these ships supposed to be comparable to? Even @ 50mil, the insurance payout makes them comparable to T1 Cruisers (with T2 mods), which other than a gimp fit, are woefully inept when it comes to taking on even a single T3D.
Hell, even with dual webs, a vanilla Svipul can still chug along @ 400+m/s in defensive mode No cruiser is tracking that.
And you want to give us more? Keep the nerfs coming.
This ^^^ to be honest.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/30dr3i/svipul_is_balanced/ |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 05:12:13 -
[55] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Drew Li wrote:Slightly off topic, but could you add a rig that reduces the powergrid of propulsion modules? That could allow a handful of ships to fit oversized prop mods, possibly even 100mn battlecruisers. That would still allow 10mn T3 destroyers, but they would be giving up rig slots to do so. The rigs would have to be more effective than stacking on a bunch of current routers and reactor controls to get grid. ..............you can't be serious.
I think he's serious.
He can't be tho?
He is.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Tear Jar
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
342
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 05:49:39 -
[56] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Much needed tweaks. Cant wait until tomorrow so I can believe them. CCP Fozzie wrote:We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable.
Still trying to balance with price huh... thought you learned that lesson..
Price balancing works fine on things that actually die. |
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
646
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 06:13:09 -
[57] - Quote
I guess I was abusing the shite out of these hulls then seems as almost all of my fits are now impossible.
Sigh, guess it was needed |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
103
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 06:20:56 -
[58] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:The Confessor changes are *okay*. I'd much prefer the ship to be slower still.
The Svipul changes are a joke. The grid nerf does very little other than hinder artillery fits. AC fits are still broken as ****. The speed nerf is laughable. What is that, 10% when overloaded in speed mode? The Svipul needs to be SLAPPED.
Perhaps the more important question is, what the hell are these ships supposed to be comparable to? Even @ 50mil, the insurance payout makes them comparable to T1 Cruisers (with T2 mods), which other than a gimp fit, are woefully inept when it comes to taking on even a single T3D.
Hell, even with dual webs, a vanilla Svipul can still chug along @ 400+m/s in defensive mode No cruiser is tracking that.
And you want to give us more? Keep the nerfs coming.
Have to agree with this fine gentleman regarding the Sviipul - Even with the PG reduction, I think 10MN AB with the smallest caliber ACs is still possible with a good/great tank to boot.
Someone run the numbers, please.
(Gò»-¦Gûí-¦n+ëGò»n+¦ Gö+GöüGö+ -----> Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼ pâÄ( pé£-pé£pâÄ)
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1700
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 06:37:51 -
[59] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Have to agree with this fine gentleman regarding the Sviipul - Even with the PG reduction, I think 10MN AB with the smallest caliber ACs is still possible with a good/great tank to boot.
The whole point of AC is to not use much powergrid. The only way to make AC svipuls very hard to fit would be to make Arty IMPOSSIBLE to fit.
I'd like to point out that ACs have a meh theoretical DPS and an even more meh actual DPS. But at least it hits most of the time.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Vlad Vladimir Vladinovsky
Black Iron Foundries Interstellar Solutions
29
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 06:55:16 -
[60] - Quote
God dammit CCP, why did you increase the cap recharge time on the confessor? it already had cap problems to begin with
why does the svipul get the same cap regen as the confessor? did you guys forget autocannons use zero cap and lasers are still garbage with your crutch bonuses of 10% to cap usage per level? |
|
Aiyshimin
Fistful of Finns Triumvirate.
497
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 07:26:13 -
[61] - Quote
Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
2217
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 07:41:57 -
[62] - Quote
have a T3 the destroyer they said.
Make a broken LSE Svipul fit they said. (well they didn't, but whatever)
76k EHP in a c4 Pulsar they said.
Nerf them they said.
Thanks, bro. Thankyou in the face.
Prolapse. Taking fights since 2014.
Sudden Buggery. Got duumb? Hola, Batmanuel!
http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
2217
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 07:47:06 -
[63] - Quote
Saede Riordan wrote:These are really small changes, I'm not sure what sort of effect it'll have yet on fitting but none of these changes seem to gimp the ships too much, (at a glance).
Pffft, it just shows how little you know about anything. Like, are you living under a rock, with your foot in your ear? 10PG is the difference between LSE Svipul and not LSE Svipul.
it's the difference between 36K EHP, and 18K EHP. If that's not significant, nothing is.
Go back to dullard creche and relearn Fitting Gymnastics I.
Prolapse. Taking fights since 2014.
Sudden Buggery. Got duumb? Hola, Batmanuel!
http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 07:58:39 -
[64] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Have to agree with this fine gentleman regarding the Sviipul - Even with the PG reduction, I think 10MN AB with the smallest caliber ACs is still possible with a good/great tank to boot. The whole point of AC is to not use much powergrid. The only way to make AC svipuls very hard to fit would be to make Arty IMPOSSIBLE to fit.
Artillery is indeed a concern here. Perhaps lower Small Arty PG requirements to compensate? How would that influence Arty Wolf/Thrashers?
Thanks
Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again.
The lady is korrekt again. RLMLs are starting to grow like cancer - How come my Abaddon/Tempest doesn't get a bonus to Medium Pulses/ACs?
Cruisers Online afterall vOv
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Spugg Galdon
Nisroc Angels
646
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 08:30:07 -
[65] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Saede Riordan wrote:These are really small changes, I'm not sure what sort of effect it'll have yet on fitting but none of these changes seem to gimp the ships too much, (at a glance). Pffft, it just shows how little you know about anything. Like, are you living under a rock, with your foot in your ear? 10PG is the difference between LSE Svipul and not LSE Svipul. it's the difference between 36K EHP, and 18K EHP. If that's not significant, nothing is. Go back to dullard creche and relearn Fitting Gymnastics I.
......aaaaaand that fit is still achievable with a "sheriff" LSE. Interesting. |
Miali Askulf
Black Rise Freight
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 08:45:16 -
[66] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Altrue wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Have to agree with this fine gentleman regarding the Sviipul - Even with the PG reduction, I think 10MN AB with the smallest caliber ACs is still possible with a good/great tank to boot. The whole point of AC is to not use much powergrid. The only way to make AC svipuls very hard to fit would be to make Arty IMPOSSIBLE to fit. Artillery is indeed a concern here. Perhaps lower Small Arty PG requirements to compensate? How would that influence Arty Wolf/Thrashers? Thanks Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again. The lady is korrekt again. R/HLMLs are starting to grow like cancer - How come my Abaddon/Tempest, Harbinger/Hurricane doesn't get a bonus to Medium/Small Pulses/ACs? Cruisers/T3Ds Online afterall vOv
The difference between AC and Arty fitting is too big (and not just small guns). It leads to pretty much all projectile fits being either arty + fitting mods + pretty much nothing else or ACs + *everything*... |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 09:11:15 -
[67] - Quote
Miali Askulf wrote: The difference between AC and Arty fitting is too big (and not just small guns). It leads to pretty much all projectile fits being either arty + fitting mods + pretty much nothing else
That has always been the case since the game's very inception: Tempests with 1400mms and two RCUs with the rest being all damage mods - no one ever bothered to fit any tank due to no stacking penalty on the the damage modules - Counter-Strike in space. However, in this day and age of solopwnmobiles, must have everything, tank too. (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç
Someone has to figure it out, otherwise Svipul will be just a very expensive Arty Thrasher, and I mean "just" a Thrasher.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1035
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:47:57 -
[68] - Quote
the actual issue here is oversized prop mods. why are they not being removed? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1035
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:49:17 -
[69] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again.
did you see that thing at fanfest where rise said he's ok with garmurs, because occasionally a very bad garmur pilot will die to a T1 frig? |
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
34089
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:52:28 -
[70] - Quote
would have settled for twice the manufacturing requirements for such powerful destroyers.
we'll see what happens to 10mn AB fits. this is one of the things that the powergrid allows that makes these ships as powerful as they are.
Critically Preposterous is recruiting! Join the fight!
I am a cat.
|
|
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
34089
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:53:18 -
[71] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again. did you see that thing at fanfest where rise said he's ok with garmurs, because occasionally a very bad garmur pilot will die to a T1 frig? did that also mention an orthrus dying to a T1 frig?
no?
rekt.
Critically Preposterous is recruiting! Join the fight!
I am a cat.
|
Rek Seven
The Scope Gallente Federation
1969
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:53:33 -
[72] - Quote
Regarding the Confessor, please increase the cpu by around 10 so we don't have to rely on implants, rigs or crap mods.
+1
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1035
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:55:58 -
[73] - Quote
Liafcipe9000 wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again. did you see that thing at fanfest where rise said he's ok with garmurs, because occasionally a very bad garmur pilot will die to a T1 frig? did that also mention an orthrus dying to a T1 frig? no? rekt.
it's theoretically possible if the orthrus pilot is afk. no nerf required. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
108
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 10:59:11 -
[74] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Regarding the Confessor, please increase the cpu by around 10 so we don't have to rely on implants, rigs or crap mods.
Which current setup doesn't fit CPU-wise?
I have DLP 10MN dual rep, DLB 10MN AAR and their equivalents with 1MN MWD in mind - All fit. I'll be honest - haven't tried SFP/Bs at all, because I'm a 10MN AB nanufaget.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Niden
Moira. Villore Accords
139
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:04:35 -
[75] - Quote
No time to read 3 pages. People who think these nerfs are mild don't fly the ships. I won't speak about the Svipul, but for me the Confessor shouldn't have been hit this hard. It's already clearly inferior to the Svipul and will lose a lot of its interesting tactics once the nerf hits.
#savetheconfessor
/N
Moira corp | Villore Accords | Gallente militia |-á Lowlife on Crossing Zebras | @Niden_GMVA
|
Inggroth
Aurora Ominae. The Gorgon Empire
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:07:07 -
[76] - Quote
In my opinion base pg needs to be cut at least by 20%, as well as CPU if you want to actually see a change in meta. Also a DESTROYER with a single speed rig that warps in 3 seconds (2 if you change out of speed mode mid-align) is a bit ridiculous. |
Skurja Volpar
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
128
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:09:29 -
[77] - Quote
Changes feel like a step the right direction, all in all they'll still be pretty ott in terms of what they can engage and the ships they effectively obsolete. I'm not sure this is enough but I'd love to be proved wrong.
Worried as the entire meta outside of big fleets feels like its starting to boil down to the latest batch of overpowered fotm new toys gifted from the devs, and the response seems to be "yeah they're op, enjoy!".
Tiercide created some amazing years of yolo frig destroyer and cruiser PVP, with a fuckload of diverse ships to choose from. But the sheer proliferation and dominance of t3ds when only half of them have been released feels like a regression back to 2011 balance over two point releases.
Still though good to see it's being looked at. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1036
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:09:39 -
[78] - Quote
Niden wrote:No time to read 3 pages. People who think these nerfs are mild don't fly the ships. I won't speak about the Svipul, but for me the Confessor shouldn't have been hit this hard. It's already clearly inferior to the Svipul and will lose a lot of its interesting tactics once the nerf hits.
#savetheconfessor
/N
'interesting tactics' = brawling but without actually committing to anything, and making missiles (even more) utterly useless |
Helene Fidard
Iron Oxide.
22
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:13:30 -
[79] - Quote
oh thank **** |
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
34096
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:15:10 -
[80] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. make sure to increase the bonuses of the modes then.
Critically Preposterous is recruiting! Join the fight!
I am a cat.
|
|
Mizhir
Matari Exodus
74191
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 11:38:35 -
[81] - Quote
Good changes, but I fear that the Svipul nerfs will hit mwd arty fits much harder than the 10mn auto fits which are the biggest problem about the ship right now.
One Man Crew - Collective Solo PVP - Video is out!
|
Rek Seven
The Scope Gallente Federation
1969
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 12:08:00 -
[82] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Regarding the Confessor, please increase the cpu by around 10 so we don't have to rely on implants, rigs or crap mods. Which current setup doesn't fit CPU-wise? I have DLP 10MN dual rep, DLB 10MN AAR and their equivalents with 1MN MWD in mind - All fit. I'll be honest - haven't tried SFP/Bs at all, because I'm a 10MN AB nanufaget.
I use a passive fit but perhaps a active might work better... Still, the active one i have just made runs into cpu issues.
What dps are you getting or better yet, can i see your fit?
+1
|
Drew Li
Space Exploitation Inc The Bastion
54
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 12:18:33 -
[83] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Drew Li wrote:Slightly off topic, but could you add a rig that reduces the powergrid of propulsion modules? That could allow a handful of ships to fit oversized prop mods, possibly even 100mn battlecruisers. That would still allow 10mn T3 destroyers, but they would be giving up rig slots to do so. The rigs would have to be more effective than stacking on a bunch of current routers and reactor controls to get grid. ..............you can't be serious. What's wrong with the suggestion? Granted the ability wouldn't be on par with what the status quo, but it would provide some interesting combinations. Even for the T3 destroyers you would be trading 37.5% of your EHP for an oversized prop mod, poor cap stability, and worse agility. Along with the proposed speed/agility changes that is a substantial hit. As for other hulls, there are very few that would have the cap stability or other necessary fitting requirements to make effective fits. HACs and T3s are the only platforms that would reasonably attempt it.
Ned Thomas wrote:The Sabre is more used than the Heretic.
That has a lot to do with why the Svipul is used more than the Confessor.
If you look at them both individually, they have a roughly 10 to 1 kill to death ratio. They're in pretty much the same place. I'd say the primary reason is that the only comparable ship being equal to a T3 destroyer is another destroyer. So you have one that deals EM/Therm damage shooting at the other with a ~90% EM/Therm resist and the ability to shoot any damage type. Not to mention more mids for tackle. |
Stalence
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry Templis CALSF
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 12:27:14 -
[84] - Quote
Firstly, I'll caveat what follows with I can speak from my experiences flying with and fighting against these hulls in low sec. I have no idea how these ships are being used in other areas of space or what their meta looks like there.
That said, the Confessor changes though are too harsh. The Confessor is actually a very challenging ship to fly as it is today. It's also quite vulnerable to neuts and tracking disrupters. I would urge you to remove the cap recharge nerf altogether on the ship and dial back the other nerfs to the ship considerably. Especially if you're nerfing cap rechargewhile simultaneously pushing people towards a 1MN MWD instead of a 10MN AB, the ship will have a tough time fitting into the speed meta in low sec and see virtually no usage after people expend their current stock of hulls.
I can however see the rationale for the Svipul changes. That ship is beyond over-powered at the moment. So while I love flying the Svipul right now, I agree that significant changes need to be made. Most noticeably to remove the dual armor rep fits.
Regarding price, I can see the rationale for the price increase for all D3s, I'm okay with this. In particular, I think it will help in steering more people into fielding T1 cruisers or assault frigates instead of D3s for some engagements. As it was, I think D3s were overshadowing those two groups for a bit there in the cost vs performance math we all do in our head before undocking.
Member of #tweetfleet @stalence //
Combat FRAPs on YouTube
|
Canon Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 12:44:33 -
[85] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:The Confessor changes are *okay*. I'd much prefer the ship to be slower still.
The Svipul changes are a joke. The grid nerf does very little other than hinder artillery fits. AC fits are still broken as ****. The speed nerf is laughable. What is that, 10% when overloaded in speed mode? The Svipul needs to be SLAPPED.
Perhaps the more important question is, what the hell are these ships supposed to be comparable to? Even @ 50mil, the insurance payout makes them comparable to T1 Cruisers (with T2 mods), which other than a gimp fit, are woefully inept when it comes to taking on even a single T3D.
Hell, even with dual webs, a vanilla Svipul can still chug along @ 400+m/s in defensive mode No cruiser is tracking that.
And you want to give us more? Keep the nerfs coming.
totally agree, the powergrid nerf is just simple hinder the artillery fits. 10AB and dual ASB still very easy to fit by changing one powergrid rig. |
Niden
Moira. Villore Accords
139
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 13:10:39 -
[86] - Quote
Stalence wrote:Firstly, I'll caveat what follows with I can speak from my experiences flying with and fighting against these hulls in low sec. I have no idea how these ships are being used in other areas of space or what their meta looks like there.
That said, the Confessor changes though are too harsh. The Confessor is actually a very challenging ship to fly as it is today. It's also quite vulnerable to neuts and tracking disrupters. I would urge you to remove the cap recharge nerf altogether on the ship and dial back the other nerfs to the ship considerably. Especially if you're nerfing cap rechargewhile simultaneously pushing people towards a 1MN MWD instead of a 10MN AB, the ship will have a tough time fitting into the speed meta in low sec and see virtually no usage after people expend their current stock of hulls.
I can however see the rationale for the Svipul changes. That ship is beyond over-powered at the moment. So while I love flying the Svipul right now, I agree that significant changes need to be made. Most noticeably to remove the dual armor rep fits.
Regarding price, I can see the rationale for the price increase for all D3s, I'm okay with this. In particular, I think it will help in steering more people into fielding T1 cruisers or assault frigates instead of D3s for some engagements. As it was, I think D3s were overshadowing those two groups for a bit there in the cost vs performance math we all do in our head before undocking.
So much this.
<3 Stalence
/N
Moira corp | Villore Accords | Gallente militia |-á Lowlife on Crossing Zebras | @Niden_GMVA
|
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
152
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 13:29:17 -
[87] - Quote
Did anybody just stop to think that the reason lots of players are using D3's is because they are good and FUN? And FUN is the reason for playing the game right? Just because lots of players are enjoying a ship SHOULD NOT mean that is has to have a nerf. I Am not a fan of any changes to the current D3's. I feel it is just another nerf to stuff I like but still failing to fix bigger issues like OGB that I hate. I Can deal with a hull cost increase. I feel that is justified. But to change any of the stats for the ship on how it flies is just a move backwards. The thing that folks like about the D3's is just how many way you CAN fit it. Same goes for when you want to kill one too. You just don't know what you are going up against until you are on grid and looking at it to see if it is shield or amour tanked, Arty or Autos, Beams, pulse. That is part of the fun of this ship.
TL'DR
Why nerf the fun things that players find fun? |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
326
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 13:43:47 -
[88] - Quote
Oddsodz wrote:Did anybody just stop to think that the reason lots of players are using D3's is because they are good and FUN? And FUN is the reason for playing the game right? Just because lots of players are enjoying a ship SHOULD NOT mean that is has to have a nerf. I Am not a fan of any changes to the current D3's. I feel it is just another nerf to stuff I like but still failing to fix bigger issues like OGB that I hate. I Can deal with a hull cost increase. I feel that is justified. But to change any of the stats for the ship on how it flies is just a move backwards. The thing that folks like about the D3's is just how many way you CAN fit it. Same goes for when you want to kill one too. You just don't know what you are going up against until you are on grid and looking at it to see if it is shield or amour tanked, Arty or Autos, Beams, pulse. That is part of the fun of this ship.
TL'DR
Why nerf the fun things that players find fun?
Because a large part of the reason T3 Dessies are so fun right now is that they're at a significant advantage compared to the majority of things that have any chance of engaging one that doesn't want to be engaged. After this change they're still going to be fun, but they won't be "laugh all the way to the bank because you're fitting a 10MN AB with no significant trade-offs" fun. |
Xavier Azabu
The Scope Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 14:15:51 -
[89] - Quote
Called it! Speed and PG for the win. +1
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/30dr3i/svipul_is_balanced/cps0xzv |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
112
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 14:16:13 -
[90] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Regarding the Confessor, please increase the cpu by around 10 so we don't have to rely on implants, rigs or crap mods. Which current setup doesn't fit CPU-wise? I have DLP 10MN dual rep, DLB 10MN AAR and their equivalents with 1MN MWD in mind - All fit. I'll be honest - haven't tried SFP/Bs at all, because I'm a 10MN AB nanufaget. I use a passive fit but perhaps a active might work better... Still, the active one i have just made runs into cpu issues. What dps are you getting or better yet, can i see your fit?
Two of my first ones, 398 cold with Conflag and 35-ish CPU spare. No, a DB EANM doesn't give a higher DPS/tanked.
Quote:[Confessor, DLPulse - 2 SAR 10MN] Corpii A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating Small Armor Repairer II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Heat Sink II Heat Sink II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Warp Scrambler II
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Expanded Probe Launcher I, Core Scanner Probe I
Small Auxiliary Nano Pump II Small Nanobot Accelerator II Small Ancillary Current Router I
Melt face, yes? However, a smart Slicer pilot will chew you down... in 20 minutes.
Quote:[Confessor, DLBeams - 10MN] Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Internal Force Field Array I Nanofiber Internal Structure II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Warp Disruptor II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Expanded Probe Launcher I, Core Scanner Probe I
Small Energy Locus Coordinator II Small Energy Locus Coordinator II Small Ancillary Current Router I
Nanufaget, works a little bit better with 1MN MWD. Rigs to taste; 37/61 km with Aurora. Web <--> Scram is also pref.
Haven't used them in over 1.5 months, use spaceship fits at your own risk. vOv
Total EHP in both fits is around 6-6.5k, but that's how we roll brother,
GûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûä GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûä GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûêGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûÇGûÆGûäGûäGûäGûÆGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûêGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûÆGûäGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûÆGûê GûæGûêGûÇGûäGûæGûêGûäGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÇGûæGûÇGûÇGûæGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûÇGûêGûäGûäGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûêGûÇGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûêGûêGûæGûæGûÇGûêGûäGûäGûäGûêGûäGûäGûêGûäGûêGûêGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûêGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûêGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûê GûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûê
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
|
GeeShizzle MacCloud
584
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 14:26:51 -
[91] - Quote
I honestly feel a CPU hit on the svipul would impact better than a PG nerf, granted this nerf is okay but it doesn't go that far to dealing with the issue. Stacking ACR rigs is easy, but CPU rigs are hella expensive in calibration, limiting their stacking ability.
At worst people flying the arty fit with just a PG nerf will take off a single 1 of their 3 damage mods or possibly a tracking mod and replace it with a mapc and be on their way again.
Having a cpu reduction on the svipul to 192CPU before skills alongside the small PG nerf would result in a curtail of the 10mn ab 280mm Arty fits better than the single pg hit alone.
people can still downgrade their artys to make it fit or plug in some implants.
... and i think a 5 second warm up time for the mode change (as mentioned earlier in this thread) alongside a 5 second cooldown would be more challenging then a straight 10 second cooldown and would somewhat remove the instawarp mode change issue too.
Edit: Also wanted to say EveHQ's HQF Editor is the sh*t for this kind of prototyping! mad props to the devs at making and maintaining that! |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
327
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:01:37 -
[92] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:I honestly feel a CPU hit on the svipul would impact better than a PG nerf, granted this nerf is okay but it doesn't go that far to dealing with the issue. Stacking ACR rigs is easy, but CPU rigs are hella expensive in calibration, limiting their stacking ability.
At worst people flying the arty fit with just a PG nerf will take off a single 1 of their 3 damage mods or possibly a tracking mod and replace it with a mapc and be on their way again.
Having a cpu reduction on the svipul to 192CPU before skills alongside the small PG nerf would result in a curtail of the 10mn ab 280mm Arty fits better than the single pg hit alone.
people can still downgrade their artys to make it fit or plug in some implants.
... and i think a 5 second warm up time for the mode change (as mentioned earlier in this thread) alongside a 5 second cooldown would be more challenging then a straight 10 second cooldown and would somewhat remove the instawarp mode change issue too.
Edit: Also wanted to say EveHQ's HQF Editor is the sh*t for this kind of prototyping! mad props to the devs at making and maintaining that!
Nothing here is meant to invalidate these fits, just nerf them a bit. If you're fitting a rig to deal with the Powergrid changes then you're not fitting a rig for speed, agility, damage, tank, or something else which means your ship is less effective compared to before the nerf. |
GankYou
Redshield Holding Company
55
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:08:22 -
[93] - Quote
I would like to inform all the interested parties, that there had been an obvious price manipulation with buying up stock by speculators and price hikes from genuine producers with respect to the increase in the proposed build cost, which is being raised by around 12 mln ISK per hull.
Within minutes of the announcement, prices spiked as high as 55m from the avg of 37m in Amarr, Domain region. This puts current build profit margins at 23 mln ISK, or 11m previously for the Confessor, as an example.
These prices won't last, so I caution you about stockping up on hulls prior to the Attribute changes going live on TQ at the end of April.
Full disclosure: I have no position in this commodity.
Regards,
CEO of Redshield Holding Company |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
584
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:15:10 -
[94] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: Nothing here is meant to invalidate these fits, just nerf them a bit. If you're fitting a rig to deal with the Powergrid changes then you're not fitting a rig for speed, agility, damage, tank, or something else which means your ship is less effective compared to before the nerf.
yes but what im saying is that the currently proposed changes to the svipul will be practically ineffective, they may slightly reduce damage from a 3x stacked damage mod to 2x stacked) or slightly reduce tracking but considering the bonuses and modes and the frequency they can be changed its hardly a nerf at all.
the -20 on the speed is far more of a nerf on the svipul then the pg loss, which is negligible at best. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
329
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:20:03 -
[95] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:yes but what im saying is that the currently proposed changes to the svipul will be practically ineffective, they may slightly reduce damage from a 3x stacked damage mod to 2x stacked) or slightly reduce tracking but considering the bonuses and modes and the frequency they can be changed its hardly a nerf at all.
the -20 on the speed is far more of a nerf on the svipul then the pg loss, which is negligible at best.
That seems to be more or less their intent, for this to be a small incremental adjustment as opposed to a "rod from god" nerf-bat from orbit. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
584
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:24:35 -
[96] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:yes but what im saying is that the currently proposed changes to the svipul will be practically ineffective, they may slightly reduce damage from a 3x stacked damage mod to 2x stacked) or slightly reduce tracking but considering the bonuses and modes and the frequency they can be changed its hardly a nerf at all.
the -20 on the speed is far more of a nerf on the svipul then the pg loss, which is negligible at best. That seems to be more or less their intent, for this to be a small incremental adjustment as opposed to a "rod from god" nerf-bat from orbit.
yah and its understanable but when you're dealing with something u can actually put on a testbed and punch numbers in to get numbers out, theres actually very little sense in even having that 10pg drop. the fits people are utilising can absorb that pg hit with ease and carry on regardless. which shows that its either in the wrong place, is too light or requires an additional factor that multiplies its effectiveness - like an associated cpu hit. |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
338
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:31:39 -
[97] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback!
Good changes so far, though more will likely be needed to the svipul. The only thing it does to the svipul is make the already not very useful arty fit even less viable.
Here's another suggested tweak: Reduce the cargo capacity of T3D by 100-200m3. It is silly that they have as much cargo as many cruiser/BC sized ships (in fact, the entire system of cargo size is currently broken IMO. BS sized hulls should have more like 1km3, BC sized hulls more like 600, for instance, given the size of cap charges and some L ammo).
|
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1227
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:32:57 -
[98] - Quote
So losing about 1/8 of base PG? ouch. Those long range fits were already tight. Trade-offs will be made.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 15:49:39 -
[99] - Quote
Please rename the topic from "Minor tweaks" (which they aren't) to "Dramiel style execution of the T3 destroyers." A nerf to the price would have been sufficient; now you're nerfing your child into the round. If a majority of people think that a particular setup of ship is overpowered do not always listen to them. They may just be using inferioir tactics to dealing with the problem. You can easily kill a T3 destroyer if you have proper tackle which most of the big gangs out there lack. Now everyone will just go back to arty thrashers and that will get nerfed into the ground because a select few individuals complain about it being overpowered. Why not fix something that actually need fixing like T1 cruiser logi being such a huge force multiplier? Please nerf that into the ground instead of the T3 destroyers which add variety to the game :( |
Am Staff
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 16:09:16 -
[100] - Quote
Is there anything that you don't want to nerf fozzie |
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3230
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 16:22:15 -
[101] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Bienator II wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Bienator II wrote:i think you overnerfed the grid on the confessor. If you compare the powerlevel of them both they don't deserve equal treatment IMO The whole point is to kill 10mn AB fits. It doesn't matter how they compare to each other in that regard. it does The Confessor will have more PG than the Svipul and will be able to fit Guns, Prop, and Tank with proper skills. What's the problem? a ship is balanced if you can fit prop, tank and guns? Thats a little oversimplified.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Carrie-Anne Moss
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
45
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 16:44:06 -
[102] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:Saede Riordan wrote:These are really small changes, I'm not sure what sort of effect it'll have yet on fitting but none of these changes seem to gimp the ships too much, (at a glance). Pffft, it just shows how little you know about anything. Like, are you living under a rock, with your foot in your ear? 10PG is the difference between LSE Svipul and not LSE Svipul. it's the difference between 36K EHP, and 18K EHP. If that's not significant, nothing is. Go back to dullard creche and relearn Fitting Gymnastics I.
Umm ever think LSE were never intended/wanted them to be used on a destroyer?
Why do you think you should be able to fit a BATTLESHIP sized shield extender and a freaking destroyer hull dude??
It was broken and shouldnt be possible.
Cry |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
329
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 16:57:46 -
[103] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:yah and its understanable but when you're dealing with something u can actually put on a testbed and punch numbers in to get numbers out, theres actually very little sense in even having that 10pg drop. the fits people are utilising can absorb that pg hit with ease and carry on regardless. which shows that its either in the wrong place, is too light or requires an additional factor that multiplies its effectiveness - like an associated cpu hit.
Out of curiosity would you mind throwing up a couple of fits you think won't be adversely affected by this?
Also keep in mind that's 10 base PG, which translates into more after skills and other multipliers are taken into account. |
Mechanical Infidel
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 16:58:07 -
[104] - Quote
Wouldn't it be better to target 10mn fits instead of nerfing the overall ship. Why not increase 10mn afterburners to 75pwg instead, I know it effects more ships, but cruisers have more pwg to spare to compensate for it. Changing it to 75pwg would also bring a bit more consistency in the afterburner to micro-warp drive relation too. (ab pwg = 50% microwarpdrive pwg) |
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 17:11:39 -
[105] - Quote
As usual, cutting the grid was the way of the least effort. RIP versatile and interesting Svipul that was able to chose from a wide range of valid fittings, including all the tank, propulsion and armor types. Welcome boring Svipul that only has 1 or 2 cookie cutter fits everyone is flying. Come here Crow with empty highslots, you got a new friend.
How about you start doing your job and actually start balancing ships? |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1463
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 17:32:33 -
[106] - Quote
Love the tears. As usual, some retards fucks are mad when overpowered **** gets balanced.
The Tears Must Flow
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
161
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 17:49:54 -
[107] - Quote
This is a start i suppose.
The oversized prop fits weren't that hard to kill, in fact i've killed quite a few. They're extremely weak to neuts.
The fit i'm using is only going to see a loss of 100 m/s to add another grid mod. So, instead of 3500 m/s cold, it will be 3400 m/s cold in prop mode with a 1mn MWD. Yea idk.. somehow a bigger, heavier dessie is considerably faster than a nano'd AF.
Still no reason to fly a jag/wolf. Svipul can still go as fast as an inty, project 190 dps out to 30-40km (or 290ish out to 20-25km) and has more tank than the arty wolf/jag.
This may stop all the 10mn scrub fits, but now you'll just have 3-5km/s 1mn MWD fits flying all over that still decimate or obsolete most AF (well, all frigs in general really). Still, at least you've acknowledged they're OP.
Consider nerfing prop mode, or base speed next, depending on which way the meta shifts. |
devian chase
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 17:57:31 -
[108] - Quote
Tbh the thing that makes a svipul slightly overpowered is the oversized 10mn ab fits Why not make oversizing prop mods on all ships a thing of the past That way you can keep the pg for decent arty fits and it will make balancing of all ships in the game easier ( 100mn tengu of the past where a joke as well ) |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1092
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 17:59:06 -
[109] - Quote
there was no reason to fly jag/wolf before the t3 destroyers got introduced anyway bro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Vad Olacar
H.E.L.I.X NEOS FLEET
26
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 18:31:18 -
[110] - Quote
I've just read an update. And I'm upset. Confessors in hangar are just expensive trash now. Thanks. |
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
281
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 18:38:16 -
[111] - Quote
I'm not too upset by the nerf although I haven't really done anything with svipul. Just glad the nerf doesn't bother my 'fessor. Still have pg to spare. And for 200+ kills with one loss (damn you, you triple-armor repping svipul who tricksed me!) it's really a matter of how you use it. |
Mixu Paatelainen
Brutal Deluxe.
213
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 19:04:34 -
[112] - Quote
Are you going to be making commensurate changes to the proposed Hecate/Jackdaw stats?
Also: no sig radius nerf. lol. |
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 19:37:26 -
[113] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Love the tears. As usual, some retards fucks are mad when overpowered ships get balanced.
... are mad when overpowered ships are released and then "fixed" in the wrong way. Fixed it for you. Sorry, couldn't do anything about your poor neighborhood language. |
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
1463
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 19:39:06 -
[114] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Love the tears. As usual, some retards fucks are mad when overpowered ships get balanced. ... are mad when overpowered ships are released and then "fixed" in the wrong way. Fixed it for you. Sorry, couldn't do anything about your poor neighborhood language.
Fixed the wrong way my ass. Cry more ********.
The Tears Must Flow
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
116
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 20:33:43 -
[115] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote: ... are mad when overpowered ships are released and then "fixed" in the wrong way. Fixed it for you. Sorry, couldn't do anything about your poor neighborhood language.
No need for tears now, I too, have Amarr Tactical Destroyer V. It's alright now.
Some things are meant to be - this was one of them. I realised this the second Confessor stats were out, hence Amarr TD V, even though I knew it would come eventually. I just wanted to abuse the platform for my own personal satisfaction.
So sad.
But take it like a man.
It's alright.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
767
|
Posted - 2015.04.02 21:55:54 -
[116] - Quote
GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:the -20 on the speed is far more of a nerf on the svipul then the pg loss, which is negligible at best.
The -20 is less than 10% on an overheated Svipul. It's a hilariously weak change.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 08:34:09 -
[117] - Quote
Vaju Enki wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:Vaju Enki wrote:Love the tears. As usual, some retards fucks are mad when overpowered ships get balanced. ... are mad when overpowered ships are released and then "fixed" in the wrong way. Fixed it for you. Sorry, couldn't do anything about your poor neighborhood language. Fixed the wrong way my ass. Cry more ********.
You should apply at CCP. You definitely got the talent. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
497
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 09:37:34 -
[118] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again. HISSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!! *swipes* |
Nalia White
Tencus
93
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 11:01:56 -
[119] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:the -20 on the speed is far more of a nerf on the svipul then the pg loss, which is negligible at best. The -20 is less than 10% on an overheated Svipul. It's a hilariously weak change.
well i know for a fact you are bitter of destroyer hulls in general :P
but the speed change is huge. it is clearly slower now than a thrasher in non propulsion mode which it was even before btw. i generaly think destroyers are too slow but that's another thing.
i am speaking about the svipul here. i always flew no tank arty variant which now sadly has to be compromised even more due to the changes even with no freaking tank at all...
nerfs had to be made as the only ship capable to tackle and kill the 10mn variants in a one on one was a rapier (it was my go to ship at least to kill em reliably, even deadspace fitted ones)... and i think it would hit the pg but never that high. i would have made a mixed nerf of for example -5 to pg of the ships and +5 pg on 10mn afterburners or just plain and simple don't allow oversized prop mods on smaller ships... a single t3 destroyer should never be able to beat a similarly competent cruiser pilot when both have short range fits.
but the argument of "diverse fitting" options are a joke really because for that to happen now the fitting costs of small artilleries has to be at least minus 1 pg. even the thrasher needs 2 small ancilliary current router to fit 280s and a mwd... the same is now true for the svipul which is a joke really if you have just one small projectile rig in it. what happened to TANK / RANGE-APPLICATION / SPEED --> choose 2.
as countless people said it will kill arty variants which i am a bit sad as i like this weapon a lot but there are so few ships where they are viable... and those variants were surely balanced. they would pack cruiser dps on small long range turret (with short range ammo of course) but they had absolutely no tank and can be oneshot by the same fit (a friend actualy oneshot a dual masb svipul = no buffer like arty) ... i would call that balanced (not the 10mn variant, but the no tank arty fits).
it's bad to even think about going back to the artythrasher. much better tracking (which i experienced is a huge thing btw!), better speed, a looooooooooot cheaper, alpha difference will no longer be that huge (was 15% more alpha with svipul, 30% more dps). the only plus for artyfits will be the higher dps (will still be around 20-25% i think as i have to change one gyro for a mapc, maybe that lets me fit a tracking rig even, will have to see)
i can say i have a lot of experience in this field of play. you can watch my killboard if you don't believe me :P
tldr:
either disallow (is that even a word?) oversized prop mods or split the pg nerf to -5 to the ships and +5 to the 10mn ab. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1038
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 11:04:26 -
[120] - Quote
Nalia White wrote:[ i am speaking about the svipul here. i always flew no tank arty variant which now sadly has to be compromised even more due to the changes even with no freaking tank at all...
the fitting gap between ACs and arties is something CCP doesn't seem to care about, even though it's really dumb. |
|
Vulfen
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
174
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 11:27:05 -
[121] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Nalia White wrote:[ i am speaking about the svipul here. i always flew no tank arty variant which now sadly has to be compromised even more due to the changes even with no freaking tank at all...
the fitting gap between ACs and arties is something CCP doesn't seem to care about, even though it's really dumb.
Big arty should be hard to fit. However i do think that small arty need a small reduction in their cost. |
Nalia White
Tencus
93
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 11:30:18 -
[122] - Quote
Vulfen wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Nalia White wrote:[ i am speaking about the svipul here. i always flew no tank arty variant which now sadly has to be compromised even more due to the changes even with no freaking tank at all...
the fitting gap between ACs and arties is something CCP doesn't seem to care about, even though it's really dumb. Big arty should be hard to fit. However i do think that small arty need a small reduction in their cost.
i think you should be able to fit a full rack of the biggest arties and a mwd with no tank at all without relying on fitting mods... no tank is already a huge commitment. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1038
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 12:54:05 -
[123] - Quote
Vulfen wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Nalia White wrote:[ i am speaking about the svipul here. i always flew no tank arty variant which now sadly has to be compromised even more due to the changes even with no freaking tank at all...
the fitting gap between ACs and arties is something CCP doesn't seem to care about, even though it's really dumb. Big arty should be hard to fit. However i do think that small arty need a small reduction in their cost.
so should big ACs. but currently if you want to use ACs on what ccp decides is an 'artillery ship', you get infinite fitting, and if you want to use artillery on an AC ship, you can't |
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
398
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 13:46:57 -
[124] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks. The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits. We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable. The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates. Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback!
Fare thee well, 280mm Kite Svipul.
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1038
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 14:55:37 -
[125] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks. The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits. We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable. The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates. Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback! Fare thee well, 280mm Kite Svipul. Edit: I'm using a fit with 280mm, a MSE, a 1mn MWD. To get this **** crammed into the ship i already need an Auxillary Power Control and a T2 Ancillary Current Router. And to round the fit out i used Geno Cores 1&2 + a 3% CPU imp. Sooo, with 10 PG gone. How exactly am i supposed to use Artillery on the Svipul? 250mms and shoot LR ammo cause if i used PP i might aswell fit Autos?
use masb or saar. you're not supposed to be able to fit absolutely everything. |
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
398
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 17:29:19 -
[126] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks. The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits. We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable. The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates. Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback! Fare thee well, 280mm Kite Svipul. Edit: I'm using a fit with 280mm, a MSE, a 1mn MWD. To get this **** crammed into the ship i already need an Auxillary Power Control and a T2 Ancillary Current Router. And to round the fit out i used Geno Cores 1&2 + a 3% CPU imp. Sooo, with 10 PG gone. How exactly am i supposed to use Artillery on the Svipul? 250mms and shoot LR ammo cause if i used PP i might aswell fit Autos? use masb or saar. you're not supposed to be able to fit absolutely everything.
I'm using 2 fitting mods and 3 imps to make a fit work. If i now had to use a MASB instead of the MSE, i'd wonder where i should pull the CPU from. Cause i will still need the 2 fitting mods.
Edit: And this is not some very-special-snowflake-fit, this is using artilleries on an artilleryplatform. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
772
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 17:34:29 -
[127] - Quote
Nalia White wrote:well i know for a fact you are bitter of destroyer hulls in general :P What? I fly T1 Destroyers all the time. I hate the T3Ds and Mordus ships, and I think they are cancerous to this game.
I agree that the oversized mods are what break these ships. The best tracking cruiser in the game (Thorax) can't reliably hit a 10mn Svipul without gimping its fit to do so.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
606
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 18:04:29 -
[128] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Nalia White wrote:well i know for a fact you are bitter of destroyer hulls in general :P What? I fly T1 Destroyers all the time. I hate the T3Ds and Mordus ships, and I think they are cancerous to this game. I agree that the oversized mods are what break these ships. The best tracking cruiser in the game (Thorax) can't hit a 10mn Svipul without gimping its fit to do so.
Prometheus dear, Mordus ships are not so bad unless someone links them. But then all other ships are op too when linked. Actually what you do not like are light missiles.
In case of the minmatar d3 you are correct, they are just silly and everyone knows it. Confessors on the other hand are not as terrible as some folks make them out to be.
The minmatar ones are the cream on the cupcake here and earned a few more nerfes than they currently get.
signature
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3230
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 18:24:26 -
[129] - Quote
random svipul fits which are unaffected by the fitting changes.
375dps tank and 548 (cold) dps tank. Both cap stable.
No implants or drugs (you might need 2% grid for one of them, depends how the grid changes are calculated. i did that in my head)
thats why i said confessor and svipul should not get the same treatment since they both have different power levels.
[Svipul, passive]
Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
[Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II Small Capacitor Control Circuit II
[Svipul, active]
Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
[Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II Small Capacitor Control Circuit II
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Nalia White
Tencus
94
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 18:30:14 -
[130] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:random svipul fits which are unaffected by the fitting changes.
375dps tank and 548 (cold) dps tank. Both cap stable.
No implants or drugs (you might need 2% grid for one of them, depends how the grid changes are calculated. i did that in my head)
thats why i said confessor and svipul should not get the same treatment since they both have different power levels.
[Svipul, passive]
Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
[Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II Small Capacitor Control Circuit II
[Svipul, active]
Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
[Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II Small Capacitor Control Circuit II
you must be joking right? |
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
772
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 18:35:21 -
[131] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Mordus ships are not so bad unless someone links them. But then all other ships are op too when linked. Actually what you do not like are light missiles.
I'm sorry, but the Orthrus is a ship that makes no sense. It's true, RLMLs have pretty much ruined frigate pvp since the offer high damage that cannot be negated (unless youre in a T3D). Replace the blanket missile bonus with HAM/HML & nuke its agility.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
162
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 18:52:50 -
[132] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Confessor and Svipul in our April release. We are extremely happy that so many people are having fun with these new ships and we are committed to keeping them powerful and exciting, but we ideally want that power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition. At the moment these ships are a little bit too strong and provide a bit too much vale for their cost. We've been listening to a lot of feedback on these ships from many players (including at Fanfest) and we're ready to make a few tweaks. The biggest area of change in this release will be in fitting. Both the Confessor and Svipul will be losing some powergrid to ensure that fitting choices for them are interesting and to pull back the power of some very high-PG fits. We're also increasing the build requirements of both of these ships to bring them closer to our original target price and to help ensure that the value you get for the cost of the ship is reasonable. The rest of the changes are more minor, but they involve small reductions in speed, agility and mass, as well as capacitor and shield recharge rates. Confessor:
- Powergrid: 71 (-9)
- Max Velocity: 250 (-30)
- Mass: 2,200,000kg (-200,000)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Inertia: 2.4 (+0.25)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- Powergrid: 68 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 270 (-20)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback! Fare thee well, 280mm Kite Svipul. Edit: I'm using a fit with 280mm, a MSE, a 1mn MWD. To get this **** crammed into the ship i already need an Auxillary Power Control and a T2 Ancillary Current Router. And to round the fit out i used Geno Cores 1&2 + a 3% CPU imp. Sooo, with 10 PG gone. How exactly am i supposed to use Artillery on the Svipul? 250mms and shoot LR ammo cause if i used PP i might aswell fit Autos? use masb or saar. you're not supposed to be able to fit absolutely everything. I'm using 2 fitting mods and 3 imps to make a fit work. If i now had to use a MASB instead of the MSE, i'd wonder where i should pull the CPU from. Cause i will still need the 2 fitting mods. Edit: And this is not some very-special-snowflake-fit, this is using artilleries on an artilleryplatform.
Welcome to CCPs love affair of making arty fits not viable on arty ships.
Tbh though, MASB/mwd/280s should still be doable after nerf. I can fit it now with only 1 acr. I have additional rig slots available too (polycarb) or drop a nano for Mapc. I think we can manage.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
127
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 18:55:27 -
[133] - Quote
Nalia White wrote:Bienator II wrote:random svipul fits which are unaffected by the fitting changes.
375dps tank and 548 (cold) dps tank. Both cap stable.
No implants or drugs (you might need 2% grid for one of them, depends how the grid changes are calculated. i did that in my head)
thats why i said confessor and svipul should not get the same treatment since they both have different power levels.
[Svipul, passive]
Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
[Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II Small Capacitor Control Circuit II
[Svipul, active]
Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Capacitor Flux Coil II Damage Control II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster
[Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II Small Capacitor Control Circuit II
you must be joking right?
Is gud fit. vOv
LOL
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
398
|
Posted - 2015.04.03 20:21:48 -
[134] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Is gud fit. vOv
LOL
Actually it's an impressive fit. Some of you maybe know the Breacher, right? Uses the same damn strat, and tanks like a massive ****.
This seems weird, as you realized, but if you have to fight this thing in a 1v1 you'll be like WTF. Even in a 2v1 or 3v1.
Bienator here is some really impressive FW pilot, he probably knows more about working fits on frig / dessie scale than most other eve-players.
On topic again:
It seems to me that the intent of this nerf is to discourage people from fitting oversized Propmods to these dessies.
If we look at 1mn Propmods, we can see a 10pg need for ABs and 15pg for MWDs. --> AB = 66% Grid need of MWD On 100mn, we can see 625pg need for ABs and 1250pg for MWDs (Numbers from head, don't nail me here!) --> AB = 50% Grid need of MWD.
If we'd extrapolate this relationship, we'd come to the conclusion that on 10mn, the AB should require 58% of MWD pg.
However, the AB takes 50pg and the MWD takes 150. That's 33%.
Hooooow about: We increase 10mn AB pg requirements to 100 instead of 50, and give all cruisers +50 powergrid? This will keep their viability with 10mn AB fits, and slightly increase their fitting on MWD fits. Same for BCs.
Edit:
This would make it near impossible to overprop a dessie. It would also help several Minmatar Cruisers in fitting Arties, as they usually run MWD and would benefit from a +50pg buff. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3230
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 04:33:35 -
[135] - Quote
aren't ABs next on the tiericide list?
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
332
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 06:12:29 -
[136] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:random svipul fits which are unaffected by the fitting changes.
375dps tank and 548 (cold) dps tank. Both cap stable.
No implants or drugs (you might need 2% grid for one of them, depends how the grid changes are calculated. i did that in my head)
thats why i said confessor and svipul should not get the same treatment since they both have different power levels.
[Svipul, passivel]
...SNIP for post length...
[Svipul, active]
...SNIP for post length...
edit: ops i pasted the same fit twice. fixed
A quick check on both fits shows that the first one is a *lot* tighter on PG coming in just 1 PG under the new max (85PG, FYI) with maxed skills, meaning it now requires all-5s on the relevant fitting skills instead of being a fairly loose fit for the ship. The second one does, indeed, require a PG implant which means it's making a small trade-off as well as needing max skills (or a bigger implant).
Also the passive fit is affected by the shield recharge changes, and both are affected by the top speed nerf and the cap changes. It's not a huge change by any means, but it's still very much there. |
ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
452
|
Posted - 2015.04.04 08:20:59 -
[137] - Quote
I have removed a disrespectful, borderline trollish post. Please be respectful if you want to continue participating on our forums.
Quote:2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
ISD Decoy
Commander
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Zavand Crendraven
Rolling Static Gone Critical
14
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 02:40:40 -
[138] - Quote
I believe this is the completely wrong way to go around the issue as it really doesnt fix a damn thing about the insane fitting freedom the Svipul will still be able to pull of a 10mn AB dual masb fit without a single fitting rig or mod and the speed nerf only makes it ~7% slower. See this fit:
[Svipul, 10mn Dual MASB] Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Shadow Serpentis 10MN Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S [empty high slot] 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
[empty rig slot] [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Fits without a single fitting rig or implant even after the patch has hit and its speed will go down with like 200m/s
So do note that im not taking AWU into account below cuz im to lazy to remove 10% PWG on everything it applies to.
So whats my idea? Well give all the T3 dessies a 50% PWG reduction to all weapons fit on them (possibly apply this to CPU too) then nuke their PWG by 3 times the most PWG demanding weapon system they can fit. For instance the Svipul it would be the 280mm Arty which is 13 PWG meaning you would reduce the PWG of the svipul with 39 PWG which is quite a bit more than the measily 12.5 PWG it losses now (its 12.5 PWG since 10 PWG is before bonuses are applied).
So how exactly will this help? The 10mn fits works pretty much solely because swapping down weapons gives an insane amount of free PWG for instance the svipul was made to be able to fit Arty so it needs a huge amount of PWG to do this meaning if you swap down from 280mm Arty to 125mm ACs you will get 12 'free' power grid for each weapon which comes down to 6 on the svipul meaning an 125mm AC fit will have 72 (with a 50% reduction it would 'only' be 36 PWG) more PWG left over a 280mm Arty fit. Thats pretty much the whole 10mn AB and one of the MASB right there (even after the AWU is taken into account). The same applies to the confessor too however it cant make quite such a ridiculous amount of free PWG from swapping down weapon system it can still make a lot. The Dual vs Focused beam lasers for instance is 8 vs 13 PWG thats 30 (with a 50% bonus it would be 15PWG ) free PWG right there when swapping down. After adding the proposed bonus and nuking the PWG the fitting difference would be reduced immensely and while still likely to need some tweaks in terms of fitting ability it will allow to still fit more stuff like Arty without giving a roflmao amount of extra PWG if one decides to run a AC fit.
Ofc this would only help on the fitting issues the ships are still hilariously fcking fast with the Svipul fit im running doing 3400m/s cold in propulsion mode and having a 3.1s align time which is on par with or usually better most frigates. While my fit does have a nano and an astro-rig this is just way to much speed for something with 9 efficient turrets where as most other ships that can go this fast is stuck at usually 3.75 effective turrets. While the 20m/s base speed nerf would make it slower (3165m/s) its just not enough its still ridiculously fast and agile for the amount of DPS it dishes out. I would think that putting the propulsion mode down to something like a 22% inertia and a 44% speed bonus added with a base speed reduction would do nicely. For my fit the speed would drop from 3400m/s down to 2746m/s if the Svipul base speed was reduced by 20m/s and bonus was reduced from 66% to 44% (a 19.25% total reduction in speed). The 33% to 22% inertia bonus would result in about 15% more inertia. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
147
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 02:55:34 -
[139] - Quote
Zavand Crendraven wrote: So whats my idea? Well give all the T3 dessies a 50% PWG reduction to all weapons fit on them (possibly apply this to CPU too) then nuke their PWG by 3 times the most PWG demanding weapon system they can fit.
Best idea yet - without having to tinker with either small arty, AC or 10MN AB fittings.
BCs with 1400mm Howitzers and Tachyons came out of nowhere, so CCP has experience with this, only that there's a valid problem and a valid Lore-compatible solution this time - advances in T3 Sleeper tech.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
335
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 04:49:43 -
[140] - Quote
Zavand Crendraven wrote:I believe this is the completely wrong way to go around the issue as it really doesnt fix a damn thing about the insane fitting freedom the Svipul will still be able to pull of a 10mn AB dual masb fit without a single fitting rig or mod and the speed nerf only makes it ~7% slower. See this fit:
[Svipul, 10mn Dual MASB] ...SNIP for space...
Fits without a single fitting rig or implant even after the patch has hit and its speed will go down with like 200m/s
So do note that im not taking AWU into account below cuz im to lazy to remove 10% PWG on everything it applies to.
So whats my idea? Well give all the T3 dessies a 50% PWG reduction to all weapons fit on them (possibly apply this to CPU too) then nuke their PWG by 3 times the most PWG demanding weapon system they can fit. For instance the Svipul it would be the 280mm Arty which is 13 PWG meaning you would reduce the PWG of the svipul with 39 PWG which is quite a bit more than the measily 12.5 PWG it losses now (its 12.5 PWG since 10 PWG is before bonuses are applied).
Couple of quick counter-points. One, that's the smallest size of AC. Currently that same fit works with 150mm ACs (the next size up) with only a 2% CPU implant or a rig, and 200mm ACs with a fitting rig and a PG implant After the changes 200mm ACs are completely out the window (or require T2 fitting rigs or a low-slot module, not sure of the exact numbers), and the 150s require at the least a significant fitting trade-off. Also after the changes the above fit is a lot tighter, so if you don't have good fitting skills it won't work without trade-offs either. The 200m/s is also fairly significant. That's more applied damage, and more ships that are now capable of catching the Svipul easily, including a number of MWD AF fits.
I think the point of this change isn't to completely remove over-sized prop mods as an option on these ships, just like CCP haven't done that to the T3 Cruisers. Your proposed change is a massive change, where as this is a small tweak that CCP can then watch and iterate on since it will take less time to settle down and they can more readily analyze the impact. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1040
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 10:40:58 -
[141] - Quote
you shouldn't even be able to fit 10mn with 2 masbs with all empty highs. |
Judas II
Dark-Rising
32
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 11:34:10 -
[142] - Quote
Hi CCP,
Semi related to this thread, have you considered simply restricting prop mods to ship size? Ie 1MN only fits on Frigs/Dessies, 10MN only fits on Cruiser/BC, etc.? Be honest, nobody likes 100MN Tengus anyway.
Watch my videos at https://www.youtube.com/user/JudasIIEVEOnline
Visit my blog at https://www.judasii.blogspot.com
|
Zavand Crendraven
Rolling Static Gone Critical
16
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 14:16:53 -
[143] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Zavand Crendraven wrote:Snipped Couple of quick counter-points. One, that's the smallest size of AC. Currently that same fit works with 150mm ACs (the next size up) with only a 2% CPU implant or a rig, and 200mm ACs with a fitting rig and a PG implant After the changes 200mm ACs are completely out the window (or require T2 fitting rigs or a low-slot module, not sure of the exact numbers), and the 150s require at the least a significant fitting trade-off. Also after the changes the above fit is a lot tighter, so if you don't have good fitting skills it won't work without trade-offs either. The 200m/s is also fairly significant. That's more applied damage, and more ships that are now capable of catching the Svipul easily, including a number of MWD AF fits. I think the point of this change isn't to completely remove over-sized prop mods as an option on these ships, just like CCP haven't done that to the T3 Cruisers. Your proposed change is a massive change, where as this is a small tweak that CCP can then watch and iterate on since it will take less time to settle down and they can more readily analyze the impact.
You make it sound as if swapping down from 150mm ACs to 125mm ACs is a big deal it is however not that significant. Going with 125mm ACs will get your DPS reduced by 6.25% and your range (falloff and optimal) by ~9% and gets your tracking speed increased by 15%. And its not like my proposed change would completely kill of oversized prop mods either its just you will have to atleast swap a lowslot for a T2 micro auxiliary power core and get a T1 ancillary rig. Imo it might even more of a nerf but with this atleast one would have to sacrifice a low slot and a rig slot.
When it comes to AFs catching svipuls after the current proposed speed nerf it will be quite barely and even when they are caught the Svipul will then get range dictation unless your fit is a dual prop and web fit not even then really since a single nano 10mn Svipul will still pull 1200m/s with a web on it where as the MWD on the AF will be shut down. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
617
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 14:18:41 -
[144] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:elitatwo wrote:Mordus ships are not so bad unless someone links them. But then all other ships are op too when linked. Actually what you do not like are light missiles. I'm sorry, but the Orthrus is a ship that makes no sense. It's true, RLMLs have pretty much ruined frigate pvp since the offer high damage that cannot be negated (unless youre in a T3D). Replace the blanket missile bonus with HAM/HML & nuke its agility.
Hey it's okay, don't be. I know where this comes from. Those rapid launchers are bad for the game and I am not the only one who told them that many moons ago.
I don't agree on the agility part of the Mordus ships since this ability makes them so unique. But I'll not get mad if we disagree here.
signature
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 18:15:29 -
[145] - Quote
Zavand Crendraven wrote:You make it sound as if swapping down from 150mm ACs to 125mm ACs is a big deal it is however not that significant. Going with 125mm ACs will get your DPS reduced by 6.25% and your range (falloff and optimal) by ~9% and gets your tracking speed increased by 15%. And its not like my proposed change would completely kill of oversized prop mods either its just you will have to atleast swap a lowslot for a T2 micro auxiliary power core and get a T1 ancillary rig. Imo it might even more of a nerf but with this atleast one would have to sacrifice a low slot and a rig slot.
When it comes to AFs catching svipuls after the current proposed speed nerf it will be quite barely and even when they are caught the Svipul will then get range dictation unless your fit is a dual prop and web fit not even then really since a single nano 10mn Svipul will still pull 1200m/s with a web on it where as the MWD on the AF will be shut down.
IMO that is a pretty significant change, and as I said you can currently manage to fit 200mm ACs on that fit as well. This is a game where a single level of skill training is often a 5% bonus, so we've now knocked your range and damage down by a level of skill training. That's definitely a significant effect on the fit.
Since Frigate and Destroyer sized duels are often decided by less than 5% hit points this sounds like exactly the kind of iterative nerf CCP should be employing here. Also you can't guarontee for sure that the T3D will be fitting a Scam or the AF won't be fitting a web and scram. That's why fitting choices are so important in this game. There's nothing stopping your Svipul fit from running a Web and Scram, you just traded that for a second ASB and the ridiculous tank that comes with it.
My point here isn't to get into a game of Eve Fitting Calvin Ball though, I was simply trying to point out that the fit you linked is absolutely affected by these nerfs, because without them it could be better or be fitted with lower skills. These are both things that should be taken into account, especially at the level of Frigate PvP where the participants are far less likely to have perfect fitting and combat skills since the barrier to entry is so low and the ships are fairly cheap. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
775
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 18:43:38 -
[146] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:Fare thee well, 280mm Kite Svipul. Edit: I'm using a fit with 280mm, a MSE, a 1mn MWD. To get this **** crammed into the ship i already need an Auxillary Power Control and a T2 Ancillary Current Router. And to round the fit out i used Geno Cores 1&2 + a 3% CPU imp.
Sooo, with 10 PG gone. How exactly am i supposed to use Artillery on the Svipul? 250mms and shoot LR ammo cause if i used PP i might aswell fit Autos?
I'm looking at it right now, and these 2 setups still fit.
2x T2 ACR, 1mn MWD, MSE, 280s, NO MAPC 112.41 total PG 2x T2 ACR, 1 T1 ACR, 1x Navy MAPC, 10mn AB, MSE, 280s
No fitting implants used. You loose a little bit or range or damage, depending on what your 3rd rig was.
This ship is still broken as ****.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 19:16:21 -
[147] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:I'm looking at it right now, and these 2 setups still fit. 2x T2 ACR, 1mn MWD, MSE, 280s, NO MAPC112.41 total PG2x T2 ACR, 1 T1 ACR, 1x Navy MAPC, 10mn AB, MSE, 280s No fitting implants used. You loose a little bit or range or damage, depending on what your 3rd rig was. This ship is still broken as ****.
You mean in addition to the speed, capacitor recharge, and shield recharge reductions. Right?
Also your math doesn't check out on my end. I've got a final PG value, with everything you list there, on the new Svipul of 142.67, so the second fit needs at least a 2% PG implant to work and it has no room left over for anything else unless you bump that up to a 4-6% PG implant. Also the tank hurts because of the shield recharge changes. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
152
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 20:14:45 -
[148] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Zavand Crendraven wrote: So whats my idea? Well give all the T3 dessies a 50% PWG reduction to all weapons fit on them (possibly apply this to CPU too) then nuke their PWG by 3 times the most PWG demanding weapon system they can fit.
Best idea yet - without having to tinker with either small arty, AC or 10MN AB fittings. BCs with 1400mm Howitzers and Tachyons came out of nowhere, so CCP has experience with this, only that there's a valid problem and a valid Lore-compatible solution this time - advances in T3 Sleeper tech.
Bump for best idea by Zavand Crendraven.
Needs CCP review.
Pilots against cancer! Unless of course 10MN AB option is intended, then vOv
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
399
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 21:08:23 -
[149] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Zavand Crendraven wrote: So whats my idea? Well give all the T3 dessies a 50% PWG reduction to all weapons fit on them (possibly apply this to CPU too) then nuke their PWG by 3 times the most PWG demanding weapon system they can fit.
Best idea yet - without having to tinker with either small arty, AC or 10MN AB fittings. BCs with 1400mm Howitzers and Tachyons came out of nowhere, so CCP has experience with this, only that there's a valid problem and a valid Lore-compatible solution this time - advances in T3 Sleeper tech. Bump for best idea by Zavand Crendraven. Needs CCP review. Pilots against cancer! Unless of course 10MN AB option is intended, then vOv
Soooo, creating strange bonuses that affect fitting requirements for small guns on a small gun platform just to reduce the possibilities to fit 10mn ABs are 'best ideas', huh?
I pointed out earlier, that the relation between ABs and MWDs of any size are *roughly* half to 2/3rd pg. Except for 10mn ABs, that somehow miracleously require only a 3rd of the 10mn MWD powergrid. If this was put in line, the whole 10mn AB on dessies-discussion would end without any impacts on anything else, except maybe better fitting on cruiserhulls if you choose to run MWD.
And to the guy who wants to run 125mm Autocannons on a 10mn AB dessie that has virtually no rangecontrol other than GOING IN and NOT GOING IN:
Jeeeesus, ***** ******* christ. You have no idea how big of an impact it is to shoot that hard in falloff. And you will ALWAYS be hard in falloff, because you will never, ever manage to be on 0 with your target unless you have a Hyena or Huginn with you. You will also never be able to hit a goddamn Condor.
And all the Condor needs is more Missiles than you have Boostercharges.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
153
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 21:22:56 -
[150] - Quote
Dual MASB/SAR with an over-sized prop mod is bad with any calibre weapons.
Killing dual-web Heavy Electron blaster Thoraxes since 2014.
/balanced gaem
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 21:30:52 -
[151] - Quote
I think it's pretty clear from these changes that CCP does not intend to kill over-sized prop mod fits on Frigates or Cruisers. If they wanted to kill them there are several easy ways they could do so. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
776
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 21:31:26 -
[152] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:I'm looking at it right now, and these 2 setups still fit. 2x T2 ACR, 1mn MWD, MSE, 280s, NO MAPC112.41 total PG2x T2 ACR, 1 T1 ACR, 1x Navy MAPC, 10mn AB, MSE, 280s No fitting implants used. You loose a little bit or range or damage, depending on what your 3rd rig was. This ship is still broken as ****. You mean in addition to the speed, capacitor recharge, and shield recharge reductions. Right? Also your math doesn't check out on my end. I've got a final PG value, with everything you list there, on the new Svipul of 142.67, so the second fit needs at least a 2% PG implant to work and it has no room left over for anything else unless you bump that up to a 4-6% PG implant. Also the tank hurts because of the shield recharge changes.
My fitting tool has the updated numbers & they check out just fine.
If you're arguing that the shield recharge on a relatively tankless ARTILLERY setup is getting nerfed, you need your priorities checked. The difference isn't noticeable.
The setups in question go from 21 peak recharge to 19 on the MWD fit & from 31 to 24 with 10mn AB. Enormous change
The only setup that gets a noticeable hit to passive tanking are the 2x MSE based setups. The SPR based one drops from a peak 297 to 199. Good riddance. The strongest passive HP tank (2x MSE + CDFEs) is still the strongest @ north of 23k eHP, but the peak regen drops from 103 to 81.
The capacitor change is non-existent because the ship doesnt rely on cap for many setups, and the change isn't big enough to be noticed on injector-based setups.
As for the speed changes, a current setup sporting a named 10mn AB & nanofiber does 2926 (4058). The new numbers bring that down to 2724 (3778). Still fast enough to shame 95% of the ships in the game. The Svipul doesn't even get an agility nerf, so when it gets *tackled* (lol) its orbit speed is no different than what it currently is.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
153
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 21:33:41 -
[153] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:I think it's pretty clear from these changes that CCP does not intend to kill over-sized prop mod fits on Frigates or Cruisers. If they wanted to kill them there are several easy ways they could do so.
Then all is good.
Only that very few ships can fit these, but oh well, not like there's a turret equivalent of RL/HMLs anyway. vOv
Drone/RLML Cruisers & 10MN Svipuls Online
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 21:55:57 -
[154] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:My fitting tool has the updated numbers & they check out just fine. If you're arguing that the shield recharge on a relatively tankless ARTILLERY setup is getting nerfed, you need your priorities checked. The difference isn't noticeable. The setups in question go from 21 peak recharge to 19 on the MWD fit & from 31 to 24 with 10mn AB. Enormous change The only setup that gets a noticeable hit to passive tanking are the 2x MSE based setups. The SPR based one drops from a peak 297 to 199. Good riddance. The strongest passive HP tank (2x MSE + CDFEs) is still the strongest @ north of 23k eHP, but the peak regen drops from 103 to 81. The capacitor change is non-existent because the ship doesnt rely on cap for many setups, and the change isn't big enough to be noticed on injector-based setups. As for the speed changes, a current setup sporting a named 10mn AB & nanofiber does 2926 (4058). The new numbers bring that down to 2724 (3778). Still fast enough to shame 95% of the ships in the game. The Svipul doesn't even get an agility nerf, so when it gets *tackled* (lol) its orbit speed is no different than what it currently is.
Mind double checking that you don't have any sort of implants or other stuff running? I actually updated my post because I forgot to factor in the NMAPC correctly but I'm fairly certain I've got the math right otherwise since it's all PG multipliers on top of the base PG.
Also check the agility on a 10MN AB fit. The ship aligns in 11.4 seconds with Propulsion Mode active. Compared to even an Assault Frigate that's atrocious. A 1600mm plated Megathron aligns in 10.7 seconds. What this means, in practice, is that on an orbit the ship is going to be slower than a similar ship with a MWD running a similar top speed. It'll still do fine in a straight line, but it can't turn very quickly to respond to threats.
Also, of the 95% of ships it's faster than, 90% aren't running a prop mod or can perma-tank the ~150-200 DPS from its arties without significant effort. The remainder, and the ships that this thing needs to be balanced against, are prop-mod fitted frigates. For comparison a MWD fitted Sentinel EAF (hardly the fastest frigate by a long shot) does 2737 with just a T2 MWD and zero nanos fitted, and aligns in 6.9 seconds, meaning a skilled pilot can both catch a Svipul, and out-maneuver attempts to sling-shot out of webs, neuts, or scrams.
A selection of T1 and Faction frigates with MWDs and no Nanos:
- Merlin: Top speed 2814 m/s, Align: 5 seconds
- Incursus: Top speed 3033 m/s, Align 4.5 seconds
- Rifter: Top speed 3186 m/s, Align 4.7 seconds
- Slasher: Top speed 3737 m/s, Align 4.2 seconds
- Daredevil: 3891 m/s, Align 4.0 seconds
Oh, and the Marauder gets all of its bonuses at once in Bastion, while the T3Ds only get one set of bonuses at a time. Also they're completely different ships on almost completely opposite ends of the size spectrum filling completely different roles, with entirely different bonus sets and trade-offs, so comparing them is a little erroneous. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
154
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 22:26:21 -
[155] - Quote
Some Confessor shenanigans:
Quote:[Confessor, DLPulse - 2 SAR 10MN copy 2] Corpii A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating Small Armor Repairer II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Heat Sink II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Warp Scrambler II
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Expanded Probe Launcher I, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe
Small Auxiliary Nano Pump II Small Nanobot Accelerator II Small Ancillary Current Router I
Swapped a Heat Sink for a MAPC II.
Gatling pulse fit:
Quote:[Confessor, GPulse - 2 SAR 10MN] Corpii A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating Small Armor Repairer II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Heat Sink II Heat Sink II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Warp Scrambler II
Gatling Pulse Laser II, Scorch S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Scorch S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Scorch S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Scorch S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Scorch S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Scorch S [empty high slot]
Small Nanobot Accelerator II Small Auxiliary Nano Pump I Small Ancillary Current Router II
Aux Nano Pump II -> Tech 1 & ACR I -> Tech II.
No implants.
Beamz:
Quote:[Confessor, DLBeams - 10 MN] Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Internal Force Field Array I Nanofiber Internal Structure II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Warp Disruptor II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Dual Light Beam Laser II, Aurora S Expanded Probe Launcher I, Core Scanner Probe I
Small Ancillary Current Router I Small Ancillary Current Router I Small Energy Burst Aerator I
Or you can easily remove one ACR and swap HS/Nano for a MAPC to make it work.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2031
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 22:58:27 -
[156] - Quote
The balance changes are stupid. Know why? Check svipul bonus.. 10% RANGE. that is ARTI bonus and with the changes it cannot even fit the arties!
If you want to nerf 10MN fits, jsut give all T3 destroyers a role bonus 20% increased PG for speed modules.
And do not touch anything else!
If you are goign to nerf the PG then you need to get rid of the RANGE bonus and give another bonus for the svipul.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
619
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 23:10:14 -
[157] - Quote
Prometheus, you hit the nail spot on.
What I don't get is why the Confessor get bashed with the nerf-bat so strong and that matari one get's only a slap on the wrist from a new-born baby-ant.
Maybe some values will shet a light on the Confessor:
An unplated Confessor with the very difficult to fly 10mn afterburner has 6343 ehp - according to the in-client fitting screen in defence mode.
A maximum afterburner speed of 2400m/s (rounded because today my client doesn't take my skills into account..) and 3100m/s with heat in propulsion mode.
It should be really clear which of the two if the winner of the currenty op-contest. If give you another hint - the Confessor isn't.
Now on the Tactical Destroyers in general, maybe CCP should elaborate what they were supposed to do. Seems there seems to be some confusion on what a destroyer is supposed to shoot at.
I thought they were like some sort of light anti-support.
signature
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2031
|
Posted - 2015.04.05 23:23:14 -
[158] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Prometheus, you hit the nail spot on.
What I don't get is why the Confessor get bashed with the nerf-bat so strong and that matari one get's only a slap on the wrist from a new-born baby-ant.
Maybe some values will shet a light on the Confessor:
An unplated Confessor with the very difficult to fly 10mn afterburner has 6343 ehp - according to the in-client fitting screen in defence mode.
A maximum afterburner speed of 2400m/s (rounded because today my client doesn't take my skills into account..) and 3100m/s with heat in propulsion mode.
It should be really clear which of the two if the winner of the currenty op-contest. If give you another hint - the Confessor isn't.
Now on the Tactical Destroyers in general, maybe CCP should elaborate what they were supposed to do. Seems there seems to be some confusion on what a destroyer is supposed to shoot at.
I thought they were like some sort of light anti-support.
Well then you are not taking all the usages into consideration. For some usages the confessor is WAY WAY more powerful ( mainly because of the superior weapons). When you are killing larger ships that will hardly ever hit you, beign able to kill them faster is very very important.
Also svipul is a ship with a CLEAR identity problem.
Ccp clearly gave it bonuses to be used with arties and MWD. But almost no one fits it like that.. because that scenario is HORRIBLE! They need to retink the sivpul COMPLETELY.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 05:03:19 -
[159] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:The balance changes are stupid. Know why? Check svipul bonus.. 10% RANGE. that is ARTI bonus and with the changes it cannot even fit the arties!
If you want to nerf 10MN fits, jsut give all T3 destroyers a role bonus 20% increased PG for speed modules.
And do not touch anything else!
If you are goign to nerf the PG then you need to get rid of the RANGE bonus and give another bonus for the svipul.
The 10% per level range bonus certainly does better with Arty than Auto-cannons, but it helps both. If you want to make best use of the bonus you fit Arties, which the Svipul absolutely can do, it just needs to make some decent trade-offs in fitting to fit the largest class of Arties both before and after these changes.
The point of these changes is pretty clearly to make broad but small nerfs to the class, not to specifically remove the viability of 10MN AB fits. The 10MN AB fits are so viable and powerful because the fittings on the ship are generally very very generous, which is what CCP is trying to fix here. |
Miali Askulf
Black Rise Freight
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 05:05:33 -
[160] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:The balance changes are stupid. Know why? Check svipul bonus.. 10% RANGE. that is ARTI bonus and with the changes it cannot even fit the arties!
If you want to nerf 10MN fits, jsut give all T3 destroyers a role bonus 20% increased PG for speed modules.
And do not touch anything else!
If you are goign to nerf the PG then you need to get rid of the RANGE bonus and give another bonus for the svipul.
Well, artillery could use a look at fitting to begin with - it's pretty typical to be completely out of grid by just fitting guns and a prop mod... and while fitting should require compromises, it seems excessive. |
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
156
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 05:15:42 -
[161] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:...trying to fix here.
Then it will take a couple of more similar passes.
However, I fairly certain that the outlined changes are what CCP thinks will balance these two boats.
I think CCP is of the even the flutter of a butterfly's wings can cause a hurricane on the otherside of the world. philosophy, hoping that this will have the desired effect, and also they're very careful about over-tweaking most things nowadays.
Most things don't include Megacyte and Zydrine, however.
Miali Askulf wrote: Well, artillery could use a look at fitting to begin with - it's pretty typical to be completely out of grid by just fitting guns and a prop mod... and while fitting should require compromises, it seems excessive.
Has been the case since New Eden was discovered, sista. If you fly Minmatar, you fly with multiple Reactor control units that are about to explode any moment.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
337
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 05:30:53 -
[162] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:...trying to fix here. Then it will take a couple of more similar passes. However, I fairly certain that the outlined changes are what CCP thinks will balance these two boats. I think CCP is of the even the flutter of a butterfly's wings can cause a hurricane on the otherside of the world. philosophy, hoping that this will have the desired effect, and also they're very careful about over-tweaking most things nowadays. Most things don't include Megacyte and Zydrine, however. Miali Askulf wrote: Well, artillery could use a look at fitting to begin with - it's pretty typical to be completely out of grid by just fitting guns and a prop mod... and while fitting should require compromises, it seems excessive.
Has been the case since New Eden was discovered, sista. If you fly Minmatar, you fly with multiple Reactor control units that are about to explode any moment.
I'm fairly certain CCP think they have a solid start here at balancing these, and will be pleasantly surprised if this puts them exactly in the state they want immediately.
Having lived through 6+ years of Eve and Eve balance changes I feel that the CCP that tries to creep up on balance is very much preferable to the CCP that tries whacking whatever is imbalanced over the head with a 10ton nerf-bat and then applies bandages to the resulting corpse. Some of these necromancy was needed in the early days of Eve because the game had some pretty massive problems (early missiles, prop-mods, and webs all spring to mind).
Arties, especially small Arties, are hard to fit, I think, because the Alpha is very very strong and has the ability to blow right through parts of your tank, like the optimal point on shield regen or right through shields or armor and into structure. If arty were really in an untenable place no one would use it, but it does still get used, quite a bit, and sees a lot of success. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1040
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 08:21:35 -
[163] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:...trying to fix here. Then it will take a couple of more similar passes. However, I fairly certain that the outlined changes are what CCP thinks will balance these two boats. I think CCP is of the even the flutter of a butterfly's wings can cause a hurricane on the otherside of the world. philosophy, hoping that this will have the desired effect, and also they're very careful about over-tweaking most things nowadays. Most things don't include Megacyte and Zydrine, however. Miali Askulf wrote: Well, artillery could use a look at fitting to begin with - it's pretty typical to be completely out of grid by just fitting guns and a prop mod... and while fitting should require compromises, it seems excessive.
Has been the case since New Eden was discovered, sista. If you fly Minmatar, you fly with multiple Reactor control units that are about to explode any moment. I'm fairly certain CCP think they have a solid start here at balancing these, and will be pleasantly surprised if this puts them exactly in the state they want immediately. Having lived through 6+ years of Eve and Eve balance changes I feel that the CCP that tries to creep up on balance is very much preferable to the CCP that tries whacking whatever is imbalanced over the head with a 10ton nerf-bat and then applies bandages to the resulting corpse. Some of these necromancy was needed in the early days of Eve because the game had some pretty massive problems (early missiles, prop-mods, and webs all spring to mind). Arties, especially small Arties, are hard to fit, I think, because the Alpha is very very strong and has the ability to blow right through parts of your tank, like the optimal point on shield regen or right through shields or armor and into structure. If arty were really in an untenable place no one would use it, but it does still get used, quite a bit, and sees a lot of success.
instead we get -50 hull every 6 months. I'll take the bat anyday. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2033
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 14:06:34 -
[164] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:The balance changes are stupid. Know why? Check svipul bonus.. 10% RANGE. that is ARTI bonus and with the changes it cannot even fit the arties!
If you want to nerf 10MN fits, jsut give all T3 destroyers a role bonus 20% increased PG for speed modules.
And do not touch anything else!
If you are goign to nerf the PG then you need to get rid of the RANGE bonus and give another bonus for the svipul. The 10% per level range bonus certainly does better with Arty than Auto-cannons, but it helps both. If you want to make best use of the bonus you fit Arties, which the Svipul absolutely can do, it just needs to make some decent trade-offs in fitting to fit the largest class of Arties both before and after these changes. The point of these changes is pretty clearly to make broad but small nerfs to the class, not to specifically remove the viability of 10MN AB fits. The 10MN AB fits are so viable and powerful because the fittings on the ship are generally very very generous, which is what CCP is trying to fix here.
The problem is that it makes more effect on making hard to use arties (the clear originalidea of the ship) than it makes har dusing 10mn ABs
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 14:24:17 -
[165] - Quote
Would love to see a dev response here on why the confessor is getting hit so hard and the svipul is not.
Clearly there's not a desire to remove the ability to use 10mn abs on these ships, as if that were the case, there would be more drastic changes. However, from the _extremely_ targeted agility and mass changes on the confessor, it seems like the devs want 10mn fits to be as clunky as possible. I personally dislike the hell out of this on the confessor as I enjoy agile ships, but I guess I'm just going to have to fall in love with the jackdaw.
I personally have felt the confessor was _fairly_ reasonable since it came out on the test server. The confessor tanks very well, but ironically is terrible at engaging frigates at close range. Tracking is a major issue with this ship at close range. Its pulse damage is also relatively anemic when taking on larger active tanked targets, which are not uncommon in small gang/solo. Overall I feel the ship has enough weaknesses and faux bonuses on it to be considered balanced. The proposed speed reduction in and of itself is relatively significant as the confessor will certainly be slower than some ab frigates when under a web.
The real question is, what is going on with the svipul changes? The svipul is not agile, but it is fast. The apparent goal of clunky 10mn ship already seems achieved here. The real problem with this ship is how much damage it is doing, oh and like a real "destroyer" it can get a tracking bonus if it wants it. The fact that virtually every fit is rocking triple gryo is a major thing here. The svipul should be losing CPU _and_ GRID. |
Solj RichPopolous
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 17:34:42 -
[166] - Quote
Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again.
What's wrong with Garmur and Orthrus? |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
168
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 17:35:56 -
[167] - Quote
Solj RichPopolous wrote:Aiyshimin wrote:Good stuff, please fix Garmur and Orthrus next and delete RLMLs and never ever introduce weapons like that again. What's wrong with Garmur and Orthrus?
Is gud.
/agree with Aiyshimin 101%
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Solj RichPopolous
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 17:37:11 -
[168] - Quote
devian chase wrote:Tbh the thing that makes a svipul slightly overpowered is the oversized 10mn ab fits Why not make oversizing prop mods on all ships a thing of the past That way you can keep the pg for decent arty fits and it will make balancing of all ships in the game easier ( 100mn tengu of the past where a joke as well )
Why? Oversize propping is so easy to kill if you actually THINK in this game outside terms of I have X amount of DPS and X amount of buffer so i should win against everything mentality. |
Solj RichPopolous
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 17:43:56 -
[169] - Quote
Judas II wrote:Hi CCP,
Semi related to this thread, have you considered simply restricting prop mods to ship size? Ie 1MN only fits on Frigs/Dessies, 10MN only fits on Cruiser/BC, etc.? Be honest, nobody likes 100MN Tengus anyway.
Correction I love them and I love when people fly them cause I can kill them so easily and they are a big pinata usually. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
779
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 18:15:35 -
[170] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Mind double checking that you don't have any sort of implants or other stuff running? I actually updated my post because I forgot to factor in the NMAPC correctly but I'm fairly certain I've got the math right otherwise since it's all PG multipliers on top of the base PG. No implants used, you've probably got a rounding error.
Cade Windstalker wrote:Also check the agility on a 10MN AB fit. The ship aligns in 11.4 seconds with Propulsion Mode active. Compared to even an Assault Frigate that's atrocious. A 1600mm plated Megathron aligns in 10.7 seconds. What this means, in practice, is that on an orbit the ship is going to be slower than a similar ship with a MWD running a similar top speed. It'll still do fine in a straight line, but it can't turn very quickly to respond to threats. That speed really isn't bad since you can't be tackled and you're STILL moving at a very good clip. The agility doesn't matter too much unless you're trying to orbit someone up close and they don't have a web or two on you.
Cade Windstalker wrote:More stuff The Sentinel is arguably the only frigate that could ruin a Svipuls day. Although, it probably wouldn't be able to break it's tank. None of those frigates, despite their speed, are capable of killing a well fit Svipul. They are idiot-proof ships.
My main issue with the ships is that they replace many ships. They are essentially miniature HACs, and T1 Cruisers can't kill the brawling setups (despite costing more to fly) without gimping their setups. This is 100% down to oversized ABs being broken on smaller hulls.
The Confessor changes fix that problem. The Svipul is still a broken piece of ****.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1040
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 18:57:04 -
[171] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote: My main issue with the ships is that they replace many ships. They are essentially miniature HACs, and T1 Cruisers can't kill the brawling setups (despite costing more to fly) without gimping their setups. This is 100% down to oversized ABs being broken on smaller hulls.
even though cruisers are supposed to counter destroyers pretty hard |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
173
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 19:19:18 -
[172] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote: My main issue with the ships is that they replace many ships. They are essentially miniature HACs, and T1 Cruisers can't kill the brawling setups (despite costing more to fly) without gimping their setups. This is 100% down to oversized ABs being broken on smaller hulls.
even though cruisers are supposed to counter destroyers pretty hard
Met a Fleet Scythe in my 2SAR 10MN DLP Confessor once. I was liek "Danger-Danger".
Butt boy, did he learn not to fit ACs, and use RLMLs next time. Had a neut and webs too.
Found the km:
Quote:[Scythe Fleet Issue Armor Explosive Hardener II Damage Control II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Gyrostabilizer II Medium Ancil Rep
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Warp Scrambler II Tracking Disruptor II,Tracking Speed Disruption Script
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II,Republic Fleet Fusion M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II,Republic Fleet Fusion M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II,Republic Fleet Fusion M 220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II,Republic Fleet Fusion M
Medium Anti-Kinetic Pump I Medium Anti-Kinetic Pump I Medium Nanobot Accelerator I
Warrior II x5
vOv
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
340
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:22:15 -
[173] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:instead we get -50 hull every 6 months. I'll take the bat anyday.
Exaggerations aside, you have your opinion on CCP's balance practices and I have mine. Personally in this and every other game I've played I've seen small continuous tweaking provide better results than bit nerf-bat whacks taken out of things and then trying to put them back together. If you care to read into Game Design literature you'll find a lot of people advocating for faster and smaller balance iterations based on feedback from metrics and data over "whack whack whack" too.
Kagura Nikon wrote:The problem is that it makes more effect on making hard to use arties (the clear originalidea of the ship) than it makes har dusing 10mn ABs
Which assumes that 10mn AB fits are the only problem or the only thing these changes are meant to hit. Besides, CCP generally takes the view that players should be given tools and then let loose to build things with them. We were given the Svipul and people immediately said "screw the range bonus, I'm bringing a 10MN AB and Autocannons" and that's what CCP have to react to. Not whatever intent that designer had when building the ship, but how the ship is actually being used.
The range bonus does still apply to ACs, and it's still there for Arties if you want to bring arties. In-fact throwing together a few fits from what I can tell the difference is pretty much one fitting module on either type of fit, with a few fits scattered around that just flat don't work anymore.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:No implants used, you've probably got a rounding error.
Can't be a rounding error, I was using Excel and with the numbers we're talking about here a rounding error should be on the order of .1 or .01 PG, not 4-5PG. Out of curiosity what fitting tool are you using?
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:That speed really isn't bad since you can't be tackled and you're STILL moving at a very good clip. The agility doesn't matter too much unless you're trying to orbit someone up close and they don't have a web or two on you.
Correction, you can't be scrammed, you can absolutely be tackled. The agility matters if you're trying to sling-shot out and/or past someone's webs or escape a long point. Also since you're now slower than a lot of the frigates people will send out trying to catch you the agility loss hurts more when trying to maneuver against them.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:The Sentinel is arguably the only frigate that could ruin a Svipuls day. Although, it probably wouldn't be able to break it's tank. None of those frigates, despite their speed, are capable of killing a well fit Svipul. They are idiot-proof ships.
My main issue with the ships is that they replace many ships. They are essentially miniature HACs, and T1 Cruisers can't kill the brawling setups (despite costing more to fly) without gimping their setups. This is 100% down to oversized ABs being broken on smaller hulls.
The Confessor changes fix that problem. The Svipul is still a broken piece of ****.
I have seen a number of kill-mails that disagree with you on this point, and I suspect a decently fitted and piloted Daredevil would beat a Svipul nine times out of ten. And trust me, there is no such thing as an idiot proof ship. Ever.
As to Cruisers, that doesn't hold up. A Svipul hull costs a base 50mil, then apply *at least* 20 mil of fittings to it, and you've got a 70 mil setup. A T1 Cruiser costs 10mil base for the hull, which means you need to spend 50-60 million in order to equal the cost of a T3 Destroyer fit, which you are perfectly capable of killing *if* you fit for it (you know, trade-offs).
Personally, I'm not convinced oversided AB fits need to go. They've survived just fine on T3 Cruisers for ages now and those things absolutely do die and drop lovely loot when they pop. The T3 Destroyers are brand new and trying to find their own niche. If there's still an obvious problem after this round of balance changes then I'm sure we'll get another round of tweaks. So lets either suggest tweaks to these tweaks or wait and see, instead of yelling and screaming for CCP to bring down the nerf-bat and smack these things into uselessness, because that's not good policy. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:25:34 -
[174] - Quote
Cade Windstalker, you appear to say a lot of things. Without saying anything.
Cade Windstalker wrote: As to Cruisers, that doesn't hold up. A Svipul hull costs a base 50mil, then apply *at least* 20 mil of fittings to it, and you've got a 70 mil setup. A T1 Cruiser costs 10mil base for the hull, which means you need to spend 50-60 million in order to equal the cost of a T3 Destroyer fit, which you are perfectly capable of killing *if* you fit for it (you know, trade-offs).
So a battleship should be able to take on 10 cruisers by this metric, then?
My Confessor fits are t2 mostly. A-Type plating can be replaced with t2 EANM.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
780
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:49:01 -
[175] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Can't be a rounding error, I was using Excel and with the numbers we're talking about here a rounding error should be on the order of .1 or .01 PG, not 4-5PG. Out of curiosity what fitting tool are you using? EFT. Are you using a named MSE or T2? MWD variant -> 112.2/112.41 10mn variant -> 146.2/147.29
Cade Windstalker wrote:Correction, you can't be scrammed, you can absolutely be tackled. The agility matters if you're trying to sling-shot out and/or past someone's webs or escape a long point. Also since you're now slower than a lot of the frigates people will send out trying to catch you the agility loss hurts more when trying to maneuver against them. No, you can't be tackled in the traditional sense. Because if you want to, you can cruise out of dual webs @ ~700+ m/s in speed mode. Just under 1km/s in defense mode against a single web. No destroyer, cruiser, or tankable frigate can deal with that.
Cade Windstalker wrote:I have seen a number of kill-mails that disagree with you on this point, and I suspect a decently fitted and piloted Daredevil would beat a Svipul nine times out of ten. And trust me, there is no such thing as an idiot proof ship. Ever. A Svipul out tanks and out damages a Daredevil significantly. It would need to be a horribly fit/flown/afk Svipul, or extremely lucky Daredevil.
Cade Windstalker wrote:As to Cruisers, that doesn't hold up. A Svipul hull costs a base 50mil, then apply *at least* 20 mil of fittings to it, and you've got a 70 mil setup. A T1 Cruiser costs 10mil base for the hull, which means you need to spend 50-60 million in order to equal the cost of a T3 Destroyer fit, which you are perfectly capable of killing *if* you fit for it (you know, trade-offs). You certainly DO NOT need to dump isk into a T3D to be more effective than a Cruiser. Your average T2 fit and rigged T1 Cruiser will cost you 35-40mil AFTER insurance payout.
T3D are VERY cheap to fit because frig mods are cheap and the insurance payout is so high. With the changes proposed, T3D will cost slightly more, but T1C will be far less worth the investment. This is especially true if you start pimping you ship.
Gimping a Cruiser solely to take on T3D is not a viable *counter*. The reason being is that you could spend a few isk more and get a T3D and make no compromises whatsoever.
Hell, the best tracking cruiser in the game can't close-range track a T3D when using webs.
Cade Windstalker wrote:They've survived just fine on T3 Cruisers for ages now and those things absolutely do die and drop lovely loot when they pop. The T3 Destroyers are brand new and trying to find their own niche. If there's still an obvious problem after this round of balance changes then I'm sure we'll get another round of tweaks. So lets either suggest tweaks to these tweaks or wait and see, instead of yelling and screaming for CCP to bring down the nerf-bat and smack these things into uselessness, because that's not good policy. T3D are a totally different bag of ****. People have been complaining about the Tengu since day 1, and that's part of the reason whyb HMLs got nerfed to hard. Complaints have died down because HMLs are ****, and RLMLs don't make sense on a Tengu/Legion.
Many of us have been playing for a LONG time to see patterns in development. If players don't recognize the problems in ship balance, good luck for the clueless devs to notice.
The Angel ships were OP for what felt like eons, and eveyone and their mother was abusing them until they were nerfed. Are the Angel ships bad now that they are shadows of their former selves? No, I'd say they're just fine if it weren't for the Vagabond being so ****.
The same thing is happening with T3D. It doens't take much effort to see that people are just upgrading into this affordable joke of a class. You may not think it's that widespread, but there are still people holding out of the Jackdaw (20+k hp Garmur), and Hecate (15+k HP, 800dps Eris).
This class is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better. Especially with the devs *****-footing around the real issues.
It doesn't help that the class still doesn't have a definitive role yet. If it's to counter cruisers (what AFs are supposed to be), then Cruisers need to be better equipped to deal with the cancer. If it's to counter frigates, then why are they so HORRIBLY overpowering against small ships? Hell, whose idea was it to give them a PROBE LAUNCHER bonus on top of it all?
This is textbook powercreep. We don't need more buffs, we need more nerfs.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
340
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 22:54:35 -
[176] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cade Windstalker, you appear to say a lot of things. Without saying anything. So a battleship should be able to take on 10 cruisers by this metric, then? What of Pirate faction cruisers? My Confessor fits are t2 mostly. A-Type plating can be replaced with t2 EANM.
I'm just pointing things out, I'm rather specifically trying to avoid making a point. I don't know whether or not these nerfs will be enough, or too much, or what the "right answer" is, but I can go around poking holes in other peoples' arguments :)
And no, it's clearly stated by CCP that cost and effectiveness are not supposed to scale linearly, and I never made any claims about the cost of a cruiser being related to its effectiveness, I simply pointed out that a T1 Cruiser is almost never going to cost more than a Tactical Destroyer. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
340
|
Posted - 2015.04.06 23:30:10 -
[177] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote: EFT. Are you using a named MSE or T2? MWD variant -> 112.2/112.41 10mn variant -> 146.2/147.29
T2 unless otherwise specified. The issue is more the final PG value of the hull with the fitting modules, not the modules themselves though. I'm showing a lower final value for the total PG of the ship, but I'm also doing my calculations by hand rather than using a fitting program with the changes inputted.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:No, you can't be tackled in the traditional sense. Because if you want to, you can cruise out of dual webs @ ~700+ m/s in speed mode. Just under 1km/s in defense mode against a single web. No destroyer, cruiser, or tankable frigate can deal with that.
Sure it can, it just needs to orbit outside of your scram range with a faction web, and thanks to your horrible agility it can do that pretty much indefinitely once it has a web on you. Out at 11-13 KM you're so far into falloff even with Barrage that you're not doing more than 60-70 DPS at the most, and that's against an Ishkur with just a MWD fitted. Even a minor active tank can deal with that kind of incoming damage.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:A Svipul out tanks and out damages a Daredevil significantly. It would need to be a horribly fit/flown/afk Svipul, or extremely lucky Daredevil.
I'm showing a 125mm Rail Daredevil actually putting out better applied DPS at optimal web range than the Svipul. The Daredevil can't break the tank on the Svipul (assuming dual ASB fit) but depending on the fit on the Daredevil it's questionable whether or not the Svipul can kill the Daredevil or escape before he either runs out of cap charges or more people show up.
It's not a definite win on either side but it does seem to me to come down very heavily to piloting ability.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:You certainly DO NOT need to dump isk into a T3D to be more effective than a Cruiser. Your average T2 fit and rigged T1 Cruiser will cost you 35-40mil AFTER insurance payout.
T3D are VERY cheap to fit because frig mods are cheap and the insurance payout is so high. With the changes proposed, T3D will cost slightly more, but T1C will be far less worth the investment. This is especially true if you start pimping you ship.
Gimping a Cruiser solely to take on T3D is not a viable *counter*. The reason being is that you could spend a few isk more and get a T3D and make no compromises whatsoever.
Hell, the best tracking cruiser in the game can't close-range track a T3D when using webs.
Fair points, maybe that means the insurance payout of the Tactical Destroyers should be re-evaluated?
Though I am wondering what the heck you're fitting a T2 fitted Cruiser with that it's that expensive. After checking a few fits in EFT I'm showing on the order of 25-35 million before Insurance and including hull cost.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:T3D are a totally different bag of ****. People have been complaining about the Tengu since day 1, and that's part of the reason whyb HMLs got nerfed to hard. Complaints have died down because HMLs are ****, and RLMLs don't make sense on a Tengu/Legion.
Many of us have been playing for a LONG time to see patterns in development. If players don't recognize the problems in ship balance, good luck for the clueless devs to notice.
...SNIP for length...
Heavy Missiles got nerfed hard because they were incredibly out of line compared to every other Medium weapon system no matter what they were mounted on. The 100MN Tengu had far less to do with the issue than the massive swarms of Drakes floating around Null that put the Drake so far up on the "most often killed ships" list it's still one of the all time winners despite having been nerfed out of Null fleet comps 2-3 years ago.
Also before you play the "I've been playing Eve long enough to see a pattern!" card check someone else's date of subscription... lol. I've been playing since 2009, been subbed all but 4 months of that (the first 4 btw) and I've been active on these forums for most of that. I've played since Rails were a joke of a weapons system and I've gotten to see the entire journey of "fit of the month" over the last six years. I've played a lot other games too in that time, and personally I think CCP is one of the more on top of things when it comes to game balance. You are, of course, free to disagree but you're not going to change my mind with those sorts of arguments.
If you've been around that long then you should know that CCP's philosophy to new ships isn't "this ship shall fill this role" it's "this sounds like a cool concept, lets do some quick tests, give it to the players, and then see what they do with it". The T3 Destroyers aren't intended to do anything, because ship roles in the game aren't created by CCP they're created by the players, and they've changed and morphed and adjusted over the years as CCP have tweaked things and the players have responded and back and forth until we get something approaching a steady state. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
177
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 01:04:16 -
[178] - Quote
Whoah.
Prometheus Exenthal, you used the c-word... Good... Good - Tell us how you really feel.
Hey, don't touch the Probe launcher bonus, I need it to warp in on sniping fagets.
Agreed on all points - if 10MN AB stays = Svipuls/T3Ds Online in sub-BC (LOL) category.
/Amarr Tacticool Destroyer V reprazent
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
781
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 06:49:15 -
[179] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Sure it can, it just needs to orbit outside of your scram range with a faction web, and thanks to your horrible agility it can do that pretty much indefinitely once it has a web on you. Out at 11-13 KM you're so far into falloff even with Barrage that you're not doing more than 60-70 DPS at the most, and that's against an Ishkur with just a MWD fitted. Even a minor active tank can deal with that kind of incoming damage. You realize that dumping the equivalent worth of the hull your shooting @ into a single mod isn't a counter right? I also think you greatly underestimate how fast/agile they are.
Cade Windstalker wrote:I'm showing a 125mm Rail Daredevil actually putting out better applied DPS at optimal web range than the Svipul. The Daredevil can't break the tank on the Svipul (assuming dual ASB fit) but depending on the fit on the Daredevil it's questionable whether or not the Svipul can kill the Daredevil or escape before he either runs out of cap charges or more people show up.
It's not a definite win on either side but it does seem to me to come down very heavily to piloting ability. No, I'd say it's a definite win for a Svipul. For starters, you're not doing much dps without being close to web range. Certainly not enough to break a tanked Svipul. Secondly, DD rail tracking is garbage without a web. Thirdly, you'd need to invest in a faction web to make it worthwhile, which brings your DD cost to roughly 4x (after insurance) that of a Svipul. And finally, you can't rail fit a DD for tank and damage.
Cade Windstalker wrote:Fair points, maybe that means the insurance payout of the Tactical Destroyers should be re-evaluated?
Though I am wondering what the heck you're fitting a T2 fitted Cruiser with that it's that expensive. After checking a few fits in EFT I'm showing on the order of 25-35 million before Insurance and including hull cost. A re-evaluation would be nice, yes. As for what kind of ship: Thorax, Rupture, Vexor are my most commonly used cruisers, and all hover around that pricepoint. Vexor being the most expensive.
Cade Windstalker wrote:The T3 Destroyers aren't intended to do anything, because ship roles in the game aren't created by CCP they're created by the players And this would be bad design if that were purely the case. Every class of ships should be / is made with some intent. They don't just throw together a bunch of stats and release it. Whether or not CCP has said what their intent is is something else entirely. They may not want to bias the players interaction with the things.
With that said, there needs to be something done. Right now they are between T1 Cruisers & Battlecruisers. Medium weaponry is NOT designed to handle fights against ships they can't hit. There is FAR too much sacrifice required to combat such bu||shi+ design.
The Confessor changes are fine. The Svipul needs a lot of work.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Erasmus Grant
EVE University Ivy League
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 08:15:05 -
[180] - Quote
BLUF: Concern the T3 system, and its expansion, will hinders the diversity and development of current and future hull types in the game and encourages stats inflation.
I understand that the T3 system was meant, I think, to give capsuleers flexibility to travel through hostile territory with their nullified fits and then switch to a dps fit via a mobile deport when they got to their objective especially for PvE purpose(Exploration Cruiser essentially). Then with the T3 destroyer be able to switch modes to patrol and combat any threat they may encounter, especially in WHs and Null.
I got really irked when listen to the Fanfest presentation on Ship & Module Balance when a fellow asked if we can have a T3 industrial ship. Fozzie replied that it something that has been bouncing around. I do not agree with this approach. If you want an Orca counterpart that is ideal for gas mining operations, ice mining, or w/e, make a separate hull for it with its own unique model and bonuses.
For Example: Make a Serpentis Industrial Command Ship for gas operations instead of making a single ship that can do it all depending on, or regardless, how you fit it.
There are chances for so many more ships to be created to serve a specific purpose that will encourage more people to band together.
Do not like OGB or Skynet, create a s faction ship(s) that projects a kind of EWAR that interferes or blocks OGB or connectivity between a carrier and its offgrid fighters based on Drifiter technology (Allow Skynet to exist in Sov. Null)
Instead we currently having T3s take the place of many T2 HAC cruisers. For example rail Tengu makes the Eagle inferior. Legion to the Zealot. Proteus to the Deimos. I think that T3 cruisers might also cut into Battlecruiser use and meta also because how much dps dish out and damage they can absorb.
I would like EVE not to become T3 Online, I would not be surprise if Drifters BS are precursors to a T3 BS, but have a diverse meta where ships have specific purposes and design. CCP and developers do a really awesome job of doing it for the most part which is why I play this game and not Star Trek Online. I am glad for the most part they have avoid stat inflation that almost every other MMO has where the community is divided by levels. You cannot take a new bro into lvl 90, w/e it is now, content on WoW nor do they have a chance to kill you in PvP. I think CCP has done an awesome job allowing people of all SP to share content with each other. |
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2034
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 09:58:01 -
[181] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:The problem is that it makes more effect on making hard to use arties (the clear originalidea of the ship) than it makes har dusing 10mn ABs Which assumes that 10mn AB fits are the only problem or the only thing these changes are meant to hit. Besides, CCP generally takes the view that players should be given tools and then let loose to build things with them. We were given the Svipul and people immediately said "screw the range bonus, I'm bringing a 10MN AB and Autocannons" and that's what CCP have to react to. Not whatever intent that designer had when building the ship, but how the ship is actually being used. The range bonus does still apply to ACs, and it's still there for Arties if you want to bring arties. In-fact throwing together a few fits from what I can tell the difference is pretty much one fitting module on either type of fit, with a few fits scattered around that just flat don't work anymore.
Nope. That is NOT how ccp works for YEARS. In the past yes, they used to follow the "let the players use their tools philosofy". But that stopped long ago, when they nerfed all e-war up to the point their are almost useless outside their bonused ships, when they removed multiple prop mods at same time on a ship, when they nerfed ALL the speed enhance modules up to the point that even if you use 3 of them you cannot reach the same bonus that a single click in overheat can (effectively making speed enhancing modules a waste of slots only justified when you lack CPU or PG to fit something more interesting, a simple example of how this is true si the rise of the oversized prop mod as the ONLY kiting alternative, because it is always better to fit PG modules in the lows to fit a larger prop mod then to use the same low slots to enhance your speed. ). And thousands of other examples, where CCP nerf things under the argument that is is not how the ship was intended to be used. Expect T3 to be the next in line to get this homogenization treatment.
And the range bonus in real game terms DO NOT APPLY TO AUTOS. 50% bonus to a NEAR ZERO VALUE is still NEAR ZERO! Probably once every 100 sivpul fights the 50% range bonus makes ANY difference on a fight outcome.
Again I will reiterate, the problem of oversized props is because CCP OVERNERFED speed enhance modules up to the point that it is always better to use your low slots for POWER GRID and then fit an oversized prop mod then it is to put speed ehnace modules. INCREASE the bonus of the speed enhacne modules and you will see less oversized setups.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Inggroth
Aurora Ominae. The Gorgon Empire
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 11:05:21 -
[182] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote: The Svipul needs a lot of work.
shaving off some more fitting resources and nuking 10mn afterburner agility (1mn can remain as-is IMO) would go a long way in my opinion, at least as first iteration step. If fitting 10mn afterburner means 15sec align time in speed mode on top of some serious fitting challenges it shouldnt be Svipul online anymore |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1972
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 11:07:34 -
[183] - Quote
Confessor will be too tough to fit now imo, resulting in there only being 1 or 2 viable fits. Fair enough, reduce the power grid to dissuade the use of oversized prop mods but increase the cpu to open up some fitting option. This won't do much but it's something.
Given that the destroyers are the largest ship designed for small weapons, i think it's silly that destroyers can't use the largest variation of the small weapons without sacrificing everything, but i'm probably alone on that.
+1
|
Dani Maulerant
Order of the Valkyrie LOADED-DICE
20
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 11:15:59 -
[184] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Confessor will be too tough to fit now imo, resulting in there only being 1 or 2 viable fits. Fair enough, reduce the power grid to dissuade the use of oversized prop mods but increase the cpu to open up some fitting option. This won't do much but it's something.
Given that the destroyers are the largest ship designed for small weapons, i think it's silly that destroyers can't use the largest variation of the small weapons without sacrificing everything, but i'm probably alone on that.
Maybe because they fit a greater number of them than frigates already. 7-8 hardpoints on average, with damage bonuses on top. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2036
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 11:18:53 -
[185] - Quote
Inggroth wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote: The Svipul needs a lot of work.
shaving off some more fitting resources and nuking 10mn afterburner agility (1mn can remain as-is IMO) would go a long way in my opinion, at least as first iteration step. If fitting 10mn afterburner means 15sec align time in speed mode on top of some serious fitting challenges it shouldnt be Svipul online anymore
Sivpul needs a tiny bit more PG cut but a role bonus to make arties cost less PG, so arties become a POSSIBILITY, without degeneratign in 10mn all the time.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1972
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 11:20:24 -
[186] - Quote
Dani Maulerant wrote: Maybe because they fit a greater number of them than frigates already. 7-8 hardpoints on average, with damage bonuses on top.
Maybe... or maybe not
+1
|
Gunz blazing Ronuken
Insane's Asylum Pride Before Fall
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 13:56:31 -
[187] - Quote
Tried the Svipul out and it needs more grid so you can fit mwd + t2 arty's and some decent shield tank. Otherwise if you can lower the power grid requirements of small artillery turrets? |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1972
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 14:23:47 -
[188] - Quote
Gunz blazing Ronuken wrote:Tried the Svipul out and it needs more grid so you can fit mwd + t2 arty's and some decent shield tank. Otherwise if you can lower the power grid requirements of small artillery turrets?
Yeah, they could have been cleaver and gave the T3 destroyers a bonus to reduce the power grid (and/or cpu) of small weapons like the assault BCs. Then we wouldn't have such vanila fitting options.
+1
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
623
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 16:07:33 -
[189] - Quote
Erasmus Grant wrote:... I got really irked when listen to the Fanfest presentation on Ship & Module Balance when a fellow asked if we can have a T3 industrial ship. Fozzie replied that it something that has been bouncing around. I do not agree with this approach. If you want an Orca counterpart that is ideal for gas mining operations, ice mining, or w/e, make a separate hull for it with its own unique model and bonuses. ...
Oh god, no!
Here is the thing with young pilots, they come here the see this tech 1 < tech 2 < tech 3 < tech 4 < tech GODMODE and they do misunderstand that that isn't the case.
So with this premise they ask those questions.
One could specutalte that those tactical choices you can make on the fly were a response to a new kind of threat that we don't even know it's coming our way.
Another thing to consider - killobards. Yeah, crazy talk, I know. The reason people even considered that bigger afterburner was that you need mobility on the field to move around but the second a scram hits you - you stop moving and go boom.
So the very thing you are trying to avoid is getting scrammed and get out of situations that will no end well and live to fight somewhere else. If people weren't so pressured into gathering those killmails you would actually be able to get good fights, not the ones that are over before the first shot has been fired.
signature
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
183
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 17:51:53 -
[190] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: Given that the destroyers are the largest ship designed for small weapons, i think it's silly that destroyers can't use the largest variation of the small weapons without sacrificing everything, but i'm probably alone on that.
What doesn't fit?
On a Confessor, SFBs + SAAR + 1MN MWD fit with one t1 ACR with these changes.
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3232
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 18:50:46 -
[191] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/rd2ShWS.png
confessor has barely half the kill count of the svipul, making svipul #1 on the list (ishtar is #3 for comparison). I don't see why they both would have to be nerfed equally. If the grid nerf is set in stone.. so be it. But why also agility, speed and mass?
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1973
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:16:32 -
[192] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Rek Seven wrote: Given that the destroyers are the largest ship designed for small weapons, i think it's silly that destroyers can't use the largest variation of the small weapons without sacrificing everything, but i'm probably alone on that.
What doesn't fit? On a Confessor, SFBs + SAAR + 1MN MWD fit with one t1 ACR with these changes.
Like i said; one or two meh fits.
+1
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
347
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:25:47 -
[193] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Nope. That is NOT how ccp works for YEARS. In the past yes, they used to follow the "let the players use their tools philosofy". But that stopped long ago, when they nerfed all e-war up to the point their are almost useless outside their bonused ships, when they removed multiple prop mods at same time on a ship, when they nerfed ALL the speed enhance modules up to the point that even if you use 3 of them you cannot reach the same bonus that a single click in overheat can (effectively making speed enhancing modules a waste of slots only justified when you lack CPU or PG to fit something more interesting, a simple example of how this is true si the rise of the oversized prop mod as the ONLY kiting alternative, because it is always better to fit PG modules in the lows to fit a larger prop mod then to use the same low slots to enhance your speed. ). And thousands of other examples, where CCP nerf things under the argument that is is not how the ship was intended to be used. Expect T3 to be the next in line to get this homogenization treatment.
And the range bonus in real game terms DO NOT APPLY TO AUTOS. 50% bonus to a NEAR ZERO VALUE is still NEAR ZERO! Probably once every 100 sivpul fights the 50% range bonus makes ANY difference on a fight outcome.
Again I will reiterate, the problem of oversized props is because CCP OVERNERFED speed enhance modules up to the point that it is always better to use your low slots for POWER GRID and then fit an oversized prop mod then it is to put speed ehnace modules. INCREASE the bonus of the speed enhacne modules and you will see less oversized setups.
You are entitled to your opinion, but CCP keep stating that as their intent. I also don't think the changes to EWar were unwarranted. EWar is still powerful outside of unbonused ships, except for ECM where the entire mechanic needs a rework in the worst way and everyone including CCP knows it.
You're talking about changes that happened over seven years ago and were massively popular and, in my opinion, much needed. Stackable prop mods didn't add anything good to the game.
Overheating prop mods is a risk/reward dynamic. The module overheats fairly quickly on most ships, can't be repaired while it's on, and gives a big boost. So you get a short period of speed which you have to ration carefully. If your opponent blows his overheat cycles and you still have yours you have a big advantage. This is one of the core dynamics of frigate PvP and solo and small gang PvP in general.
You're also neglecting the fact that an oversized prop mod has drawbacks in cap use and agility as well as fitting. They're very powerful but it costs a lot to fit one, which is why only a very very small number of ships ever both to fit one in a combat situation (bump stabbers not withstanding)
Fitting speed mods in the lows does't have any of those drawbacks.
Lastly if someone wants to ignore the bonus to range on the Svipul it's because they found something that they feel is worth more and they're willing to trade the effect of that bonus for it. There's nothing wrong with that and it doesn't mean the ship needs a falloff bonus to make the AC fits even stronger. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1045
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:38:26 -
[194] - Quote
cap usage? it's an afterburner, nobody cares. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
347
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:55:10 -
[195] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:cap usage? it's an afterburner, nobody cares.
The base cap use on a 10MN AB is greater than on a 1MN MWD, though interestingly it ends up lower with high levels of Afterburner and Fuel Conservation. |
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1668
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 20:58:54 -
[196] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:cap usage? it's an afterburner, nobody cares. The base cap use on a 10MN AB is greater than on a 1MN MWD, though interestingly it ends up lower with high levels of Afterburner and Fuel Conservation.
If you take everything into account, it's also much lower because there is no cap pool penalty on the AB. That penalty reduce your cap regen which is effectively "burned" because of the MWD. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
783
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 21:45:07 -
[197] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Confessor will be too tough to fit now imo, resulting in there only being 1 or 2 viable fits. Fair enough, reduce the power grid to dissuade the use of oversized prop mods but increase the cpu to open up some fitting option. This won't do much but it's something.
All of the strongest Confessor fits still fit, albeit with an extra PG rig resulting in less overall tank.
Frankly, I'd like to see the Svipuls grid NUKED to nothing and then it given a very large optimal bonus which basically results in 250s giving 280s range. That an a bigger speed/agility nerf.
Arty fits still work as intended, and nobody has absurd passive tanks. Win win.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
183
|
Posted - 2015.04.07 22:45:20 -
[198] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Rek Seven wrote: Given that the destroyers are the largest ship designed for small weapons, i think it's silly that destroyers can't use the largest variation of the small weapons without sacrificing everything, but i'm probably alone on that.
What doesn't fit? On a Confessor, SFBs + SAAR + 1MN MWD fit with one t1 ACR with these changes. Like i said; one or two meh fits.
So you want a 400mm plate there with no fitting mods?
Ever flown tech 1 & 2 Arty boats? Reactor control units glow funny in sunlight.
Cade Windstalker wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:cap usage? it's an afterburner, nobody cares. The base cap use on a 10MN AB is greater than on a 1MN MWD, though interestingly it ends up lower with high levels of Afterburner and Fuel Conservation.
Tell me more. ( -í-¦ -£-û -í-¦)
The -17-25% total capacitor penalty on the MWD is the most important bit.
10MN ABs on T3Ds by default is a farce, tbh. Not even funny anymore.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1973
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 07:02:51 -
[199] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
All of the strongest Confessor fits still fit...
Obviously, because if they they didn't, it wouldn't be a fit.
Let's move away from the "well my fit works" argument and answer me this; what's wrong with giving the ship 10-20 more cpu?
+1
|
Freelancer117
so you want to be a Hero
285
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 09:10:48 -
[200] - Quote
a 10mn speed module on destoyer because of oversized PG attribute should be intended, CCP is saying it is not, so remove it.
The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
|
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2043
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 09:30:24 -
[201] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Nope. That is NOT how ccp works for YEARS. In the past yes, they used to follow the "let the players use their tools philosofy". But that stopped long ago, when they nerfed all e-war up to the point their are almost useless outside their bonused ships, when they removed multiple prop mods at same time on a ship, when they nerfed ALL the speed enhance modules up to the point that even if you use 3 of them you cannot reach the same bonus that a single click in overheat can (effectively making speed enhancing modules a waste of slots only justified when you lack CPU or PG to fit something more interesting, a simple example of how this is true si the rise of the oversized prop mod as the ONLY kiting alternative, because it is always better to fit PG modules in the lows to fit a larger prop mod then to use the same low slots to enhance your speed. ). And thousands of other examples, where CCP nerf things under the argument that is is not how the ship was intended to be used. Expect T3 to be the next in line to get this homogenization treatment.
And the range bonus in real game terms DO NOT APPLY TO AUTOS. 50% bonus to a NEAR ZERO VALUE is still NEAR ZERO! Probably once every 100 sivpul fights the 50% range bonus makes ANY difference on a fight outcome.
Again I will reiterate, the problem of oversized props is because CCP OVERNERFED speed enhance modules up to the point that it is always better to use your low slots for POWER GRID and then fit an oversized prop mod then it is to put speed ehnace modules. INCREASE the bonus of the speed enhacne modules and you will see less oversized setups. You are entitled to your opinion, but CCP keep stating that as their intent. I also don't think the changes to EWar were unwarranted. EWar is still powerful outside of unbonused ships, except for ECM where the entire mechanic needs a rework in the worst way and everyone including CCP knows it. You're talking about changes that happened over seven years ago and were massively popular and, in my opinion, much needed. Stackable prop mods didn't add anything good to the game. Overheating prop mods is a risk/reward dynamic. The module overheats fairly quickly on most ships, can't be repaired while it's on, and gives a big boost. So you get a short period of speed which you have to ration carefully. If your opponent blows his overheat cycles and you still have yours you have a big advantage. This is one of the core dynamics of frigate PvP and solo and small gang PvP in general. You're also neglecting the fact that an oversized prop mod has drawbacks in cap use and agility as well as fitting. They're very powerful but it costs a lot to fit one, which is why only a very very small number of ships ever both to fit one in a combat situation (bump stabbers not withstanding) Fitting speed mods in the lows does't have any of those drawbacks. Lastly if someone wants to ignore the bonus to range on the Svipul it's because they found something that they feel is worth more and they're willing to trade the effect of that bonus for it. There's nothing wrong with that and it doesn't mean the ship needs a falloff bonus to make the AC fits even stronger.
If oversized prop mods had so many issues, we (and other small scale high SP entities) would not be living under the norm.. oversized AB.. or stay home....
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2043
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 09:31:13 -
[202] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
All of the strongest Confessor fits still fit...
Obviously, because if they they didn't, it wouldn't be a fit. Let's move away from the "well my fit works" argument and answer me this; what's wrong with giving the ship 10-20 more cpu?
It would make sense, and ccp is commited to the budget of 1 change per year making sense.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2045
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 09:32:40 -
[203] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Confessor will be too tough to fit now imo, resulting in there only being 1 or 2 viable fits. Fair enough, reduce the power grid to dissuade the use of oversized prop mods but increase the cpu to open up some fitting option. This won't do much but it's something. All of the strongest Confessor fits still fit, albeit with an extra PG rig resulting in less overall tank. Frankly, I'd like to see the Svipuls grid NUKED to nothing and then it given a very large optimal bonus which basically results in 250s giving 280s range. That an a bigger speed/agility nerf. Arty fits still work as intended, and nobody has absurd passive tanks. Win win.
Isnt easier to just give ALL destroyers of all sized 50% reduction on weapon fittings, and reduce the PG of all of them to the same as normal frigates?
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Inggroth
Aurora Ominae. The Gorgon Empire
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 13:19:44 -
[204] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: Sivpul needs a tiny bit more PG cut but a role bonus to make arties cost less PG, so arties become a POSSIBILITY, without degeneratign in 10mn all the time.
280s are supposed to be hard to fit, right now you can fit 280s and MWD without any fitting mods/implants. Thrasher needs 2 acr to do that if i'm not mistaken
A role bonus for arty fitting is something i'd be cool with though, if they dont overdo it |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2045
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 14:31:00 -
[205] - Quote
Inggroth wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: Sivpul needs a tiny bit more PG cut but a role bonus to make arties cost less PG, so arties become a POSSIBILITY, without degeneratign in 10mn all the time.
280s are supposed to be hard to fit, right now you can fit 280s and MWD without any fitting mods/implants. Thrasher needs 2 acr to do that if i'm not mistaken A role bonus for arty fitting is something i'd be cool with though, if they dont overdo it
With the change they will be IMPOSSIBLE to fit without PG mod. No other minmatar ship besides the trasher abnormality needs PG moduels to fit JUST the arties.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1669
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 17:41:51 -
[206] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Inggroth wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: Sivpul needs a tiny bit more PG cut but a role bonus to make arties cost less PG, so arties become a POSSIBILITY, without degeneratign in 10mn all the time.
280s are supposed to be hard to fit, right now you can fit 280s and MWD without any fitting mods/implants. Thrasher needs 2 acr to do that if i'm not mistaken A role bonus for arty fitting is something i'd be cool with though, if they dont overdo it With the change they will be IMPOSSIBLE to fit without PG mod. No other minmatar ship besides the trasher abnormality needs PG moduels to fit JUST the arties.
Tornado and panther need one iirc. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
349
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 17:44:07 -
[207] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:If you take everything into account, it's also much lower because there is no cap pool penalty on the AB. That penalty reduce your cap regen which is effectively "burned" because of the MWD.
Good point.
Freelancer117 wrote:a 10mn speed module on destoyer because of oversized PG attribute should be intended, CCP is saying it is not, so remove it.
They're not saying anything like that. They're tweaking the power of the hull, they're not saying oversized prop mod fits are something they don't intend on these hulls.
Kagura Nikon wrote:If oversized prop mods had so many issues, we (and other small scale high SP entities) would not be living under the norm.. oversized AB.. or stay home....
You are also entitled to your own risk/reward analysis, that you refuse to fight without certain advantages is not my fault or my problem |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 18:47:40 -
[208] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Inggroth wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: Sivpul needs a tiny bit more PG cut but a role bonus to make arties cost less PG, so arties become a POSSIBILITY, without degeneratign in 10mn all the time.
280s are supposed to be hard to fit, right now you can fit 280s and MWD without any fitting mods/implants. Thrasher needs 2 acr to do that if i'm not mistaken A role bonus for arty fitting is something i'd be cool with though, if they dont overdo it With the change they will be IMPOSSIBLE to fit without PG mod. No other minmatar ship besides the trasher abnormality needs PG moduels to fit JUST the arties. Tornado and panther need one iirc.
Well panther grid is pretty terrible. Guess we will see where it is after blops rebalance (lol). 1400 nado is a fair compromise. Largest subcap alpha gun in the game should need a single PG rig to fit.
The problem with 280s is i already fit a PG rig to fit 280s on my svipul. Now i need 2? ACRs use a lot of calibration, meaning i have to sacrifice 3 rigs just to get the desired weapon system to fit. Or drop a low and use a RCU, which then means i need a CPU rig, ACR and RCU to make 280s fit using my current svipul fit.
That seems alil excessive to me. This is not a 10mn fit, but a 1mn mwd fit with a MASB as its only tank (no dcu). |
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
33820
|
Posted - 2015.04.08 18:57:05 -
[209] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/rd2ShWS.png
confessor has barely half the kill count of the svipul, making svipul #1 on the list (ishtar is #3 for comparison). I don't see why they both would have to be nerfed equally. If the grid nerf is set in stone.. so be it. But why also agility, speed and mass?
As an addendum to this post, the Confessor was released before the Svipul.
Why do bad threads happen to good people?
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
352
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 03:22:47 -
[210] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/rd2ShWS.png
confessor has barely half the kill count of the svipul, making svipul #1 on the list (ishtar is #3 for comparison). I don't see why they both would have to be nerfed equally. If the grid nerf is set in stone.. so be it. But why also agility, speed and mass? As an addendum to this post, the Confessor was released before the Svipul.
That list is monthly, otherwise the Drake would *still* be number 7 or so and the kill totals would be in the millions. |
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
784
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 06:11:27 -
[211] - Quote
115,481 total Svipul kills 10,975total Svipul loses since release (mid-Feb) 20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH
120,007 total Confessor kills 10,842 total Confessor losses Since release (December) 9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness
195
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 06:39:46 -
[212] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:115,481 total Svipul kills 10,975total Svipul loses since release (mid-Feb) 20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH
120,007 total Confessor kills 10,842 total Confessor losses Since release (December) 9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH
is it possible to split the Svipul kills between Arti- and Autocannon fits? because I have the feeling, that the low PG requirements of Autos is making the Svipul PG so powerful. wouldn't be the first time that a PG big enough to make Arties viable makes the ship being a too good of an Autocannon platform. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1050
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 09:06:34 -
[213] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:115,481 total Svipul kills 10,975total Svipul loses since release (mid-Feb) 20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH
120,007 total Confessor kills 10,842 total Confessor losses Since release (December) 9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH
is it possible to split the Svipul kills between Arti- and Autocannon fits? because I have the feeling, that the low PG requirements of Autos is making the Svipul PG so powerful. wouldn't be the first time that a PG big enough to make Arties viable makes the ship being a too good of an Autocannon platform.
it would be if killmails weren't broken almost all the time, and if any of the killboards were any good |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2047
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 10:08:41 -
[214] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:115,481 total Svipul kills 10,975total Svipul loses since release (mid-Feb) 20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH
120,007 total Confessor kills 10,842 total Confessor losses Since release (December) 9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH
That result is a bit skewed because of the min maxing behavior of players. If the svipul is 5% better than the confessor, that is enough for 90% of the high skilled and brain capable players to change to the svipul. That increases drastically its results. Because its win ratio is 2 times higher, does not mean it is MASSIVELY better than the confessor.
Also how many of those kills were frigates .. how many were battleships, hacs.. etc? I Would prefer a LOT a confessor to a svipul to fight against a vigilant for example. Raw numbers have useful info, but you need to analyse the effect on the player behavior to get a reasonable conclusion about them.
At end, the Arties needing TOO MUCH PG causes an issue where it is too easy to push a specific minmatar ship made to use arties into weird fittings.
The real problem is in the arties. They could all lose some 15% fittings and SOME of the ships then could lose a tad of PG (the ones that were clearly built to use arties and that are abused with AC (trashers and svipul basically) , others are already in hard place when using AC and there is no need to toucht heir PG (like tempest, munin)
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Chrisfighter
Gladdebacher's
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 12:55:25 -
[215] - Quote
The -9 PG cut on the confessor is a little to much. A change in -8 or -7 pg would be ok, just my two cents :)
Nur die harten kommen innen Garten, eh .... Eve xD
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
194
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:21:14 -
[216] - Quote
Chrisfighter wrote:The -9 PG cut on the confessor is a little to much. A change in -8 or -7 pg would be ok, just my two cents :)
[citation needed]
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Nightfox BloodRaven
State Protectorate Caldari State
36
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 19:32:42 -
[217] - Quote
-9 powergrig is too much. Confessor is not as op as ppl think cap is tight.
but hey to all folks here..
CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics. They dont care what we think. |
Fird
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:36:11 -
[218] - Quote
Don't poop on the Svipul. |
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
22
|
Posted - 2015.04.09 21:42:33 -
[219] - Quote
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics.
This does seem to be the trend with these balancing threads. They are more early warning threads than actual feedback threads. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
785
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 00:04:08 -
[220] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:115,481 total Svipul kills 10,975total Svipul loses since release (mid-Feb) 20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH
120,007 total Confessor kills 10,842 total Confessor losses Since release (December) 9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH
That result is a bit skewed because of the min maxing behavior of players. If the svipul is 5% better than the confessor, that is enough for 90% of the high skilled and brain capable players to change to the svipul. That increases drastically its results. Because its win ratio is 2 times higher, does not mean it is MASSIVELY better than the confessor. Also how many of those kills were frigates .. how many were battleships, hacs.. etc? I Would prefer a LOT a confessor to a svipul to fight against a vigilant for example. Raw numbers have useful info, but you need to analyse the effect on the player behavior to get a reasonable conclusion about them.
It doesn't take a genius to see that the Svipul is head and shoulders above the Confessor. If you want to break it down by ship type or weapon usage month by month help yourself
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
625
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 05:38:59 -
[221] - Quote
I call the agility and capacitor gimp an overnerf. Yeah, we know CCP doesn't like Caldari or Amarr very much so they listen to outcries from folks that have no business calling themselves educated.
Dail those overnerfs back, the Confessor doesn't need them. The whine-matar need a tad more nerfs.
signature
|
Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
162
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 05:45:49 -
[222] - Quote
Torei Dutalis wrote:Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics.
This does seem to be the trend with these balancing threads. They are more early warning threads than actual feedback threads.
Not really true in the very recent past. iHubs and the Entosis Module had changes or things implemented based on player feedback in forum threads. We haven't seen an example in rebalancing yet though. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
353
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 06:22:28 -
[223] - Quote
Lucine Delacourt wrote:Torei Dutalis wrote:Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics.
This does seem to be the trend with these balancing threads. They are more early warning threads than actual feedback threads. Not really true in the very recent past. iHubs and the Entosis Module had changes or things implemented based on player feedback in forum threads. We haven't seen an example in rebalancing yet though.
This actually goes back a lot further than that, but you need to bring up a glaring issue with something they're trying to fix, and proof to back it up, or make a very well supported argument with numbers and examples if you want to massively change what CCP is doing. Either that or pretty much everyone needs to be saying the same thing, if they're getting a mix of "too much" and "not enough" then they're going to figure this is a decent pass. |
Idame Isqua
Vipres' Templis CALSF
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 08:30:58 -
[224] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:Nice changes.
Now if you would just block them from small plexes :)
That will happen with the Caldari release |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2050
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 10:11:18 -
[225] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:115,481 total Svipul kills 10,975total Svipul loses since release (mid-Feb) 20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH
120,007 total Confessor kills 10,842 total Confessor losses Since release (December) 9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH
That result is a bit skewed because of the min maxing behavior of players. If the svipul is 5% better than the confessor, that is enough for 90% of the high skilled and brain capable players to change to the svipul. That increases drastically its results. Because its win ratio is 2 times higher, does not mean it is MASSIVELY better than the confessor. Also how many of those kills were frigates .. how many were battleships, hacs.. etc? I Would prefer a LOT a confessor to a svipul to fight against a vigilant for example. Raw numbers have useful info, but you need to analyse the effect on the player behavior to get a reasonable conclusion about them. It doesn't take a genius to see that the Svipul is head and shoulders above the Confessor. If you want to break it down by ship type or weapon usage month by month help yourselfThe Confessor doesn't need help, and after the change it will be totally fine. The Svipul is what needs a nerf. If you want to keep its artillery ability then either nuke the cpu, the speed, or nuke the PG and boost the optimal bonus.
does not take a genius to read my sentences and see the truth. Just take playing the game.
If a ships is 10% better than the other, on same role, that ship will be used by 99% of the good players. That result in a MASSIVE bloating of its killboards stats. Simple example? The tempest, is among the weakest battleships, it is barely used at all, but the peopel that use it, mostly know very well the scenarios that they are good at.. a few scenarios that they excel, the result is that is among the highest win rate for ANY battleships. That means the tempest is excelent? NO.. it is horrible because it can do only a tiny number of things, so much that no one uses it most of time? ooo does that mean it is 40 times worse than a dominix because of the total number of kills made with them? NO.. it means that the dominix is better, and being better is enough to make the ship flown 10-20 times MORE then the other, even if it were only 10% better.
We for example had EXACTLY the same kill rate with the confessor and the sivpul. The sivpul is better at the most common scenarios ? Yes... 2 times better? lol no at all. if you REMOVE the sivpul and leave the confessor as it is, the confessor kill rate will increase up to a point that is not MUCH smaller than what the sivpul has now.
CCP is wise to see that. The amount of nerfing on both and the way is not something I agree, but that when you touch the best ship you need to evaluate the most likely ship to replace its place in the food chain, that is the wisest thing you can do in game balance.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
399
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 14:41:48 -
[226] - Quote
Dear CCP Fozzie,
I don't understand these changes. And i am just talking about the Svipul for now, not even in contrast to the Confessor.
The Svipul has a hull bonus that grants it 10% Damage and 10% Range on small projectile weapons. These are the 2 stats that make any minmatar hull viable to actually fit arties and not be horribly bad.
Arties have a horrible tracking, so you'd optimally want to use them while kiting. This is, using a mwd, and stay away from anything that tries to scram you, so you can keep the transversal low and defecate your artillery shells on their pretty little faces.
However, with the upcoming -10 PG nerf to the Svipul, fitting anything that is 280mms is already horrible as fock and will **** your fittingspace. Fitting 250mm Arties *and* a tank is going to be hard as fock even with maxed out skills.
Meanwhile, fitting a 10mn Afterburner and some autocannons and a good tank is ... oh look at that, perfectly viable.
Here's 2 fits.
[Svipul, 10mn]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Gyrostabilizer II Internal Force Field Array I Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S [Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I
DPS: 352 with RF PP Tank: Sweet Speed: Awesome What happens when you get scrammed: You're in autocannon range, perfect piloting! Fitting: Tight, but sufficient.
---
[Svipul, Svipul fit]
Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Warp Disruptor II
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S [Empty High slot] 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
Small Projectile Locus Coordinator II Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Small Ancillary Current Router I
Quake S x2000 Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S x2000 Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S x2000 Nanite Repair Paste x200 Navy Cap Booster 50 x270
DPS: 192 with RF Depleted Uranium (Cause if you use PP or EMP or Fusion, you have to stay within 10-15km to properly outdamage Depleted Uranium. But you don't want to be there.) Tank: Sweet Speed: Awesome What happens when you get scrammed: You're not tracking **** and get your poophole stuffed, horrible piloting! Fitting: Holy, like, what, Fozzie, please, where am i going to pull the lacking CPU from without making the fit expensive or dropping mobility or dps or range( which is dps, basically). I already fit 250mms, REWARD ME!
TL;DR:
Don't nerf the Svipul, nerf 10mn ABs! Upp 10mn PG - Requirements to 100! Increase Cruiser and Battlecruiser PG by 50ish to compensate!
Results: No more ~nosig~ 10mn Frigs or Dessies, slighlty more competiitive MWD cruisers and Battlecruisers, still the 100mn stuff on T3s. Cause that's another bullet, seriously. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
213
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 15:08:55 -
[227] - Quote
People these days.
I agree, AC fits with Dual MASB and 10MN have to go.
Cut the powergrid some more, Rise.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 16:36:56 -
[228] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:Dear CCP Fozzie, I don't understand these changes. And i am just talking about the Svipul for now, not even in contrast to the Confessor. The Svipul has a hull bonus that grants it 10% Damage and 10% Range on small projectile weapons. These are the 2 stats that make any minmatar hull viable to actually fit arties and not be horribly bad. Arties have a horrible tracking, so you'd optimally want to use them while kiting. This is, using a mwd, and stay away from anything that tries to scram you, so you can keep the transversal low and defecate your artillery shells on their pretty little faces. However, with the upcoming -10 PG nerf to the Svipul, fitting anything that is 280mms is already horrible as fock and will **** your fittingspace. Fitting 250mm Arties *and* a tank is going to be hard as fock even with maxed out skills. Meanwhile, fitting a 10mn Afterburner and some autocannons and a good tank is ... oh look at that, perfectly viable. Here's 2 fits. [Svipul, 10mn] Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Gyrostabilizer II Internal Force Field Array I Nanofiber Internal Structure II Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S [Empty High slot] 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S 200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I DPS: 352 with RF PP Tank: Sweet Speed: Awesome What happens when you get scrammed: You're in autocannon range, perfect piloting! Fitting: Tight, but sufficient. (THIS IS AFTER 10 PG NERF) --- [Svipul, Svipul fit] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Warp Disruptor II 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S [Empty High slot] 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S 250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S Small Projectile Locus Coordinator II Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Small Ancillary Current Router I Quake S x2000 Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S x2000 Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S x2000 Nanite Repair Paste x200 Navy Cap Booster 50 x270 DPS: 192 with RF Depleted Uranium (Cause if you use PP or EMP or Fusion, you have to stay within 10-15km to properly outdamage Depleted Uranium. But you don't want to be there.) Tank: Sweet Speed: Awesome What happens when you get scrammed: You're not tracking **** and get your poophole stuffed, horrible piloting! Fitting: Holy, like, what, Fozzie, please, where am i going to pull the lacking CPU from without making the fit expensive or dropping mobility or dps or range( which is dps, basically). I already fit 250mms, REWARD ME! TL;DR: Don't nerf the Svipul, nerf 10mn ABs! Upp 10mn PG - Requirements to 100! Increase Cruiser and Battlecruiser PG by 50ish to compensate! Results: No more ~nosig~ 10mn Frigs or Dessies, slighlty more competiitive MWD cruisers and Battlecruisers, still the 100mn stuff on T3s. Cause that's another bullet, seriously.
Dual MASB arty with x2 gyro? Lol. You cant have your cake and eat it too.
Arty boats are always skimpy on tank. Some worse than others (no tank arty wolf). They require SKILL, and speed as the primary way to survive. You cant have max tank, gank, speed and projection. That is the definition of overpowered.
Drop a MASB, replace with web. Drop a nano and add MAPC (navy one for max PG), that might free up enough grid for 280s to work. Try this:
x6 280s
fleeting web t2 point Limited 1mn mwd
Nano x2 tracking enhancer gyro
ACR polycarb burst aerator
That was my svipul fit before nerf. With sabot shot out to 40km, went 3400ish (cold, 5k hot) in prop mode and still had great tracking. Could easily kill garms/tackle. Did 190-290dps depending on ammo.
I might have to drop a poly or nano for another grid mod. Guess we will see.
|
Syrias Bizniz
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
399
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 18:39:44 -
[229] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote: stuff
The whole point was actually to show how ******* ******** the proposed changes are. ******* over arties while still maintaining 10mn dual asb fits (that are scram immune!) on an arty hull is kinda horrible design.
Fun fact, if you drop one of the Nanos, you're just BARELY faster than a 10mn Svipul. While having all the disadvantages: Lower DPS, Sigbloom, lower tracking, less range control.
Edit: The first step to change the svipul is to take away it's ability to 10mn it. And THEN you can start balancing it properly. |
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.10 20:44:30 -
[230] - Quote
Lucine Delacourt wrote:Torei Dutalis wrote:Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:
CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics.
This does seem to be the trend with these balancing threads. They are more early warning threads than actual feedback threads. Not really true in the very recent past. iHubs and the Entosis Module had changes or things implemented based on player feedback in forum threads. We haven't seen an example in rebalancing yet though.
Perhaps I should have said ship balancing threads. To be fair, in your example they were planning on iterating on the very loose sov presentation (which still may not be done) and they had how many hundred pages of tears about interceptors? And the t2 link still has a 250km range....what? I'd like to see responses to some of the actual, reasonable, number filled posts from people who actually fly in and against these ships. Those are the posts that seem to be ignored. There have been a lot of unnecessary nerfs to things like light missiles and tracking enhancers, or balancing passes on ships where they give a ship +3 CPU when it needs a completely different weapon bonus to not be overlapping with multiple other ships. Anyway, rant over. |
|
Murkelost
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 09:31:33 -
[231] - Quote
Your powergrid decrease is to much.
Read: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=418061&find=unread |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
224
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 11:01:13 -
[232] - Quote
No.
Fit more MAPCs.
Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept //
Make BS & BC Worth the Warp!
( -í° -£-û -í°)
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1682
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 18:35:37 -
[233] - Quote
Make arty not take over 3 time as much PWG per gun as autos and then re-babalce ships using these around. How can you hope to balance the tank/prop mod of a ship when one of the largest PWG requirement is 3 time as much as the other available option? |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
226
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 19:46:57 -
[234] - Quote
With these changes, Arty fits are balanced PG-wise, it is the ACs that have disproportionately low PG requirements and need to be looked at.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Murkelost
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 19:51:21 -
[235] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Make arty not take over 3 time as much PWG per gun as autos and then re-babalce ships using these around. How can you hope to balance the tank/prop mod of a ship when one of the largest PWG requirement is 3 time as much as the other available option?
The PWR grid nerf is not gonna prevent people from fitting a 10mn AB from what I've learned (atleast what it seems like at this point). Basically this means that the nerf is for nothing PWR grid wise, which is why I think the only solution would be to limit propulsion mods size wise toward specific ship sizes... Just saying |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
227
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 20:06:47 -
[236] - Quote
Murkelost wrote:Basically this means that the nerf is for nothing PWR grid wise, which is why I think the only solution would be to limit propulsion mods size wise toward specific ship sizes... Just saying
A rather drastic change because of one ship. One ship and its ACs to be exact.
AC PG needs to be looked at, nothing more.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Kaede Hita
K.H. Holding
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.11 21:51:52 -
[237] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core
These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback!
Pure speculation, but are you sure the prices are not going down just because more people are dwelling/looting in WH space ? I suppose T3 prices are not dropping as fast because people are used to pay top ISK for the hull. I am not a market specialist, I just want to make sure there is not barking at the wrong tree going on. Maybe someone well-versed in eve market could enlightened us please ?
One thing I find a bit annoying, when there is nerfing/balancing coming, I have to scroll down after the dev post to know specifically what kind of abuse is going with the ship. I would prefer straightforward reason on the opening post, so I can know what is going on and why. Some people are not that familiar with forums and/or latest patches might find some of the changes a bit cryptic. And it may increases troll detection as well.
10mn destroyers with good range and damage and tanking is a bad idea, I believe the change is needed. |
Murkelost
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.12 08:10:57 -
[238] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Murkelost wrote:Basically this means that the nerf is for nothing PWR grid wise, which is why I think the only solution would be to limit propulsion mods size wise toward specific ship sizes... Just saying A rather drastic change because of one ship. One ship and its ACs to be exact. AC PG needs to be looked at, nothing more.
You are totally right on the fact that it is a drastic change, but if it's wrong to fit a 10MN AB to a t3 destroyer, why would it then still be possible to fit it to such a vessel, or any other small vessel for that matter. With this said it is just not only about one ship but all. propulsion size mods vs ship size. It just happened to be the awesomeness of a t3 destroyer that surfaced the very dilemma
This is only why I found it to be a better problemsolver to do this instead of nerfing ships in themselves. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.12 09:32:04 -
[239] - Quote
It is more reasonable to drop base speed of the hulls, or even reduce bonuses given in (each) tacticool mode.
This game has history with oversized, extreme, often broken setups that work super good if only for a time, as the hull in question gets nerfbatted. I don't recall a change that put artificial restrictions just because of 1-2 boats.
In the nanu era stacking penalty was introduced, so battleships couldn't reach 5 km/speeds with inty acceleration. Likewise for damage mods - stacking penalty faded the 8 Heatsink Geddon.
Very early in the game, multiple prob mode and their simultaneous activation prompted a restriction of the number of active propulsion modules to 1. You can still fit AB + MWD
Yes, T3Ds with 10MNs are cancel.
Yes, there will be less of it.
Yes, there will be some drawbacks now to fitting one now.
Yes, it may require further review of the specific hulls in question.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
924
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 03:32:06 -
[240] - Quote
Face it, whether it was Tengus with 100mn Afterburners or T3D's with 10mn Afterburners, they are both cancerous. Get rid of that fitting option, then balance the ships.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
|
Alexis Nightwish
144
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 03:52:01 -
[241] - Quote
There's a lot of hate towards oversized ABs on these ships. Have people not noticed that by spending 25pg on them you're limiting the other aspects like damage, tank, etc.? Also, even in propulsion mode they take ages to get up to speed and still handle like hippos. My point is that these ships are the first outside of niche fits like 100MN Stabber FIs to be able to fit oversized prop mods and still be effective. Removing that pushes us away from fit heterogenization, and that IMO, is a bad thing.
Rather than removing fitting options I'd rather see stats such as HP, speed, agility, sensor strength, etc. shifted to the stances and the cooldown on switching stances increased to 20 seconds to further amplify the importance of wise tactical choices in combat. This would reduce the 'too good at everything all the time' issue that plagues T3D balance. It would also align with Fozzie's ststed goal of "power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition."
I think the proposed changes, particularly the cap and PG nerfs, are terrible, especially for the Confessor which relies heavily on them, regardless of prop mod. The only change I like is the build cost. Ships of this power should be no less than 60m.
Lastly, I find it very sad that Ishtars/VNIs have been broken for over a year and have barely received a slap on the wrist, but the T3Ds have been out for a few months and are getting neutered hard. "Limited in scope"? Hardly.
CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
232
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 05:05:16 -
[242] - Quote
As someone who has been putting oversized ABs on my ships since Apocrypha, I feel like I should come in and at least defend the psychology of the choice.
Starting out as a young Minmatar pilot, you always hear "Minmatar ships are fast." This is true, until someone gets webs on you or shuts your MWD off with a scram or if you are fitted with a regular sized afterburner versus a MWDing opponent. At that point, the whole balance of your fitting is usually entirely negated. You can't track. You can't run. You either have a gimped capacitor from fitting a MWD or you are using capacitor to run an afterburner that does essentially nothing for you. You might as well not even have fit a propulsion module, but you can't go back to the fitting window and fix it, now. You're just . . . dead in the water. (Pun intended.)
What do you do? How do you ensure that your opponent doesn't just point->click-> and shut off your ability to maneuver effectively?
A warp disruptor is already telling my ship what to do: Do not warp out! A warp scrambler 1-ups that: Do not warp out and shut down your MWD! A webifier: Fly (much) slower!
As a young destroyer pilot (Thrasher and Catalyst, mostly), all I really wanted, and still want even now, is a module that answers a warp disruptor and/or a warp scrambler and/or a stasis webifier and/or a warp disruptor bubble or scripted warp disruption field generator, simply: No!
Is the problem that I'm moving too fast and you can't stop me or is the problem that you expect to dictate how I fly MY SPACESHIP by clicking just one or two buttons? |
Murkelost
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 05:44:45 -
[243] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:As someone who has been putting oversized ABs on my ships since Apocrypha, I feel like I should come in and at least defend the psychology of the choice.
Starting out as a young Minmatar pilot, you always hear "Minmatar ships are fast." This is true, until someone gets webs on you or shuts your MWD off with a scram or if you are fitted with a regular sized afterburner versus a MWDing opponent. At that point, the whole balance of your fitting is usually entirely negated. You can't track. You can't run. You either have a gimped capacitor from fitting a MWD or you are using capacitor to run an afterburner that does essentially nothing for you. You might as well not even have fit a propulsion module, but you can't go back to the fitting window and fix it, now. You're just . . . dead in the water. (Pun intended.)
What do you do? How do you ensure that your opponent doesn't just point->click-> and shut off your ability to maneuver effectively?
A warp disruptor is already telling my ship what to do: Do not warp out! A warp scrambler 1-ups that: Do not warp out and shut down your MWD! A webifier: Fly (much) slower!
As a young destroyer pilot (Thrasher and Catalyst, mostly), all I really wanted, and still want even now, is a module that answers a warp disruptor and/or a warp scrambler and/or a stasis webifier and/or a warp disruptor bubble or scripted warp disruption field generator, simply: No!
Is the problem that I'm moving too fast and you can't stop me or is the problem that you expect to dictate how I fly MY SPACESHIP by clicking just one or two buttons?
The thing I like about what you have written is that it confirms the fact that PVP in Eve is a complex scenario, atleast when you are up against people who know their stuff. Back in the day when vagabonds were really hard to catch, you had to put your mind to it and come up with ways to catch them along with some blind luck not to mention the nanophoons . I know that I setup various traps that included drag bubbles, rapiers for webifying an so on and it was such a joy when one actually nailed one of those fast muppets :)
I think one of the few or many problems that comes along with this is the mental state of convinience/laziness and less skills or knowledge of how to act around various scenarios. No offence to anyone but if you take Rooks and Kings and compare them to a big blobfest alliance (any alliance) I'm sure you will be able to make a distinction between the two.
I also agree that the fitting concept should not be to tightly controlled, but I just find it wrong to nerf a ship/ships when the obvious problem is that a module which people think is wrong to fit to a specific sized ship is actually able to be fitted to it. So question is what's it gonna be, the ongoing tradition of nerfing ships when they in themselves are not the primary issue, or address the real issue behind it (in this case propulsion module size vs ship size).
I am split between both scenarious, but if it was up to me i would prefer to latter. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
248
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 06:58:02 -
[244] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Face it, whether it was Tengus with 100mn Afterburners or T3D's with 10mn Afterburners, they are both cancerous.
They are, but only when fitted by default due to generous PG. MWD Confessor and Arty Sviipuls should become very competitive due to these changes.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Murkelost
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 07:11:28 -
[245] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Face it, whether it was Tengus with 100mn Afterburners or T3D's with 10mn Afterburners, they are both cancerous. They are, but only when fitted by default due to generous PG. MWD Confessor and Arty Sviipuls should become very competitive due to these changes.
The generous PG is not the main issue in my opinion |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
356
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 07:25:00 -
[246] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:As a young destroyer pilot (Thrasher and Catalyst, mostly), all I really wanted, and still want even now, is a module that answers a warp disruptor and/or a warp scrambler and/or a stasis webifier and/or a warp disruptor bubble or scripted warp disruption field generator, simply: No!
Is the problem that I'm moving too fast and you can't stop me or is the problem that you expect to dictate how I fly MY SPACESHIP by clicking just one or two buttons?
What you're looking for mate is ECM. Also, in some ways, what the Scram/Web are doing is answering your prop mod and speed. A ship with an AB who is webbed is still moving significantly faster than a ship with no AB who is webbed.
The point though is to avoid getting locked down in the first place unless that's something you have the tools to deal with, whether that's tank, DPS, ECM, or something else entirely.
BTW let me tell you there is nothing in the world more annoying than being tackled by a Griffin with ECM running.
Murkelost wrote:I also agree that the fitting concept should not be to tightly controlled, but I just find it wrong to nerf a ship/ships when the obvious problem is that a module which people think is wrong to fit to a specific sized ship is actually able to be fitted to it. So question is what's it gonna be, the ongoing tradition of nerfing ships when they in themselves are not the primary issue, or address the real issue behind it (in this case propulsion module size vs ship size).
I am split between both scenarious, but if it was up to me i would prefer to latter.
I don't really feel like the 10MN fits are the problem, but more a symptom of it. When a 10MN fit doesn't have to make significant trade-offs to work then it's likely other things aren't having to make trade-offs either, which is what we're seeing with the 2x MASB fits and other stuff.
These changes aren't nerfing these fits off the map but I don't think that's desirable either. They incur significant trade-offs which, on paper, should be enough to balance the fits out. If that's not the case I'd prefer a look at the MWD's balance and place in the game over something that makes these fits flat out non-viable, since on paper a MWD fit should have significant benefits in terms of fitting and maneuverability over a 10MN fit. It's also a module that hasn't been touched, as far as I'm aware, since the original Nano-nerf some ~8 years ago.
With all the changes the game has undergone since then maybe a look at propulsion modules and their counters is in order? I mean, the meta has been progressively shifting toward small and maneuverable over the last 8 years. First it was AHAC gangs, then it was T3 fleets, then the warp-speed changes, then finally T3 Destroyers, and now everything from Null-fleets to small gangs is drifting quickly toward Cruisers and smaller when it's not Battleships supported by Capitals and the larger ships are feeling increasingly out in the cold from the look of things in the community. Oh, and the Vindi is one of the most popular Battleships, which is also telling.
No particular point to that little ramble, just some general thoughts. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
249
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 08:23:23 -
[247] - Quote
Murkelost wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Face it, whether it was Tengus with 100mn Afterburners or T3D's with 10mn Afterburners, they are both cancerous. They are, but only when fitted by default due to generous PG. MWD Confessor and Arty Sviipuls should become very competitive due to these changes. The generous PG is not the main issue in my opinion
Yes, it is a cumulative issue of the Prop mode bonuses and high base speeds, with Svipul having too much PG left over in AC setup even with the nerf.
Confessor with a 10MN in Defense mode excels at brawling cruisers due to the triple whammy of insanely low sig radius, high resists and disengagement option in practically all situations.
I've been double webbed, neuted and shot at with anything from 180mm ACs to Heavy Electron blasters by boats that have application bonuses such as tracking, yet the it was mathematically impossible to either 1) hit me; 2) properly tackle; 3) shut down the dual SARs - hallo 400 cap boosters, or 4) land an alpha that would go past 60% armour point.
Mathematically unpossible. PG nurf makes one sacrifice both DPS and a tiny bit of tank for 10MN goodness.
Good ship. I liek. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦)
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
628
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 08:27:38 -
[248] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:..This game has history with oversized, extreme, often broken setups that work super good if only for a time, as the practice in question gets nerfbatted. I don't recall a change that put artificial restrictions just because of 1-2 boats.]
Falcon - ecm nerf
Drake, tengu - heavy missile nerf, Drake overnerf
Caracal, Cerberus - assault missile launchers become rapid launchers
all subcaptial ships - useless nos, neut all zee things..
logistics - all ships resistance bonusses
signature
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
249
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 09:09:24 -
[249] - Quote
No, those are all attribute adjustments.
I see no artificial restrictions being placed in any of those cases.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
250
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 09:40:23 -
[250] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:BTW let me tell you there is nothing in the world more annoying than being tackled by a Griffin with ECM running.
During the first weeks of release, I almost got rekt by a Tristan and a Griffin - didn't realise Sharpshooter gave a 100% bonus to sensor strength.
Moonwalked out of it with 10AB lulululululululul. (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ-û #)a+ç
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12588
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:32:42 -
[251] - Quote
Hey everyone! Big thanks to everyone who has posted feedback about the first round of changes. We agree with the point that some of you were bringing up, that these first round of changes are a bit too harsh on long range weapon fits compared to short range weapon fits. A certain amount of added fitting pain for long range fits will be necessary, but long range weapon viability is a key part of the character of the tactical destroyers and it would be a shame to limit that more than absolutely necessary.
So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. This allows us to reduce fittings significantly without harming long range fits as much, as the weapons will make a smaller percentage of the overall Powergrid and CPU consumption of the ships.
These new versions also include a mass reduction for the Svipul (which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules) and a bit more speed reduction. Material requirement changes remain the same as in version one.
Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core
Like I said above, thanks to everyone who has participated in this feedback thread so far. We're very interested in hearing your thoughts about this second iteration of the changes.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
260
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:37:04 -
[252] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same.
BRB to read the specifics, I first hafta, in a very expedite and prompt manner, set my training to Minmatar Tactical Destroyer V.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Alexis Nightwish
147
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:47:27 -
[253] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! Big thanks to everyone who has posted feedback about the first round of changes. We agree with the point that some of you were bringing up, that these first round of changes are a bit too harsh on long range weapon fits compared to short range weapon fits. A certain amount of added fitting pain for long range fits will be necessary, but long range weapon viability is a key part of the character of the tactical destroyers and it would be a shame to limit that more than absolutely necessary. So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. This allows us to reduce fittings significantly without harming long range fits as much, as the weapons will make a smaller percentage of the overall Powergrid and CPU consumption of the ships. These new versions also include a mass reduction for the Svipul (which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules) and a bit more speed reduction. Material requirement changes remain the same as in version one. Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements (unchanged): +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core Like I said above, thanks to everyone who has participated in this feedback thread so far. We're very interested in hearing your thoughts about this second iteration of the changes.
Improvement!
The pg and cap nerf isn't so devastating to the Confessor now since it's firing 4 turrets instead of 6 so that's good. Also with only needing to fit 4 turrets, arty Svips will probably still be viable. I'd have to run the numbers to see for sure but I think 10MN ABs are still viable, but no longer super strong with these changes. I hope I'm right on that as I like oversized props being an option on the T3Ds. Hopefully it will be one of many viable fitting choices for these ships.
Oh and they gain a utility high! Entosis link anyone? Double NOS brawling Confessors? Such choices. Much option. Wow!
Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12592
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:50:22 -
[254] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Mizhir
Matari Exodus
74236
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:54:55 -
[255] - Quote
Looks like some cool changes. As someone who loves RR gangs it is nice to see them having 2 utility highs.
And it is a great way to target the annoying 10mn brawl setups rather than nano setups. But why is the cap recharge time higher for the confessor than the svipul?
One Man Crew - Collective Solo PVP - Video is out!
|
Bagehi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
282
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 21:55:34 -
[256] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently.
But faster than a Minmitar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships.
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12592
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:01:53 -
[257] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently. But faster than a Minmatar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships.
It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case).
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
260
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:13:16 -
[258] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote: Svipul:
Max Velocity: 230 (-60) Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
Without taking mass changes into account, the new 1MWD speeds are 1,450/2,000 m/s and 2,400/3350 m/s in Prop mode.
Don't know how to calculate mass-thrust relationship.
These levels seem a lot more reasonable, than previously.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Sparky Dave3
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:16:09 -
[259] - Quote
Seems like some really great changes, bit worried about the Confessor having worse recharge than the Svipul though considering it has capless guns! It already struggled somewhat with cap :(
The 4 gun setup has some interesting implications for overheating though, it should be nice! |
Bagehi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
282
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:16:17 -
[260] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently. But faster than a Minmatar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships. It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case). At the end of the day we're more focused on getting an interesting variety of ships than in following any specific patterns rigidly.
Svipul still ends up being the more agile, higher dps, faster, more tanked ship of the two. Confessor was already a tight fit, the fitting changes seem to hurt the Confessor more than the Svipul, even though the Svipul seems the more dominant ship to begin with. Maybe I'm missing an in-game use where the Confessor deserved to be punished more than the Svipul? |
|
ChromeStriker
Out of Focus Odin's Call
884
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:17:08 -
[261] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case). At the end of the day we're more focused on getting an interesting variety of ships than in following any specific patterns rigidly.
I love that your not thinking with blinkers on but im worried with all the recent balance changes we are losing the racial uniqueness of the ships.... Theres so little gap between some ships you could mistake one for the other..... (other than *minmatar use projectiles* etc)
No Worries
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
359
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:22:38 -
[262] - Quote
Mizhir wrote:But why is the cap recharge time higher for the confessor than the svipul?
The Confessor has much higher base cap amount than the Svipul, 1000 vs 750 with maxed skills. The peak cap recharge for both ships is the same on TQ currently, and I believe Fozzies current changes either keep it the same or slightly favor the Confessor.
Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently. But faster than a Minmatar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships.
This is correct, and I have a spreadsheet to prove it. but Fozzie is also correct that the Svipul performs better with a prop mod due to the lower base mass.
However, it now performs far worse with an over-sized prop-mod because of the massive inertia increase. This is because a 10MN AB's mass increase is huge compared to the base mass of the ship. So, doing some back of the napkin estimation the new Svipul with a 10MN AB and Propulsion Mode active should take around 16-17 seconds to align, up from 9.6 seconds currently. For those of you who care that's slower than a Megathron running a Microwarpdrive. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
261
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:25:08 -
[263] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Svipul:
Max Velocity: 230 (-60) Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000) Without taking mass changes into account, the new 1MWD speeds are 1,450/2,000 m/s and 2,400/3350 m/s in Prop mode. Don't know how to calculate mass-thrust relationship. These levels seem a lot more reasonable, than previously.
With new mass taken into consideration:
293 m/s base speed * (1+(6.25 MWD boost * (1,500,000 thrust / (1,500,00 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1,666 / 2499 OH m/s with 1MN MWD.
In Propulsion mode: 2766 / 4149 OH m/s.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1095
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:26:35 -
[264] - Quote
props fozzlord this is pretty much exactly the balance pass i think these two ships needed
now about the ishtar.........................................
just kidding but heavy missiles need a bit of love
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
359
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:26:39 -
[265] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:Svipul still ends up being the more agile, higher dps, faster, more tanked ship of the two. Confessor was already a tight fit, the fitting changes seem to hurt the Confessor more than the Svipul, even though the Svipul seems the more dominant ship to begin with. Maybe I'm missing an in-game use where the Confessor deserved to be punished more than the Svipul?
The Confessor doesn't have to try and fit 280mm Arty on three less base PG. Overall the Confessor is losing less in absolute terms than the Svipul is. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
359
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:29:02 -
[266] - Quote
Definitely liking the new changes, and effectively gaining a High Slot opens up some interesting fitting options for both PvP and PvE. I wouldn't be surprised to see these ships show up even more in Exploration now and a Svipul with dual small NOS or Neut might be interesting as well.
Much more give and take with these changes. Love it. |
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1095
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:29:39 -
[267] - Quote
honestly i personally think the confessor is stronger than the svipul but requires a lot more skill to use
the svipuls true terror is the fact that anyone can hit approach and turn on their mwd and have a very good chance of winning against anything that isnt a svipul
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
261
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:31:39 -
[268] - Quote
Yolo,
Quote:Svipul, Yolo] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script 'Orion' Tracking CPU I, Optimal Range Script Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I F-90 Positional Sensor Subroutines, Scan Resolution Script
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet Titanium Sabot S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet Titanium Sabot S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet Titanium Sabot S 280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet Titanium Sabot S [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot]
Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II Small Projectile Locus Coordinator I [empty rig slot]
31+27km, 265 DPS, 1.5k Alpha, 4.1km/s OH in Prop.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1567
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:37:38 -
[269] - Quote
Ok, could someone be kind enough to tell me how the damage role bonus and the damage bonus from the tactical destroy level stack up?
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Capqu
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
1096
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:39:52 -
[270] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Ok, could someone be kind enough to tell me how the damage role bonus and the damage bonus from the tactical destroy level stack up?
multiplicative
pretend the ship has 6 guns worth of damage and go from there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
|
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
262
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:40:55 -
[271] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case). At the end of the day we're more focused on getting an interesting variety of ships than in following any specific patterns rigidly.
I love that your not thinking with blinkers on but im worried with all the recent balance changes we are losing the racial uniqueness of the ships.... Theres so little gap between some ships you could mistake one for the other
Whut? Puhhleeze. Have you seen my calculations with the new shipmass?
And,
Defense Mode:
66.6% reduction in Microwarpdrive signature radius penalty while Defense Mode is active
P. racially-motivated, I'd say. At least now, there will be actual benefit of the above bonus.
Ned Thomas wrote:Ok, could someone be kind enough to tell me how the damage role bonus and the damage bonus from the tactical destroy level stack up?
Same exact DPS, same exact Alpha as before.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Arthur Aihaken
Jormungand Corporation
4348
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:41:51 -
[272] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. How will this affect the Caldari and Gallant T3 Destroyers?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Borat Guereen
Chao3 Chao3 Alliance
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:42:39 -
[273] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently. But faster than a Minmatar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships.
Unfortunately, this is a consequence of the exploitation by Amarr of Minmatar slave labor and skllset. Join the Minarchist Revolution, and help do something against this unsettling trend.
Speaker of Chao3
Porte Parole de Chao3
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
262
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:44:12 -
[274] - Quote
Wow, it seems, I'll have to do a calc for the Confessor as well to prove that Svipul is the faster one.
Standby.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1567
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 22:45:31 -
[275] - Quote
Capqu wrote:Ned Thomas wrote:Ok, could someone be kind enough to tell me how the damage role bonus and the damage bonus from the tactical destroy level stack up? multiplicative pretend the ship has 6 guns worth of damage and go from there
Gracias.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1260
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:01:53 -
[276] - Quote
Two utility highs... Let's all say it together..
Assault frigates... Rest in pieces.
Yaay!!!!
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
786
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:03:09 -
[277] - Quote
muuuuch better changes
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
264
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:03:59 -
[278] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:muuuuch better changes
Just you wait.
Must first fit 10MN... then calculate new thrust with this mass.
Curious, Curious.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
86
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:06:10 -
[279] - Quote
Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Bagehi wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently. But faster than a Minmatar ship? If memory serves me, Minmatar ships usually have a higher base speed as well as lower mass. Base speed for Amarr ships is usually a couple percent slower than Minmatar base speed for comparable ships. It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case). At the end of the day we're more focused on getting an interesting variety of ships than in following any specific patterns rigidly. Svipul still ends up being the more agile, higher dps, faster, more tanked ship of the two. Confessor was already a tight fit, the fitting changes seem to hurt the Confessor more than the Svipul, even though the Svipul seems the more dominant ship to begin with. Maybe I'm missing an in-game use where the Confessor deserved to be punished more than the Svipul?
The confessor used to have enough grid to be able to squeeze on a 10MN MWD and a rack of gatling pulses if you filled the lows and rigs with T2 fitting mods. It's a hilarious single-purpose fit (to kill interceptors that aren't paying enough attention), but it made significant use of the fitting space that was provided to put beam lasers on. (It also beat out the Svipul for this because it was something like 15% more agile in speed mode.) I haven't run the numbers, but I assume one goal is to make a fit like that impossible. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
786
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:07:12 -
[280] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:muuuuch better changes Just you wait. Must first fit 10MN... then calculate new thrust with this mass. Curious, Curious.
T2 10mn AB w/ nanofibre on Svipul in speed mode: 2567 (3588) without implants or bonuses.
T2 10mn AB on Confessor in speed mode: 2259 (3144) without implants or bonuses.
The most important thing to take away from this is that a tracking bonused Cruiser can now HIT these things more reliably when scram/webbed.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
786
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:07:59 -
[281] - Quote
Ranamar wrote:The confessor used to have enough grid to be able to squeeze on a 10MN MWD and a rack of gatling pulses if you filled the lows and rigs with T2 fitting mods. It's a hilarious single-purpose fit (to kill interceptors that aren't paying enough attention), but it made significant use of the fitting space that was provided to put beam lasers on. (It also beat out the Svipul for this because it was something like 15% more agile in speed mode.) I haven't run the numbers, but I assume one goal is to make a fit like that impossible.
It still fits, and if you want to, you can squeeze a nos on there as well.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire Great Blue Balls of Fire
599
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:08:58 -
[282] - Quote
I'm bad at maths so i just went in and changed pyfa's db. Nerf to speed isn't bad at all even tho its 25% on base velocity so it looks bad. Old Svipul fit was goin ~3450m/s new one goin 3231m/s with mwd
Blue-Fire Best Fire
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
265
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:15:53 -
[283] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Prometheus Exenthal wrote:muuuuch better changes Just you wait. Must first fit 10MN... then calculate new thrust with this mass. Curious, Curious. T2 10mn AB w/ nanofibre on Svipul in speed mode: 2567 (3588) without implants or bonuses.
Nope.
Quote:[Svipul, New Setup 1 copy 1] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Warp Scrambler II
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S [empty high slot] [empty high slot] [empty high slot]
Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
3039 / 4558 m/s OH m/s.
Xaxaxa.
No Links.
Xaxaxa.
No Quafe.
Xaxaxaxa.
10MN AB, 372 DPS with dual MASB.
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
GûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûäGûäGûä GûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûÇGûÇGûä GûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûæGûæGûê GûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûêGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûäGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûê GûæGûÇGûÆGûäGûäGûäGûÆGûæGûêGûÇGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûêGûêGûäGûäGûêGûæGûæGûæGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûÆGûäGûæGûÇGûäGûäGûäGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûæGûæGûæGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûÆGûê GûêGûÆGûêGûæGûêGûÇGûäGûäGûæGûæGûæGûæGûæGûêGûÇGûæGûæGûæGûæGûÇGûäGûæGûæGûäGûÇGûÇGûÇGûäGûÆGûê
Proof: 360 m/s * (1 + (1.7225 AB bonus * (15,000,000 AB Thrust / (1,500,000 shipmass + 5,000,000 AB mass))) = 1824 / 2736 OH m/s, and 3039 / 4558 m/s OH m/s. in Propulsion mode.
Xaxaxa
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
786
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:18:39 -
[284] - Quote
Obviously you can make it faster, I was just giving vanilla numbers from the most common setups.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
265
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:24:04 -
[285] - Quote
6 km/s AC 10MN Sviipuls are a go.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1567
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:33:14 -
[286] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Two utility highs... Let's all say it together.. Assault frigates... Rest in pieces.
Yeah, I can't quite think of a way to make AF's desirable in the face of D3's.
.......f**k it, give 'em d-scan immunity.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Soul-on-Ice
Doughboys Snuffed Out
54
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:43:31 -
[287] - Quote
Fozzie, Can we also set up a crisis hotline for all the victims?
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Should help
Zappity wrote:Excellent, I'm very glad the balance happened before the other two came out. It was getting ridiculous.
Deacon Abox wrote:much needed. thanks.
Die losers. |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
786
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:52:28 -
[288] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin, you make it sound like you had no idea how fast the ships were before. But enjoy your poor-tank, no-range, moderate speed Svipul.
https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
267
|
Posted - 2015.04.13 23:55:40 -
[289] - Quote
Oh, I will.
I've strange tastes.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Liam Inkuras
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
1523
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:22:12 -
[290] - Quote
Heat for days
I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
|
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
5295
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:22:40 -
[291] - Quote
Removed an off topic post.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
The Connoisseur
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
28
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:23:25 -
[292] - Quote
Wouldn't change give the Svipul a little over 19% increased performance in heating its guns in a ship with an already flat 25% reduction in heat damage? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1051
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:35:52 -
[293] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules
ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2252
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:38:10 -
[294] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer They're not bad if the trade off is appropriately large. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12603
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:53:44 -
[295] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer
Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
268
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 00:59:35 -
[296] - Quote
CCP Fozzie's - the man.
I am kinda glad that fitting 10MNs by default is no longer required.
I feel free.
FREE!
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Soul-on-Ice
Doughboys Snuffed Out
54
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 01:44:06 -
[297] - Quote
Hows about a skill reimbursement? Seeings as minmatar tactical destroyer is completely worthless now?
The tears think the ship is OP:
Option 1 - Counter it.
Option 2 - Fly one yourself.
Option 3 - QQ to CCP about your feelings. |
God's Apples
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
592
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 01:58:24 -
[298] - Quote
Soul-on-Ice wrote:Hows about a skill reimbursement? Seeings as minmatar tactical destroyer is completely worthless now?
The tears think the ship is OP:
Option 1 - Counter it.
Option 2 - Fly one yourself.
Option 3 - QQ to CCP about your feelings.
Because it's extremely fun gameplay when you have to either fly a svipul or a svipul counter. It's almost like there are 200 other ship hulls that don't exist...
"Hydra Reloaded are just jealous / butthurt on me / us because we can get tons of PVP action in empire while they aren't good enough to get that." - NightmareX
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1121
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 02:25:55 -
[299] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
thats one view point i suppose, many others are on the side of removal of the easily exploitable, so the question is with these changes do you really think using oversized props have strong enough trade offs?
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
Milam Dobbins
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 03:11:02 -
[300] - Quote
Hey Fozzie! Thanks for the great work on balance. Everything's been amazing the last few years, though I was getting worried with the T3 release since you guys had previously said T3's would be on the power levels of navy faction but versatility would push it up in worth...and instead it was above current T2 levels and the versatility just made it more powerful on top of it - though you didn't have a real comparison on dessie navy/T2 levels and you wanted people to be excited about T3 dessies, so super understandable. and the versatility just made it more powerful on top of it. Anywho, both the initial nerf and this reaction to the feedback is amazing!
That being said, I would like to sound a concern on the speed. It's been kind of disheartening that with real game builds the ammar dictor actually typically ends up with higher possible speeds than the sabre. This is due to the plentiful low slots the ammarian ship has. The difference isn't as big between the two T3's, but I did want to bring that up since nano/overdrive fit shield amarr T3's(yeah, they're around even without the defense boost, since sniper mode is actually good on the confessor :P) will be faster than shield svipuls without sacrificing dps mods or DCU.
Anywho, I'm not sure how much minnie ships being fast has been factored in to more recent balance decisions, but it is kind of crucial if range flexibility is supposed to be a strength of projectiles - flexibility of range doesn't matter if the other guy gets to dictate range.
In real game terms it largely doesn't matter since both ships break the DPS and usefulness level that stuff like that is gravy. Svipul is great right now because it doesn't use cap, as well as tank flexibility. That might change a bunch when the other two T3's are released but it seems good right now.(Caldari also doesn't use cap, Gall will probably be around as flexible tank wise, right?)
Anywho, keep up the great work! |
|
Xavier Azabu
The Scope Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 03:32:27 -
[301] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
Agreed. Basically Dual Lights or 250s if you're running 10mn ab would be preferred respectively for Confessor and Svipul. Thanks for the thoughtful changes.
I have a vain suggestion to make but, can you please graphically update the Svipul and Confessor now that they are losing their turret slots? It's a minor detail but... it always looks better when the turret hardpoints on the ship model match the actual slots in the game. Cheers. |
Quietsky
Low Orbit Reconnaissance
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 04:30:54 -
[302] - Quote
As an avid FW bro, I would like to see tact destroyers removed from available ships to take into small plexs. My logic follows as such, if Loki's and Tengu's (both medium sized t3 ships) can't get into mediums, why should tech 3 destroyers be allowed in smalls?
Edit: I don't mind the power of the ships as much as I do their ability to engage much weaker ships in small FW plexs. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
362
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 04:35:14 -
[303] - Quote
Quietsky wrote:As an avid FW bro, I would like to see tact destroyers removed from available ships to take into small plexs. My logic follows as such, if Loki's and Tengu's (both medium sized t3 ships) can't get into mediums, why should tech 3 destroyers be allowed in smalls?
Edit: I don't mind the power of the ships as much as I do their ability to engage much weaker ships in small FW plexs.
I believe the eventual goal is for various T2 Frigates and Destroyers to be competitive with these ships, but somewhat less versatile due to the T3's mode switching.
If this isn't the case then I absolutely agree they should not be allowed into the FW complexes. |
O2 jayjay
Tit-EE Sprinkles Stratagem.
22
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 04:58:00 -
[304] - Quote
does this mean no more 10mn AB T3 destroyers with crazy dps and reps? If so thank you! |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
341
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 05:37:29 -
[305] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
Yeah actually saying over and over does make it true, because we are the people still logging in and playing the game and experiencing what PVP is like now on a daily basis. Multiple classes are obsolete because of D3s and links are everywhere and a prerequisite for a decent chance at successful solo/small gang pvp; both of which combined have created one of the worst environments for solo and small gang PVP I've experienced in 3+ years. In the words of The Hound, "f- links, f- D3s, f- the king" |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2256
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 05:49:17 -
[306] - Quote
Sven Viko VIkolander wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place. Yeah actually saying over and over does make it true, because we are the people still logging in and playing the game and experiencing what PVP is like now on a daily basis. Multiple classes are obsolete because of D3s and links are everywhere and a prerequisite for a decent chance at successful solo/small gang pvp; both of which combined have created one of the worst environments for solo and small gang PVP I've experienced in 3+ years. In the words of The Hound, "f- links, f- D3s, f- the king" I geuss oversized mods will be cancer in their entirety until CCP finally realizes how sadistically OP a 100mn Talos is.
Not really though. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
362
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 05:49:40 -
[307] - Quote
So, after doing some actual hard math (yay more Spreadsheets) I've got hard align numbers on the new Svipul and Confessor. All numbers assume All Vs skills unless otherwise specified. All numbers are rounded to one decimal place to correspond to EFT values.
Svipul
- Base: 4.9 seconds (up from 4.7 seconds)
- Propulsion Mode: 3.3 seconds (up from 3.1 seconds)
- 10MN AB-Base: 21.3 seconds (up from 17.11 seconds)
- 10MN AB-Propulsion Mode: 14.2 seconds (up from 11.4 seconds)
- 1MN MWD-Base: 6.6 seconds (up from 6.0 seconds)
- 1MN MWD-Propulsion Mode: 4.4 seconds (up from 4.0 seconds)
Confessor
- Base: 5.1 seconds (up from 4.8 seconds)
- Propulsion Mode: 3.4 seconds (up from 3.2 seconds)
- 10MN AB-Base: 17.7 seconds (up from 14.9 seconds)
- 10MN AB-Propulsion Mode: 11.8 seconds (up from 9.3 seconds)
- 1MN MWD-Base: 6.3 seconds (up from 5.8 seconds)
- 1MN MWD-Propulsion Mode: 4.2 seconds (up from 3.9 seconds)
Short summary (for anyone whose eyes just glazed over at that wall of numbers):
Both ships gained around 3 seconds of align on the 10MN AB fits with Prop mode active. For comparison that means the Confessor with a 10MN AB now turns like a Megathron with three 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates equipped (or about like the old Svipul), and the Svipul turns like a Megathron with twelve 1600 plates equipped (and yes I know that's impossible).
In practical terms this means you're going to lose a lot of velocity in an orbit, you're not going to be able to change direction quickly and consequently not be able to sling-shot anyone with a MWD fit, and a MWD fit Tactical Destroyer will run rings around one with an AB fitted, if not necessarily out-run one. |
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
35006
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 06:21:46 -
[308] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! Big thanks to everyone who has posted feedback about the first round of changes. We agree with the point that some of you were bringing up, that these first round of changes are a bit too harsh on long range weapon fits compared to short range weapon fits. A certain amount of added fitting pain for long range fits will be necessary, but long range weapon viability is a key part of the character of the tactical destroyers and it would be a shame to limit that more than absolutely necessary. So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. This allows us to reduce fittings significantly without harming long range fits as much, as the weapons will make a smaller percentage of the overall Powergrid and CPU consumption of the ships. These new versions also include a mass reduction for the Svipul (which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules) and a bit more speed reduction. Material requirement changes remain the same as in version one. Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements (unchanged): +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core Not so sure about making the confessor faster than the svipul. But these changes sure are interesting and I'm looking forward to fitting double neuts in the util. hi. slots.
Critically Preposterous is recruiting! Join the fight!
I am a cat.
|
Stunt Flores
Anime Masters Verge of Collapse
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 07:06:11 -
[309] - Quote
Did CCP ever consider possibly keeping the T3d's as is and adding a negative side effect while in certain modes? |
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
33827
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 07:20:23 -
[310] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! Big thanks to everyone who has posted feedback about the first round of changes. We agree with the point that some of you were bringing up, that these first round of changes are a bit too harsh on long range weapon fits compared to short range weapon fits. A certain amount of added fitting pain for long range fits will be necessary, but long range weapon viability is a key part of the character of the tactical destroyers and it would be a shame to limit that more than absolutely necessary. So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. This allows us to reduce fittings significantly without harming long range fits as much, as the weapons will make a smaller percentage of the overall Powergrid and CPU consumption of the ships. These new versions also include a mass reduction for the Svipul (which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules) and a bit more speed reduction. Material requirement changes remain the same as in version one. Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements (unchanged): +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core Like I said above, thanks to everyone who has participated in this feedback thread so far. We're very interested in hearing your thoughts about this second iteration of the changes.
The whole point of the Confessor is the 10MN fit. It's simply not good otherwise. Three midslots is restrictive enough.
Why do bad threads happen to good people?
|
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1703
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 07:33:29 -
[311] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case). At the end of the day we're more focused on getting an interesting variety of ships than in following any specific patterns rigidly.
I'll keep that in the quote vault if you try to make a Jackdaw that's half the size of the other, has twice the sig radius without any mods on, and yet manages to be slow and super heavy.
On a serious note though, I think that these updated changes are great! Lessening the importance of weapons in the fitting by going from 4 to 6 is something very clever. You might want to take a look at the cap consumption of the Confessor though, and see if you are still good with it (since removing two turrets definitely changes said cap consumption).
Besides, I feel like the added inertia really favors long-range fits over brawling fits, even more so with 10mn on. And we all know that the long-range version should be equally viable on the confessor and svipul.
Signature Tanking Best Tanking
Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
|
Ix Method
Guilty Pleasures
438
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 07:45:54 -
[312] - Quote
Two utility highs is a beautiful thing. Thanks for letting long range fits remain a thing *hugs*
Travelling at the speed of love.
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
363
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 08:21:51 -
[313] - Quote
Ria Nieyli wrote:The whole point of the Confessor is the 10MN fit. It's simply not good otherwise. Three midslots is restrictive enough.
It seems to me that even with a MWD the Confessor (and the Svipul) bring an excellent mix of fitting space, firepower, and utility to the table and can easily threaten if not outright beat any ship fast enough to catch them, and if they are caught and pinned down they have more options to react in the form of their other two modes that other ships don't have access to.
In short, if these Tactical Destroyers aren't viable without a super roomy 10MN fit in your eyes, then what poor paupers must the rest of the T1 and T2 Frigates be to you? |
Inggroth
Aurora Ominae. The Gorgon Empire
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 08:56:03 -
[314] - Quote
Had a quick look at the changes (w/o actually theorycrafting fits) Looks p. good in my opinion! Cant wait for those to go live.
Hope you'll tune Jackdaw/Hecate accordingly
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
363
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 09:29:05 -
[315] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: [Svipul, Cancer 2.0] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Warp Scrambler II
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I [empty high slot]
Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Small Ancillary Current Router I
Just realized, this fit doesn't actually work with the new changes. At the least it needs to drop a Neut and fit a 6% CPU implant. It could also drop the velocity rig for a CPU rig and a Gyro for a PDS2 or any number of other more extreme tweaks.
But as fitted there is no way, through implants, skills, or whatever, to make this fit work with the current iteration of the Svipul. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 09:44:00 -
[316] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: [Svipul, Cancer 2.0] Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Gyrostabilizer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Warp Scrambler II
125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I [empty high slot]
Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Small Ancillary Current Router I
Just realized, this fit doesn't actually work with the new changes. At the least it needs to drop a Neut and fit a 6% CPU implant. It could also drop the velocity rig for a CPU rig and a Gyro for a PDS2 or any number of other more extreme tweaks.
Yes, I've mentioned a 18 CPU shortage. Easy fix, however - faction scram and/or gyros. I also like the fact that such setups still are possible, albeit at the cost of pretty much else, especially requiring fitting implants and/or faction.
The above could get ugly in wolfpacks.
Cancer 2.0 Supreme. (püÑn+ú -¦n+ú)püÑ
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 10:04:31 -
[317] - Quote
Liafcipe9000 wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Not so sure about making the confessor faster than the svipul.
Aha. [quote]Svipul 1MN MWD: 293 m/s base speed * (1+(6.25 MWD boost * (1,500,000 thrust / (1,500,00 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1,666 / 2499 OH m/s. In Propulsion mode: 2766 / 4149 OH m/s. Confessor 1MN MWD: 299 m/s * (1 + (6.25 MWD bonus * (1,500,000 MWD thrust / (2,000,000 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1424 / 2136 OH m/s. In Prop mode: 2373 / 3560 OH m/s
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
959
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 11:24:30 -
[318] - Quote
So, pve-confessor now got a salvager aswell? Neat. I know that's totally irrelevant.
I love about everything about having another utility high. For wormholes, I see glorious times of Asteros decloaking and RR-confessors ahead. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1051
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 11:35:11 -
[319] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules ok but how about you just get rid of them entirely instead, they've always been full cancer Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
I'm yet to see oversized/undersized prop be an interesting and balanced fitting choice. it's always either useless or game-breaking, and I don't want to wait 3 years for you guys to do little fitting tweaks on absolutely everything, when you could just cut it out entirely. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1051
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 11:45:24 -
[320] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Liafcipe9000 wrote: Not so sure about making the confessor faster than the svipul.
Aha. Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Svipul 1MN MWD: 293 m/s base speed * (1+(6.25 MWD boost * (1,500,000 thrust / (1,500,00 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1,666 / 2499 OH m/s. In Propulsion mode: 2766 / 4149 OH m/s. Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Confessor 1MN MWD: 299 m/s * (1 + (6.25 MWD bonus * (1,500,000 MWD thrust / (2,000,000 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1424 / 2136 OH m/s. In Prop mode: 2373 / 3560 OH m/s.
CCP ruining the balance on propless fits :[ |
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1266
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 12:00:49 -
[321] - Quote
Regarding the assault frigates..
Maybe just a very minor change is needed.
They currently have a MWD bloom reduction of 50%.
Maybe make that 100%.
Yaay!!!!
|
Arthur Aihaken
Jormungand Corporation
4348
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 12:02:09 -
[322] - Quote
Why not just tie a skill loss into the T3 Destroyers?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
William Rokov
The Dozen Galaxy Spiritus
65
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 12:22:02 -
[323] - Quote
This t3d shows us the problem with assault frigs, its nice time to think about them and their niche in pvp.
No links, no imps, no scouts. True solo pvp pilot. Channel for russian users: PVP.solo
|
Daimus Daranius
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
18
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 12:46:03 -
[324] - Quote
At what date will those changes become live?
Amarr Victor!
|
crimsonshank
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
15
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 12:48:56 -
[325] - Quote
I think that the whiners complaining how they are invincible need to do is adapt and over come, the introduction of these new ships have made pvper's who face them rethink their cookie cutter fits and take these new ships head on.
I feel the changes are not needed they are a T3, look at how OP the cruisers are, cap stable running rep, guns, web, prop, td and still pushing large amounts of DPS for example my current proteus fit gets 724 dps with 5 rails and 5 hammerheads. And is cap stable firing those rails running my rep full time and prop and web.
If the whiners keep it up we will lose a tactical destroyer level with each lose at this rate.
A tip for CCP quit taking notes from the whiners of how OP they are, you introduced a great ship leave it how it is. That subscriber base will never adapt and keep expecting the game to be changed to their liking instead of just playing and adapting to new hurdles. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
270
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 12:56:30 -
[326] - Quote
crimsonshank wrote:I think that the whiners complaining how they are invincible need to do is adapt and over come, the introduction of these new ships have made pvper's who face them rethink their cookie cutter fits and take these new ships head on.
I feel the changes are not needed they are a T3, look at how OP the cruisers are, cap stable running rep, guns, web, prop, td and still pushing large amounts of DPS for example my current proteus fit gets 724 dps with 5 rails and 5 hammerheads. And is cap stable firing those rails running my rep full time and prop and web.
If the whiners keep it up we will lose a tactical destroyer level with each lose at this rate.
A tip for CCP quit taking notes from the whiners of how OP they are, you introduced a great ship leave it how it is. That subscriber base will never adapt and keep expecting the game to be changed to their liking instead of just playing and adapting to new hurdles.
9/10
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1121
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 13:00:46 -
[327] - Quote
shield confessors eh .. funky, a possible solution is too nerf the base resistances to T1 default and maybe reduce shield HP a little as well.. i still haven't heard from fozzie why T3's have T2 resists .. have asked multiple times...
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1266
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 13:30:21 -
[328] - Quote
William Rokov wrote:This t3d shows us the problem with assault frigs, its nice time to think about them and their niche in pvp.
Honestly they should look at both interceptors and assault frigates. Could just merge a few of them (so instead of 2 interceptors and 2 assault frigates, just turn them into a new type of frigate fleet
1 interceptor (fast light tackle), one assault frigate (dps tackle), one heavy tackle frigate (tank, tackle). Throw out one of the ships for each race.
Just thoughts, use the d3 forms and make a frigate based on each, one fast tackle, one good dps, one good tank.
Yaay!!!!
|
Oddsodz
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare.
152
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 13:41:06 -
[329] - Quote
Did anybody come around to the idea that maybe we should just leave them as they are?
What is it that the 10mn AB fits that we like the most? Its the fact that no t1 ship with a t1 scam can stop D3 MWD like speed. And that makes the ship stand out. So maybe, Just maybe we should look at adding a role to the the ship that means that a scam has no effect of MWD operation. I Am not saying a scam will not work to stop a D3 warping off. But it would be interesting if it did not stop an MWD from working. That is the thing that makes the D3 with 10mn AB stand out. It can keep it's speed. Sig Bloom is not the main factor in fitting a 10mn AB. It is the ability to keep speed as a option.
Again,. I still feel the D3 should be left as is. Increase COST to build is OK, Hell make it more for all I care. But I would like to see them stay as is. Players are flying them as they like them. Why take away something that is 1,. Not pay to Win. 2, Players seem to enjoy? |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
272
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 13:48:36 -
[330] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:William Rokov wrote:This t3d shows us the problem with assault frigs, its nice time to think about them and their niche in pvp. Honestly they should look at both interceptors and assault frigates. Could just merge a few of them (so instead of 2 interceptors and 2 assault frigates, just turn them into a new type of frigate fleet 1 interceptor (fast light tackle), one assault frigate (dps tackle), one heavy tackle frigate (tank, tackle). Throw out one of the ships for each race. Just thoughts, use the d3 forms and make a frigate based on each, one fast tackle, one good dps, one good tank. Then again why bring one when you can bring a destroyer that can transform into each at will... Yea they'll need to be rethought
Interceptors are perfectly balanced as is.
I would increase the AF T2 resist profiles to levels, which would constitute a "hard tackle" -> EHP surpassing T3Ds by 50% at the very least.
That, or delete either AFs/T3Ds from the gaem.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
443
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:01:35 -
[331] - Quote
If you block T3Ds from small FW complexes AFs have a niche again (although a pretty small one). |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
272
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:03:16 -
[332] - Quote
Artificial restriction is artificial.
Cancer will spread to null, especially with the coming new Sov capture mechanics.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1053
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:06:35 -
[333] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:If you block T3Ds from small FW complexes AFs have a niche again (although a pretty small one).
it's better to actually fix the game than make special 'avoid broken counters' areas. that way we could actually see non-interceptor/kite frigates, non-T3/snipeycorm destroyers, non-T3/logistics cruisers, etc. in actual combat. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1267
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:11:17 -
[334] - Quote
Thanatos Marathon wrote:If you block T3Ds from small FW complexes AFs have a niche again (although a pretty small one). It's weird because there is a big blur with the interceptor and assault frigate.
I just think there is one too many.
Yaay!!!!
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
273
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:17:05 -
[335] - Quote
Before this is over, if the devs are serious about fixing broken concepts (oh Ishtar nm), I foresee the review of both the Defensive and Propulsion modes, and the percentage increase that they grant.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Marian Devers
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
61
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:22:59 -
[336] - Quote
I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).
Give the confessor a shield bonus, maybe it can get some use as a mini-zealot, but with beams. Otherwise, no one is gonna fly it. 10mn AB mode was the only saving grace of the ship. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
274
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 14:31:01 -
[337] - Quote
Marian Devers wrote:I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).
That is a fairly valid question.
With both ships unfitted and in Defensive mode, Confessor has 4,976, and Svipul 5,658 EHP. Fitting a DC II gives Confessor 7,055 EHP, and 7,475 for the Svipul.
I think the answer may lie in the fact that Confessor's Signature reduction bonus is always being applied in Defensive mode, compared to MWD-use dependent second bonus on the Svipul.
CCP Fozzie?
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
prolix travail
Blue Mountain Trails
26
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 15:38:06 -
[338] - Quote
The new, new changes look interesting. Could you give us an idea of when they'll go live on the testserver? |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
285
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 15:44:54 -
[339] - Quote
Marian Devers wrote:I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).
Give the confessor a shield bonus, maybe it can get some use as a mini-zealot, but with beams. Otherwise, no one is gonna fly it. 10mn AB mode was the only saving grace of the ship.
I've never used 10mn on a confessor, but I will certainly say this ship makes for one hell of an anti-tackle sniper, if you fly it right and don't make mistakes (in approx. 300+ kills I've made 2 mistakes, hence two losses).
So yeah, I'll be flying it. And thanks Foz, looking forward to blapping fools at 100+km away now. I'll be able to do lots with that extra 20km engagement window. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12618
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 16:02:06 -
[340] - Quote
prolix travail wrote:The new, new changes look interesting. Could you give us an idea of when they'll go live on the testserver?
They'll be in the next SISI update, probably in the next day or so.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
Alexis Nightwish
148
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 16:15:41 -
[341] - Quote
Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?
CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12620
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 16:41:43 -
[342] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them?
The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1267
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 17:25:32 -
[343] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them? The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once.
Adjusting cost isn't the answer.
Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers.
Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay.
Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors.
Yaay!!!!
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1053
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 17:44:15 -
[344] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them? The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once. Adjusting cost isn't the answer. Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers. Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay. Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors.
I can't think of any ships that don't need a balance pass |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2741
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 17:56:45 -
[345] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them? The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once. Adjusting cost isn't the answer. Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers. Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay. Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors. I can't think of any ships that don't need a balance pass
t1 cruisers
inties
recons
battleships
marauders
black ops
hacs
t1 destroyers
interdictors
heavy interdictors
command ships
You seemed to be stuck so i figured i'd help you with what ships are fine as they are.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
277
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 18:00:10 -
[346] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them? The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once. Adjusting cost isn't the answer. Frigates (specifically assault frigates, and oddly enough interceptors) need to be reviewed because there is a new Power-creep that happened with the T3 destroyers. Cost won't balance it out, its more of a fundamental scale of gameplay. Its pretty well known that Assault Frigates need a pass, but when you make that pass, don't ignore interceptors. I can't think of any ships that don't need a balance pass t1 cruisers inties recons battleships marauders black ops hacs t1 destroyers interdictors heavy interdictors command ships You seemed to be stuck so i figured i'd help you with what ships are fine as they are.
So pretty much what we started the game with + the first few expansions.
Delete all T3 and capitals - I want to play Eve: The Second Genesis again.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1053
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 18:25:11 -
[347] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: You seemed to be stuck so i figured i'd help you with what ships are fine as they are.
ok I've been baited.
cruisers are a mixed bag ranging from too good to too bad, please don't fix my vexor, please do fix my rupture combat inties are trash recons are all hitlers, how about more usable gang ewar ships, less anti-solo battleships are a mixed bag, lol tempest lol rokh marauders lol why do they exist, and why do asbs use 0 cap and not have a 1 per ship limit black ops eh idk, no complaints, but the bonuses are a bit funky for some people. hacs the infinite mwd cap thing is silly, and the kiting sig bonus is silly, why does my vagabond have a shield bonus and only 4 mids t1 destroyers lol try bringing one other than a cormorant or linked talwar to any kind of fight with ships other than frigs and cruisers in it interdictors are alright, they're like destroyers but with a load of concessions so they're not totally unusable in combat heavy interdictors, how about letting them receive reps so you don't need like 20 of them to tackle a super command ships, yeah, active tanking is exactly what you want on a fleet command ship. and what's up with the strange damage bonuses to make up for the obvious difference in power between different weapon systems? dual rate of fire bonuses? ok I didn't want to be able to overheat or have any volley damage anyway. |
Alexis Nightwish
149
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 18:44:41 -
[348] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote:Fozzie, have you considered further increasing the build cost to help offset the disparity of power between T3Ds and AFs by increasing the disparity of price between them? The build cost changes in this pass are pretty significant, I don't think we'll be likely to go further all at once. Fair enough. I hope that once all the wrinkles are ironed out, T3Ds will be around 65-75m. Thanks for your responses Fozzie :)
CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
63
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 18:53:13 -
[349] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements: +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core Like I said above, thanks to everyone who has participated in this feedback thread so far. We're very interested in hearing your thoughts about this second iteration of the changes.
Ok. Good. Please, tell me, why i should fly wolf or jag instead of svip? Srsly. What is assaults do better then t3d? I forced to fly wolf becuase cost? Nope. 20kk different. Even 30 or 40 kk is nothing. People fly t3d (and certainly they fly svip) becuase of safe pvp. SAFE. Svip forgives many mistakes for nothing. "Oh god, he god me with web and scram. Well better to turn on my 10mn ab and get 1,5 km/s and fly away." 'Oh god, cruiser in range! Well i have 400 shield/s passive tank with 70m sign."
All stats better then any analogue in frig or destr size.
I want to remember CCP their picture: BALANCE
So, tell me witch destr or frig have more dps/tank and even speed then svip. If i thinks correct - assault ships is spec in damage deal. Sooooo....?
|
GROUND XERO
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 19:32:41 -
[350] - Quote
Honestly ...once there comes a ship ...ppl are using to brawl... ppl are screaming about the power etc.... after that ppl are beginning to spread their tears.... and ccp is nerfing them to useless **** :-) ... while other mechanics like cloacky nullified even comes for free... all i can say is why don-¦t you give us system cloack or rabbit feets for extra fast running and hiding?
one simple change would balance them in my opinion make it unpossible to fit oversized prop mods and everything is fine.
Have fun cloacky rabbits :-)... and don-¦t forget to fit 4 stabbs!
|
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1121
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 19:42:23 -
[351] - Quote
perhaps reduce the 50% damage role bonus a little too say 25%? .. versatility over high power levels is meant to be the point afterall, along with resists to T1 default level. and a little less base speed is needed too balance them.
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
GROUND XERO
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 19:48:22 -
[352] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:perhaps reduce the 50% damage role bonus a little too say 25%? .. versatility over high power levels is meant to be the point afterall, along with resists to T1 default level. and a little less base speed is needed too balance them.
why not just cancel them cause your ideas are making them worse than trashers? ... and these are t3 ships so why tt1 resis???
:_)
|
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
63
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 19:57:36 -
[353] - Quote
GROUND XERO wrote:Harvey James wrote:perhaps reduce the 50% damage role bonus a little too say 25%? .. versatility over high power levels is meant to be the point afterall, along with resists to T1 default level. and a little less base speed is needed too balance them. why not just cancel them cause your ideas are making them worse than trashers? ... and these are t3 ships so why tt1 resis??? :_) Why not just delete assaults from game? We have t3d! Better in all ways! Its a balance! |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:06:09 -
[354] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Grath Telkin wrote: You seemed to be stuck so i figured i'd help you with what ships are fine as they are.
ok I've been baited. cruisers are a mixed bag ranging from too good to too bad, please don't fix my vexor, please do fix my rupture combat inties are trash recons are all hitlers, how about more usable gang ewar ships, less anti-solo battleships are a mixed bag, lol tempest lol rokh marauders lol why do they exist, and why do asbs use 0 cap and not have a 1 per ship limit black ops eh idk, no complaints, but the bonuses are a bit funky for some people. hacs the infinite mwd cap thing is silly, and the kiting sig bonus is silly, why does my vagabond have a shield bonus and only 4 mids t1 destroyers lol try bringing one other than a cormorant or linked talwar to any kind of fight with ships other than frigs and cruisers in it interdictors are alright, they're like destroyers but with a load of concessions so they're not totally unusable in combat heavy interdictors, how about letting them receive reps so you don't need like 20 of them to tackle a super command ships, yeah, active tanking is exactly what you want on a fleet command ship. and what's up with the strange damage bonuses to make up for the obvious difference in power between different weapon systems? dual rate of fire bonuses? ok I didn't want to be able to overheat or have any volley damage anyway.
Infinite mwd HAC cap? Dont think thats really a problem. 1 heavy neut fixes that real quick. Or a couple scram fit inties. The vaga has 4 mids cause it goes 2600ish m/s. If it had more mids it would have a 50k+ EHP tank while going 2600-2800m/s. Better question to ask, why hasnt the muninn been rebalanced.
|
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:08:55 -
[355] - Quote
Captain Semper wrote:GROUND XERO wrote:Harvey James wrote:perhaps reduce the 50% damage role bonus a little too say 25%? .. versatility over high power levels is meant to be the point afterall, along with resists to T1 default level. and a little less base speed is needed too balance them. why not just cancel them cause your ideas are making them worse than trashers? ... and these are t3 ships so why tt1 resis??? :_) Why not just delete assaults from game? We have t3d! Better in all ways! Its a balance!
Destroyers can already kill AFs with ease so i dont see the issue |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
63
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:13:06 -
[356] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:Captain Semper wrote:GROUND XERO wrote:Harvey James wrote:perhaps reduce the 50% damage role bonus a little too say 25%? .. versatility over high power levels is meant to be the point afterall, along with resists to T1 default level. and a little less base speed is needed too balance them. why not just cancel them cause your ideas are making them worse than trashers? ... and these are t3 ships so why tt1 resis??? :_) Why not just delete assaults from game? We have t3d! Better in all ways! Its a balance! Destroyers can already kill AFs with ease so i dont see the issue assaults vs destris. Assaults have much more resists and still high damage with good speed. BUT t3d have even much then assaults have in all ways and all of that at the same time.
I think so - t3d must have less stats in each tactical mode then assaults. If that defence mod - they ehp must be nearly or slitly less then assaults have. Speed? Same. Sharpshoot? Same. But even hull of t3d have much stats then assault. Thats all about. |
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:26:18 -
[357] - Quote
you cant compare a frig to a destroyer t2 to t3 , honestly all they need to do is put a restriction on the hull so it cant fit 10mn because it makes the ship too unstable and may.... whatever. and maybe add more skill reqs to fly it like t3 cruisers. i don't see why they should be nerfd into the ground because people are crying over them. making poor arguments as to why they should be nerfd in the first place. they are easy to kill 2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
277
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:38:47 -
[358] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead
Cool story, only that it has been tried and proven mathematically impossible to do so. -»\_(pâä)_/-»
Even with these second pass changes, they obsolete all of the AFs as a class.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:42:22 -
[359] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead Cool story, only that it has been tried and proven mathematically impossible to do so. -»\_(pâä)_/-» Even with these second pass changes, they obsolete all of the AFs as a class.
its a destroyer...... it kills frigs. its not that hard to figure out. and having flown them and killed quite a few of them i know how easy they are to kill. but trying to kill them with a frig is not that smart. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1389
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:45:57 -
[360] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:...recons are all hitlers, how about more usable gang ewar ships, less anti-solo... What combination of factors allows something to be effective against a gang of targets without completely negating a solo opponent? |
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:46:22 -
[361] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:you cant compare a frig to a destroyer t2 to t3 , honestly all they need to do is put a restriction on the hull so it cant fit 10mn because it makes the ship too unstable and may.... whatever. and maybe add more skill reqs to fly it like t3 cruisers. i don't see why they should be nerfd into the ground because people are crying over them. making poor arguments as to why they should be nerfd in the first place. they are easy to kill 2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead
Isn't it supposed to be the opposite? T2 is supposed to better at their thing than T3, T3 gets advantages by being able to do a lot. You can have a Loki that has guns and webs, but it isn't supposed to be as good at brawling and chasing as a HAC or as good at webbing as a Recon. CCP hasn't always done the best at this but this is the goal as far as I know. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:46:41 -
[362] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead Cool story, only that it has been tried and proven mathematically impossible to do so. -»\_(pâä)_/-» Even with these second pass changes, they obsolete all of the AFs as a class. its a destroyer...... it kills frigs.
Killing is fine - eliminating the need for an entire class like Assault Frigates is not.
Three Gud ModesGäó - Ceptor/AF/Destroyer - be all you wanna be at a click of a buttan.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
GROUND XERO
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:48:37 -
[363] - Quote
Assault frig is a frig...so what do you expect when going against a T3 destroyers when destroyers are designed to kill frigs? I never cried because i can-¦t solo a titan in my dread... |
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:52:38 -
[364] - Quote
GROUND XERO wrote:Assault frig is a frig...so what do you expect when going against a T3 destroyers when destroyers are designed to kill frigs? I never cried because i can-¦t solo a titan in my dread... I don't think anyone's complaining that the d3's win in a straight fight, it's just that they remove any real use for AF's due to being tougher, faster and stronger for similar costs and similar to greater utility. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:53:06 -
[365] - Quote
Yes, the new T3Ds are a hit. Excellent monthly stats. CCP must be doing something right-right.
Would buy again.
Carry on.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:55:47 -
[366] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead Cool story, only that it has been tried and proven mathematically impossible to do so. -»\_(pâä)_/-» Even with these second pass changes, they obsolete all of the AFs as a class. its a destroyer...... it kills frigs. Killing is fine - eliminating the need for an entire class like Assault Frigates is not. Three Gud ModesGäó - Ceptor/AF/Destroyer - be all you wanna be at a click of a buttan.
so you never have to avoid any other ship type? |
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:56:46 -
[367] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote: so you never have to avoid any other ship type?
This doesn't really make sense in context. What do you mean by this? |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:58:01 -
[368] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:2 med neuts or 2 webs to get dps down and its dead Cool story, only that it has been tried and proven mathematically impossible to do so. -»\_(pâä)_/-» Even with these second pass changes, they obsolete all of the AFs as a class. its a destroyer...... it kills frigs. Killing is fine - eliminating the need for an entire class like Assault Frigates is not. Three Gud ModesGäó - Ceptor/AF/Destroyer - be all you wanna be at a click of a buttan. so you never have to avoid any other ship type?
I fly these cancer machines myself, that's why I'm being reasonable here.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 20:59:12 -
[369] - Quote
it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:01:01 -
[370] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3
You are comparing an example with 50 times the price difference to a difference of 2x between an AF and a T3D.
Think pls
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:05:37 -
[371] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3
A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? |
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:09:10 -
[372] - Quote
NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3?
run?
it might be a reason to buff AFs but not nerf T3Ds to the point they are worse than t1. because that's whats going to happen. thrasher was always strong against AFs when arty fit |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
568
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:09:30 -
[373] - Quote
Easiest way to nerf them is to make the switching modes longer than 10 seconds. Bump it up to a minute. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:10:37 -
[374] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? but not nerf T3Ds to the point they are worse than t1.
[citation needed]
Provide some numbers comparing the two, please.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:11:36 -
[375] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? run? it might be a reason to buff AFs but not nerf T3Ds to the point they are worse than t1. because that's whats going to happen. thrasher was always strong against AFs when arty fit
I'm not sure you understand, it's perfectly ok that T3D's would beat AFs in a straight fight. A Legion will beat a Guardian in a shooting match any day. The question is what niche T3Ds leave for AFs, and if they don't leave a niche then something needs to be done. |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
66
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:15:19 -
[376] - Quote
GROUND XERO wrote:Assault frig is a frig...so what do you expect when going against a T3 destroyers when destroyers are designed to kill frigs? I never cried because i can-¦t solo a titan in my dread... Ok, you was blind. Lets try again |
Teh Tripple
Paradox Collective Project.Mayhem.
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:16:41 -
[377] - Quote
NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? run? it might be a reason to buff AFs but not nerf T3Ds to the point they are worse than t1. because that's whats going to happen. thrasher was always strong against AFs when arty fit I'm not sure you understand, it's perfectly ok that T3D's would beat AFs in a straight fight. A Legion will beat a Guardian in a shooting match any day. The question is what niche T3Ds leave for AFs, and if they don't leave a niche then something needs to be done.
so that's a valid reason to nerf them? because AFs no longer have a place, like BS and BC we should just nerf cruisers aswell then |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
67
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:17:35 -
[378] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? run? it might be a reason to buff AFs but not nerf T3Ds to the point they are worse than t1. because that's whats going to happen. thrasher was always strong against AFs when arty fit I'm not sure you understand, it's perfectly ok that T3D's would beat AFs in a straight fight. A Legion will beat a Guardian in a shooting match any day. The question is what niche T3Ds leave for AFs, and if they don't leave a niche then something needs to be done. so that's a valid reason to nerf them? because AFs no longer have a place, like BS and BC we should just nerf cruisers aswell then Lol wut? A lot of BC uses in most alliance. Mach, navy apoc, megas, rattle, domi, ravens. What are u talking about? |
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:20:46 -
[379] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:
so that's a valid reason to nerf them? because AFs no longer have a place, like BS and BC we should just nerf cruisers aswell then
These are new ships so their power is in flux. They need to be slotted into an existing ecosystem. If T1 cruisers were being added to the game now I'd look at BC's and try to keep them in line with what we have. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
278
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:22:58 -
[380] - Quote
Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? run? it might be a reason to buff AFs but not nerf T3Ds to the point they are worse than t1. because that's whats going to happen. thrasher was always strong against AFs when arty fit I'm not sure you understand, it's perfectly ok that T3D's would beat AFs in a straight fight. A Legion will beat a Guardian in a shooting match any day. The question is what niche T3Ds leave for AFs, and if they don't leave a niche then something needs to be done. so that's a valid reason to nerf them?
It's called being fixed, and not only because of other smaller class irrelevancy. I'll take on a cruiser any day of the week in a 10MN Confessor.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
490
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 21:46:35 -
[381] - Quote
NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? And a command ship throws bonuses better than a . . Ah well . . here's hoping when they seriously bite into T3 cruiser subsystems they nerf the T3 command subsystems some more. The T3s are still used more than the command ships. But of course that is a digression.
As for the confessor and svipuls, yeah the svipul is still going to have too easy a time against a bunch of ship classes it probably should not be. Maybe they'll take a third look at trimming some more off of it.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1121
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 22:42:10 -
[382] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:NovemberMike wrote:Teh Tripple wrote:it wont eliminate a ship class from the game and make it useless, AFs have a place. just like people fly cruisers of all types and not just t3 A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? And a command ship throws bonuses better than a . . Ah well . . here's hoping when they seriously bite into T3 cruiser subsystems they nerf the T3 command subsystems some more. The T3s are still used more than the command ships. But of course that is a digression. As for the confessor and svipuls, yeah the svipul is still going to have too easy a time against a bunch of ship classes it probably should not be. Maybe they'll take a third look at trimming some more off of it.
T3's are OP because of their T2 resists .. they simply don't belong on them they make them so tough to kill especially if getting repped, there strength should be the versatility instead of being super resilient .. which is meant to be the point of the Assault line is it not? .. thus they obsolete ships they shouldn't be.
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
4316
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 22:45:51 -
[383] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and the one quoting it.
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
371
|
Posted - 2015.04.14 23:00:58 -
[384] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:I'm yet to see oversized/undersized prop be an interesting and balanced fitting choice. it's always either useless or game-breaking, and I don't want to wait 3 years for you guys to do little fitting tweaks on absolutely everything, when you could just cut it out entirely.
There have actually been niche Cruiser fits, namely on the Fleet Stabber, for a long time now. They just never took off like the 10MN Tengu did, and even the 10MN Tengu isn't really OP at this point, at least compared to other T3 Cruiser fits. The T3 Cruisers as a whole on the other hand... well, that's another thread
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Why not just tie a skill loss into the T3 Destroyers?
Because skill loss was a terrible balancing mechanic on the T3 Cruisers and every sign seems to point to it going away with the eventual T3 Cruiser balance pass. It just punishes new players and older ones are both less likely to lose the ship and less worried by a day or a week's worth of training.
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Artificial restriction is artificial.
Cancer will spread to null, especially with the coming new Sov capture mechanics.
Different situation. The Capture Nodes in Null aren't going to have ship restrictions and T3 Destroyers are going to need a way to actually engage things like Rapiers, Hugins, and Cruisers beyond "run away quickly" in order for them to be a viable Null fleet comp.
The plexes in FW already have restrictions, so while it doesn't fix the relationship between T3Ds and AFs it isn't a bad idea either, assuming the relative power levels stay as they are now.
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP ruining the balance on propless fits :[
I've yet to see a use-case on any of these ships that doesn't involve a prop mod. The balance of propless fits on these ships is "they lose to anything that fits a prop mod" so the base speed is almost irrelevant relative to the performance with a prop mod. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
233
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 00:33:33 -
[385] - Quote
NovemberMike wrote:A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3?
Comparing a Tech III destroyer to a Tech II frigate is like comparing a Tech II battlecruiser to a Tech I cruiser. The comparison is just not apt at all. An Eos will murder a Vexor. A Svipul will murder a Wolf. That's just about what you should expect. Should it work differently? How? |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2741
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 00:35:07 -
[386] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Grath Telkin wrote: You seemed to be stuck so i figured i'd help you with what ships are fine as they are.
ok I've been baited. cruisers are a mixed bag ranging from too good to too bad, please don't fix my vexor, please do fix my rupture combat inties are trash recons are all hitlers, how about more usable gang ewar ships, less anti-solo battleships are a mixed bag, lol tempest lol rokh marauders lol why do they exist, and why do asbs use 0 cap and not have a 1 per ship limit black ops eh idk, no complaints, but the bonuses are a bit funky for some people. hacs the infinite mwd cap thing is silly, and the kiting sig bonus is silly, why does my vagabond have a shield bonus and only 4 mids t1 destroyers lol try bringing one other than a cormorant or linked talwar to any kind of fight with ships other than frigs and cruisers in it interdictors are alright, they're like destroyers but with a load of concessions so they're not totally unusable in combat heavy interdictors, how about letting them receive reps so you don't need like 20 of them to tackle a super command ships, yeah, active tanking is exactly what you want on a fleet command ship. and what's up with the strange damage bonuses to make up for the obvious difference in power between different weapon systems? dual rate of fire bonuses? ok I didn't want to be able to overheat or have any volley damage anyway.
Massive wall of your own personal taste passed off as game fact.
Nope.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
372
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 01:00:41 -
[387] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:NovemberMike wrote:A Huginn has longer range webs than a Loki. There is a reason to run a Huginn if you want the best webber. A Guardian is better at repping than a Legion. A HAC has reduced MWD signature compared to a T3 so there's at least some use if you want to be tough and go fast. What does an AF do better than a D3? Comparing a Tech III destroyer to a Tech II frigate is like comparing a Tech II battlecruiser to a Tech I cruiser. The comparison is just not apt at all. An Eos will murder a Vexor. A Svipul will murder a Wolf. That's just about what you should expect. Should it work differently? How?
Different mandates per CCP. Tech 2 is supposed to offer increased performance over Tech 1 at the cost of increased ISK cost and specialization. Tech 3 is supposed to be about on par or worse than T2 but have more generalized utility available, like the mode switching on the Tactical Destroyers or the different subsystems on the T3 Cruisers.
The comparison with AFs is apt because these ships perform similarly and in similar roles, but one soundly beats out the other as things are now on TQ, which should not be how they perform in practice. The T3 Destroyers should be comparable with the various T2 ships in some role but have the option to use the mode switching to respond to situations and gain more generalized utility. |
S3ND3TH
Bloody Hands Usurper.
22
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 02:49:11 -
[388] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Alexis Nightwish wrote: Fozzie, it seems odd that the Amarran ship is faster than the Minmatar one. Is that intentional?
There's a higher base speed on the Confessor, but the lower mass on the Svipul ensures that it's faster with prop mods on. High base speed but high mass to temper that speed is a feature of a lot of the Amarrian ships that we've rebalanced recently.
interesting to know the thought pattern behind some of the balances. it would appear to be in line with the lore too since amarr would only use the best materials and minmatar don't typically have much to them. they kind of look like flying scaffolding with weapons and an engine. |
S3ND3TH
Bloody Hands Usurper.
22
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 02:52:23 -
[389] - Quote
ChromeStriker wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:
It'll differ from ship to ship, mainly depending on how big the mass difference is (pretty big in this case). At the end of the day we're more focused on getting an interesting variety of ships than in following any specific patterns rigidly.
I love that your not thinking with blinkers on but im worried with all the recent balance changes we are losing the racial uniqueness of the ships.... Theres so little gap between some ships you could mistake one for the other..... (other than *minmatar use projectiles* etc)
flown bombers lately? (especially caldari and gallente) |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
234
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 03:21:26 -
[390] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:The comparison with AFs is apt because these ships perform similarly and in similar roles,
If they performed similarly, I think this thread would be over by now. If they performed in similar roles, what would be the point of calling one a "destroyer" and one an "assault frigate"?
Frigates are supposed to move around quickly, catch things off guard, swarm in and overwhelm. Destroyers are supposed to provide mobile, fast tracking point defense. There is an inherent asymmetry in what they each do. Frigates scout and scan and tackle and transport and provide all sorts of awesome utility functions for their fleet depending on their hull specialization. Destroyers look for things to destroy and destroy them. So, if you warped in on a destroyer in your frigate, you did half his job for him. It seems like bad strategy more than a ship balance issue. Not saying I dislike or disagree with the balance changes. |
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 03:48:50 -
[391] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:The comparison with AFs is apt because these ships perform similarly and in similar roles, If they performed similarly, I think this thread would be over by now. If they performed in similar roles, what would be the point of calling one a "destroyer" and one an "assault frigate"? Frigates are supposed to move around quickly, catch things off guard, swarm in and overwhelm. Destroyers are supposed to provide mobile, fast tracking point defense. There is an inherent asymmetry in what they each do. Frigates scout and scan and tackle and transport and provide all sorts of awesome utility functions for their fleet depending on their hull specialization. Destroyers look for things to destroy and destroy them. So, if you warped in on a destroyer in your frigate, you did half his job for him. It seems like bad strategy more than a ship balance issue. Not saying I dislike or disagree with the balance changes.
This isn't reflected in the design of t3 destroyers. |
d0cTeR9
Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 03:57:17 -
[392] - Quote
I fly the confessor a lot, with a very expensive 10mn AB. With the new changes, it will stop me (and others) from fitting an oversize AB, correct?
Just want to make sure. Before buying/fitting more ships :) |
Captain Semper
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
68
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 04:41:45 -
[393] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:The comparison with AFs is apt because these ships perform similarly and in similar roles, If they performed similarly, I think this thread would be over by now. If they performed in similar roles, what would be the point of calling one a "destroyer" and one an "assault frigate"? Frigates are supposed to move around quickly, catch things off guard, swarm in and overwhelm. Destroyers are supposed to provide mobile, fast tracking point defense. There is an inherent asymmetry in what they each do. Frigates scout and scan and tackle and transport and provide all sorts of awesome utility functions for their fleet depending on their hull specialization. Destroyers look for things to destroy and destroy them. So, if you warped in on a destroyer in your frigate, you did half his job for him. It seems like bad strategy more than a ship balance issue. Not saying I dislike or disagree with the balance changes. Avarege AFs speed like 1,7-2km/s. T3d can fit 10mn ab that gives 3-4km/s w/o penalty to sign.rad. If t3d fits 1mn mwd it still gives much more speed then af have. Why sabre have less ehp then enyo if destr suppose to kill af?
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
373
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 04:46:48 -
[394] - Quote
d0cTeR9 wrote:I fly the confessor a lot, with a very expensive 10mn AB. With the new changes, it will stop me (and others) from fitting an oversize AB, correct?
Just want to make sure. Before buying/fitting more ships :)
Nope, but you probably will have to re-rig and change up your fits a bit. Per Fozzie in this comment:
CCP Fozzie wrote:Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true. There's plenty of room for the fitting of oversized prop mods to be an interesting and balanced fitting choice, as long as the benefits and drawbacks are in their proper place.
Other users have confirmed that you can still fit a 10MN AB but the performance is somewhat diminished and you have to make more trade-offs for the fitting space to make the fit work.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:If they performed similarly, I think this thread would be over by now. If they performed in similar roles, what would be the point of calling one a "destroyer" and one an "assault frigate"?
Frigates are supposed to move around quickly, catch things off guard, swarm in and overwhelm. Destroyers are supposed to provide mobile, fast tracking point defense. There is an inherent asymmetry in what they each do. Frigates scout and scan and tackle and transport and provide all sorts of awesome utility functions for their fleet depending on their hull specialization. Destroyers look for things to destroy and destroy them. So, if you warped in on a destroyer in your frigate, you did half his job for him. It seems like bad strategy more than a ship balance issue. Not saying I dislike or disagree with the balance changes.
Similar does not mean one isn't better than the other, it just means they are performing similarly. As on the performance of the two is directly comparable.
The roles are similar from observational evidence. There are obviously differences but overall AFs and T3Ds are both fast ships with a good tank and weapons loadout. The T3Ds have the option of performing different roles, they just commonly don't.
I feel like you're taking your role queues too much from real life here. The Destroyers in Eve have rarely provided anything like point defense, and generally act like somewhat squishier Frigates with more firepower. However, these are just based on a destroyer hull, that doesn't mean they need to fill the same roles any more than a modern Missile Cruiser fills the same role as a WW2 Cruiser.
In practice, meaning in the way in which Eve pilots are employing these ships, they commonly fight Tech 2 Frigate class ships and in this match up it is seen as desirable (by both players and CCP, as shown in this thread) that T3Ds not completely overwhelm the class. |
d0cTeR9
Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 04:53:25 -
[395] - Quote
Thanks! |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
234
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 08:27:55 -
[396] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Similar does not mean one isn't better than the other, it just means they are performing similarly. As on the performance of the two is directly comparable.
The roles are similar from observational evidence. There are obviously differences but overall AFs and T3Ds are both fast ships with a good tank and weapons loadout. The T3Ds have the option of performing different roles, they just commonly don't.
I feel like you're taking your role queues too much from real life here. The Destroyers in Eve have rarely provided anything like point defense, and generally act like somewhat squishier Frigates with more firepower. However, these are just based on a destroyer hull, that doesn't mean they need to fill the same roles any more than a modern Missile Cruiser fills the same role as a WW2 Cruiser.
In practice, meaning in the way in which Eve pilots are employing these ships, they commonly fight Tech 2 Frigate class ships and in this match up it is seen as desirable (by both players and CCP, as shown in this thread) that T3Ds not completely overwhelm the class.
People use Cormorants to salvage. People use Procurers as fast lockers in gate camps. I heard there was a dude who mines in a Titan. Anything is possible. This is EVE, baby! But, that doesn't mean destroyers aren't intended to destroy, Procurers aren't intended to mine, and Avatars aren't intended as an unbridled display of e-peen just because people use them for other things.
Assault frigates are dying when they assault a ship whose specialization is to neutralize assaulting frigates. Duh. Looking through the Svipul's kills and losses on zkillboard (plenty of 1MN MWD fits), it is obvious that the solution to 1 Tech III destroyer is 2 or 3 (or 4 or 5 or 6) frigates. This follows a recogizable trend. All else being equal, it usually takes 2 or 3 cruisers to kill a battlecruiser, maybe a handful of batllecruisers to kill a battleship, maybe a squad of battleships to kill a carrier (provided there is no escalation).
Tech III destroyers probably need a few whacks with the Nerf bat to bring them in line, but consider other possibile factors. Maybe people just don't know what they are doing when they try to go toe-to-toe, 1vs1 with one in their frigate. Maybe people who fly around in Tech III destroyers are better than average pilots wanting to use a ship that can better handle a numerically superior enemy. Maybe they're catching more players off guard with their probes. Maybe many people still don't have their overviews (and thus, dscan) set up to show Tech III destroyers or maybe they did't even know such ships were in the game. Maybe many players just have no respect for the hull class and throw themselves into a fight they can't win. Nothing in this game is ever as simple as x needs to = 5 instead of 6. It's always a confluence of dynamics.
BTW, every time a destroyer kills a frigate, another destroyer, a drone, diverts their attack, or deters them from engaging, it's point defense. They don't have to be doing it for someone else. They can just be doing it for themselves. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
279
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 08:41:38 -
[397] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: Frigates are supposed to move around quickly, catch things off guard, swarm in and overwhelm.
That would be fine, if T3Ds couldn't reach 3.5-4.1 km/s speeds by default with MWD.
Speed. Tank. Projection. DPS.
It has it all. No need to specialise.
Great success.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
376
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 09:00:29 -
[398] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:People use Cormorants to salvage. People use Procurers as fast lockers in gate camps. I heard there was a dude who mines in a Titan. Anything is possible. This is EVE, baby! But, that doesn't mean destroyers aren't intended to destroy, Procurers aren't intended to mine, and Avatars aren't intended as an unbridled display of e-peen just because people use them for other things.
Assault frigates are dying when they assault a ship whose specialization is to neutralize assaulting frigates. Duh. Looking through the Svipul's kills and losses on zkillboard (plenty of 1MN MWD fits), it is obvious that the solution to 1 Tech III destroyer is 2 or 3 (or 4 or 5 or 6) frigates. This follows a recogizable trend. All else being equal, it usually takes 2 or 3 cruisers to kill a battlecruiser, maybe a handful of batllecruisers to kill a battleship, maybe a squad of battleships to kill a carrier (provided there is no escalation).
Tech III destroyers probably need a few whacks with the Nerf bat to bring them in line, but consider other possibile factors. Maybe people just don't know what they are doing when they try to go toe-to-toe, 1vs1 with one in their frigate. Maybe people who fly around in Tech III destroyers are better than average pilots wanting to use a ship that can better handle a numerically superior enemy. Maybe they're catching more players off guard with their probes. Maybe many people still don't have their overviews (and thus, dscan) set up to show Tech III destroyers or maybe they did't even know such ships were in the game. Maybe many players just have no respect for the hull class and throw themselves into a fight they can't win. Nothing in this game is ever as simple as x needs to = 5 instead of 6. It's always a confluence of dynamics.
BTW, every time a destroyer kills a frigate, another destroyer, a drone, diverts their attack, or deters them from engaging, it's point defense. They don't have to be doing it for someone else. They can just be doing it for themselves.
Except that the specialization of T3 Destroyers shouldn't be to neutralize T2 frigates. They're doing that now because they beat out the frigate at their own game, which is why they're getting nerfed. Again, Tech 3 is supposed to be about generalization, not specialization, and Assault Frigates are specialized combat ships with a bonus to speed tanking. They shouldn't be getting chased down and killed reliably by T3 Destroyers.
All of your supposition is just that, and there's no proof for any of it, but there is plenty of testimonial and numerical evidence that T3 Destroyers just kind of win out over most T2 Frigate and Destroyer class ships right now.
The problem isn't that people are engaging in a fight that they can't win, it's that solo small-ship PvP is currently dominated by this one ship class when it used to have a fair amount of variety to it. That's a problem, both from the perspective of the players and from the perspective of CCP (remember that whole tiericide thing to get un-used ships useful again?)
There are some very legitimate concerns being posed here about T3 Destroyers invalidating Assault Frigates as a class, so please stop dismissing them as "well they're supposed to kill frigates!" Especially when CCP is in the middle of tapping them on the shoulder with the nerf-bat to address exactly those player concerns. |
FleshDiver
V0LTA Triumvirate.
3
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 09:35:59 -
[399] - Quote
I was thinking about the changes to the number of guns which you had proposed the other day Fozzie. I think its a shame to reduce the amount of guns on the ship as this is almost the flavour of all destroyers, "loads of guns." I understand that you did so to allow the ship to be fitted, but heres an alternate solution.
Why not just give the ships a bonus to the fitting of their racial gun types? There is already president for this in the covert ops ships and more so in Teir 3 battlecruisers. 50% reduction in the Power grid and CPU cost of fitting should be the same.
I understand there is a difference in the overall amount of utility highslots but if this is your reasoning you could just add another two highslots to the ship. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
376
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 09:42:25 -
[400] - Quote
FleshDiver wrote:I was thinking about the changes to the number of guns which you had proposed the other day Fozzie. I think its a shame to reduce the amount of guns on the ship as this is almost the flavour of all destroyers, "loads of guns." I understand that you did so to allow the ship to be fitted, but heres an alternate solution.
Why not just give the ships a bonus to the fitting of their racial gun types? There is already president for this in the covert ops ships and more so in Teir 3 battlecruisers. 50% reduction in the Power grid and CPU cost of fitting should be the same.
I understand there is a difference in the overall amount of utility highslots but if this is your reasoning you could just add another two highslots to the ship.
I get what you're saying here, but there's actually a good reason for doing it this way.
Lowering the number of guns actually serves as a nice counter-balancing buff to some of the nerfs introduced here. It reduces cap use, ammo use, and the overall cost of the fit (albeit fairly minutely on that last one). It also makes it harder to squeeze extra space out of the fit with weapon fitting rigs on certain configurations. |
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
279
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 09:43:32 -
[401] - Quote
FleshDiver wrote:I was thinking about the changes to the number of guns which you had proposed the other day Fozzie. I think its a shame to reduce the amount of guns on the ship as this is almost the flavour of all destroyers, "loads of guns." I understand that you did so to allow the ship to be fitted, but heres an alternate solution.
Why not just give the ships a bonus to the fitting of their racial gun types? There is already president for this in the covert ops ships and more so in Teir 3 battlecruisers. 50% reduction in the Power grid and CPU cost of fitting should be the same.
Yes, that was one of the proposed solutions earlier in this thread. I like the current one more, however.
Quote:I understand there is a difference in the overall amount of utility highslots but if this is your reasoning you could just add another two highslots to the ship.
I liek my T3Ds with 2 neuts on.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Sard Caid
Ubiquitous Hurt
113
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 17:26:33 -
[402] - Quote
Has anyone mention the very large buff the t3 dessie ability to heat it's high rack with this change? Why not adjust mass and relook at prop mode bonuses, as right now both current t3 dessies are able to instantly align to warp by swapping from prop to other modes, which is absurd. |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
344
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 17:30:14 -
[403] - Quote
Having run these changes against my fits, I gotta say, the Confessor is getting the short end of the stick here on fitting.. Just looks like the Confessor is still going to be harder to fit than the Svipul, while the Svipul imho was the most OP of the two.
Seems a shame that the lesser of the two is the one most harmed by these changes.. |
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
753
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 17:31:27 -
[404] - Quote
I think the balance changes to make t3d balanced have to go way further than they do now as theyre still a flat improvement above t2d and t1d. At the same time I feel that the concept of "versatility above all" has a lot of potential.
First just flat nerf the damage bonuses these ships get as together with the slot layout and fitting resource they allow t3ds to outdps t1ds and t2ds way too much and make them flat better. They also dont even need that kind of damage to fulfill their role of being a frigate killer as they are going to have different tools available afterwards. Its still going to be able to outdps their lesser tech counterparts but its going to require some tradeoffs.
Confessor: Amarr Tactical Destroyer bonuses (per skill level): 7.5% (-2,5%) bonus to Small Energy Turret damage 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost 5% reduction in module heat damage amount taken
Svipul: Minmatar Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 7,5% (-2,5%) bonus to Small Projectile Turret damage 10% bonus to Small Projectile Turret optimal range 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules
Adding of course the 50% bonus from the Fozzie post.
Second thing I would remove the damage projection/application bonus in sharpshooter mode from both ships as those are a bit too powerful in the case of the Confessor and a bit dull in the case of the Svipul. We could have so much more fun things instead while retaining balance and following the versatility theme. Sharpshooter mode should be renamed afterwards probably.
confessor "whatever mode" would look like this: 25% bonus to tracking disruptor effectiveness 100% bonus to sensor strength, targeting range and scan resolution Might aswell bump it up to 33% tracking disruptor effectiveness. Important is that its less than Sentinel and 33% is a bit too close to the Sentinel bonus.
Svipul "whatever mode" would look like this: 100% bonus to Stasis webifier optimal range OR 33% bonus to target painter effectiveness 100% bonus to sensor strength, targeting range and scan resolution Now the web range bonus is a very strong bonus but the core is here that its going to be half as much as a fully trained Hyena.
Next lets look at the tank modes which are too powerful at times and some decisions straight not balanced and boring.
Confessor Defense Mode 20% bonus to all armor resistances while Defense Mode is enabled 20% bonus to armor hitpoints while Defense Mode is enabled Im not quite sure if its possible to code the hitpoint bonus that way. It would go well with the general direction of heavy amarr armor tanking. About the resistance nerf: I have no idea how CCP could think that a 33% bonus would be balanced in any way especially after nerfing old resist bonuses down to 20% instead of 25% because they were too strong.
Svipul Defense Mode 20% bonus to all shield and armor resistances while Defense Mode is enabled 20% bonus to ship Signature radius while Defense Mode is enabled The svipul is getting the signature radius bonus of the Confessor which would allow for old Stabber Fleet issue inspired gameplay and generally offer more options for armor tanked svipuls aswell as open interesting tradeoffs for shield tanked svipuls regarding the amount of tanking rigs and mid slot modules used. Generally a more interesting bonus on the Svipul than on the Confessor.
And last lets look at the Propulsion modes:
Propulsion Mode: 50% bonus to maximum velocity while a Propulsion Module in Propulsion Mode is active 20% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active The first bonus is a bit silly formulated, please correct me on this one, you get the idea. The idea is to drastically tone down their ability to signature tank as the propulsion mode offers too much base speed at the moment allowing them to effectively signature tank and therefor hard tackle better than Assault frigs. Fast hard tackling in gangs/fleets should be left as a role to Assault frigs.
I am not going to touch on base ship stats as those are a bit too far reaching for a forum post and there are people there getting paid to do that. Afterwards they wouldnt be better than any of the tech 2 hulls frigate/destroyer size in any way, but more flexible than them fitting the theme of versatility.
LYK DIS IF YOU SUPPORT THE GENERAL IDEA, PLEASE SUGGEST IMPROVEMENTS.
RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
234
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 17:56:03 -
[405] - Quote
Captain Semper wrote:Avarege AFs speed like 1,7-2km/s. T3d can fit 10mn ab that gives 3-4km/s w/o penalty to sign.rad.
Iroquoiss Pilskin wrote:That would be fine, if T3Ds couldn't reach 3.5-4.1 km/s speeds by default with MWD.
I agree. Ships that go really, really fast and do a ton of precision DPS suck and CCP should make a ship specifically to combat and destroy them.
Iroquoiss Pilskin wrote:This whole 3-buttans concept is cancerous If you don't like it because it's Tech III, just say so. Everyone knows Tech III's are overpowered in many ways. I got hit up by 3 Tengus the other day. (They didn't kill me.) I share and validate your animosity.
Cade Windstalker wrote:Except that the specialization of T3 Destroyers shouldn't be to neutralize T2 frigates . . . [Tech II frigates] shouldn't be getting chased down and killed reliably by T3 Destroyers.
If you don't like the concept of "destroyer", just say so. I sympathize. Destroyers are just big 'ole bullies of frigates, really. There's really nothing nice about them . . . except they're really good protectors.
If you don't like the concept of "Tech III" or the concept of "destroyer" or the concept of "ship that goes fast and does a lot of DPS", no amount of rebalancing is likely to make you happy with the resulting ship. |
Alexis Nightwish
149
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 17:58:36 -
[406] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:FleshDiver wrote:I was thinking about the changes to the number of guns which you had proposed the other day Fozzie. I think its a shame to reduce the amount of guns on the ship as this is almost the flavour of all destroyers, "loads of guns." I understand that you did so to allow the ship to be fitted, but heres an alternate solution.
Why not just give the ships a bonus to the fitting of their racial gun types? There is already president for this in the covert ops ships and more so in Teir 3 battlecruisers. 50% reduction in the Power grid and CPU cost of fitting should be the same.
I understand there is a difference in the overall amount of utility highslots but if this is your reasoning you could just add another two highslots to the ship. I get what you're saying here, but there's actually a good reason for doing it this way. Lowering the number of guns actually serves as a nice counter-balancing buff to some of the nerfs introduced here. It reduces cap use, ammo use, and the overall cost of the fit (albeit fairly minutely on that last one). It also makes it harder to squeeze extra space out of the fit with weapon fitting rigs on certain configurations.
As someone who loves ships bristling with weapons I feel you. However as Cade pointed out there's balance issues why that wouldn't be a good idea.
Fozzie, if you're still reading this, would it be possible to simply increase the number of visual weapons on the ships? Normally we have 2x the number of turrets/launchers as fitted to give a 360* coverage, but there's nothing stopping you from making that 4x. The Destroyers would then appear to have 8 turrets on each side of the ship, with two of the turret models firing per actual fitted gun. From what I saw from Fanfest, the art department could add this pretty easily. :D
CCP only approaches a problem in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
287
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 17:59:05 -
[407] - Quote
Yes, next we need to put the 3-buttn concept on ALL the ships! It is so greate.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: If you don't like the concept of "destroyer", just say so. I sympathize. Destroyers are just big 'ole bullies of frigates, really.
I don't fly frigates of any kind. I do fly all of the T3Ds.
Being a destroyer with superb DPS and damage projection - that is the purpose. However, at the same time reaching and far exceeding the next closest comparison in both tank & speed, is not. That includes AF & dictors.
I'd be fine with a combo of any 2 of the 3 components, but not all three in one package.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
382
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 18:29:27 -
[408] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Except that the specialization of T3 Destroyers shouldn't be to neutralize T2 frigates . . . [Tech II frigates] shouldn't be getting chased down and killed reliably by T3 Destroyers. If you don't like the concept of "destroyer", just say so. I sympathize. Destroyers are just big 'ole bullies of frigates, really. There's really nothing nice about them . . . except they're really good protectors. If you don't like the concept of "Tech III" or the concept of "destroyer" or the concept of "ship that goes fast and does a lot of DPS", no amount of rebalancing is likely to make you happy with the resulting ship.
Either you snipped a little too much there or I wasn't clear. My issue is with one class completely invalidating another, along with people pushing roles from other games, media, or real life onto Eve ships. If that was the intent we wouldn't have fittings and this would be an RTS.
No where in any of the info about the T3 Destroyers does it say "these ships are/should be a counter to T2 Frigates" and historically CCP hasn't restricted ships based on those sorts of preconceptions, nor have they let them run wild based on them. Even the other destroyers in-game don't completely beat out a frigate, and the T2 destroyers vs a T2 Frigate are a fairly even fight if both ships are flown well and play to their strengths. |
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 18:34:07 -
[409] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:I think the balance changes to make t3d balanced have to go way further than they do now as theyre still a flat improvement above t2d and t1d. At the same time I feel that the concept of "versatility above all" has a lot of unused potential.
First just flat nerf the damage bonuses these ships get as together with the slot layout and fitting resource they allow t3ds to outdps t1ds and t2ds way too much and make them flat better. They also dont even need that kind of damage to fulfill their role of being a frigate killer as they are going to have different tools available afterwards. Its still going to be able to outdps their lesser tech counterparts but its going to require some tradeoffs.
Confessor: Amarr Tactical Destroyer bonuses (per skill level): 7.5% (-2,5%) bonus to Small Energy Turret damage 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost 5% reduction in module heat damage amount taken
Svipul: Minmatar Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 7,5% (-2,5%) bonus to Small Projectile Turret damage 10% bonus to Small Projectile Turret optimal range 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules
Adding of course the 50% bonus from the Fozzie post.
Second thing I would remove the damage projection/application bonus in sharpshooter mode from both ships as those are a bit too powerful in the case of the Confessor and a bit dull in the case of the Svipul. We could have so much more fun things instead while retaining balance and following the versatility theme. Sharpshooter mode should be renamed afterwards probably.
confessor "whatever mode" would look like this: 25% bonus to tracking disruptor effectiveness 100% bonus to sensor strength, targeting range and scan resolution Might aswell bump it up to 33% tracking disruptor effectiveness. Important is that its less than Sentinel and 33% is a bit too close to the Sentinel bonus.
Svipul "whatever mode" would look like this: 100% bonus to Stasis webifier optimal range OR 33% bonus to target painter effectiveness 100% bonus to sensor strength, targeting range and scan resolution Now the web range bonus is a very strong bonus but the core is here that its going to be half as much as a fully trained Hyena.
Next lets look at the tank modes which are too powerful at times and some decisions straight not balanced and boring.
Confessor Defense Mode 20% bonus to all armor resistances while Defense Mode is enabled 20% bonus to armor hitpoints while Defense Mode is enabled Im not quite sure if its possible to code the hitpoint bonus that way. It would go well with the general direction of heavy amarr armor tanking. About the resistance nerf: I have no idea how CCP could think that a 33% bonus would be balanced in any way especially after nerfing old resist bonuses down to 20% instead of 25% because they were too strong.
Svipul Defense Mode 20% bonus to all shield and armor resistances while Defense Mode is enabled 20% bonus to ship Signature radius while Defense Mode is enabled The svipul is getting the signature radius bonus of the Confessor which would allow for old Stabber Fleet issue inspired gameplay and generally offer more options for armor tanked svipuls aswell as open interesting tradeoffs for shield tanked svipuls regarding the amount of tanking rigs and mid slot modules used. Generally a more interesting bonus on the Svipul than on the Confessor.
And last lets look at the Propulsion modes:
Propulsion Mode: 50% bonus to maximum velocity while a Propulsion Module in Propulsion Mode is active 20% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active The first bonus is a bit silly formulated, please correct me on this one, you get the idea. The idea is to drastically tone down their ability to signature tank as the propulsion mode offers too much base speed at the moment allowing them to effectively signature tank and therefor hard tackle better than Assault frigs. Fast hard tackling in gangs/fleets should be left as a role to Assault frigs.
I am not going to touch on base ship stats as those are a bit too far reaching for a forum post and there are people there getting paid to do that. Afterwards they wouldnt be better than any of the tech 2 hulls frigate/destroyer size in any way, but more flexible than them fitting the theme of versatility.
LYK DIS IF YOU SUPPORT THE GENERAL IDEA, PLEASE SUGGEST IMPROVEMENTS.
Edit: If you think that the Sig bonus on the Svipul is too strong lets try a shield regen bonus equal to 75% of the shield regen lost due to the possible regen nerf. Edit 2: The web range bonus if at all should probably be weaker aswell, rather 75% or 50% even, if at all.
I really like this in general. I think the specifics could use a little work, and I'd like to see something more like combat mode (resists and optimal/rof or whatever), utility mode (probe strength and ewar range/strength) and prop mode (speed, warp speed, align time, prop mod boosts, whatever). Prop mode should be slower than inty's, utility mode should be worse than a covops or ewar frigate and combat mode should be slightly better than a T1 destroyer but not much better. Switching modes should also have a real cost, maybe losing your current bonus and gaining the new one ten seconds later or so. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1974
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 19:16:29 -
[410] - Quote
The revised changes look good. Thanks.
+1
|
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
234
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 20:23:55 -
[411] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pilskin wrote:Being a destroyer with superb DPS and damage projection - that is the purpose. However, at the same time reaching and far exceeding the next closest comparison in both tank & speed, is not. That includes AF & dictors.
The next closest ships to compare a Svipul to would be the Loki (same grade, 1 hull class larger), the Sabre (1 grade lower, same hull class), or probably most appropriately, a Vagabond or Munnin (1 grade lower, 1 hull class larger). If you look at zkillboard's top ships, you see (as I write this) #1 Svipul, #2 Ishtar (1 grade lower, 1 hull class larger), #3 Sabre (1 grade lower, same hull class). Tech II frigates are 1 grade lower and 1 hull class lower. That's not a fair comparison.
Also, keep in mind that all those veteran Sabre pilots are 1 skill level away from a Svipul which is probably better for their purpose AND cheaper. Caracal, Vexor Navy, Loki, Vexor are all in the top 10, and what they all have in common is that they have excellent point defense potential. The Vexors with drones, the Caracal with rapid light launchers, and the Loki with long webs and fast locking.
Capsule is at #4. Many of those pilots were probably de-shipped by tactical destroyers, but then the tactical destroyer exploded, because tactical destroyers are not invincible, and they will probably be even less so once the rebalancing goes live, not that I'm complaining about that. I'm just saying . . .
Cade Windstalker wrote:No where in any of the info about the T3 Destroyers does it say "these ships are/should be a counter to T2 Frigates"
Ummm . . . DUH-stroy-er. The description is the name of the ship type. Why would you expect uniform success when conducting a rapid assault against a ship that was intended specifically to repel rapid assault? Fast attacks work best against targets that are not ready. Destroyers are the epitome of readiness, but if you like to assault things so much, consider a heavier assault ship, like, maybe, a heavy assault ship. I think Ishtars are pretty good, if you can fly Gallente.
"Why is this hammer beating all my nails?" |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
292
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 20:32:28 -
[412] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Iroquoiss Pilskin wrote:Being a destroyer with superb DPS and damage projection - that is the purpose. However, at the same time reaching and far exceeding the next closest comparison in both tank & speed, is not. That includes AF & dictors. The next closest ships to compare a Svipul to would be the Loki (same grade, 1 hull class larger), the Sabre (1 grade lower, same hull class), or probably most appropriately, a Vagabond or Munnin (1 grade lower, 1 hull class larger). ... Also, keep in mind that all those veteran Sabre pilots are 1 skill level away from a Svipul which is probably better for their purpose AND cheaper.
Discussion over.
Eve is kill.
No.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
383
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 21:13:04 -
[413] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Ummm . . . DUH-stroy-er. The description is the name of the ship type. Why would you expect uniform success when conducting a rapid assault against a ship that was intended specifically to repel rapid assault? Fast attacks work best against targets that are not ready. Destroyers are the epitome of readiness, but if you like to assault things so much, consider a heavier assault ship, like, maybe, a heavy assault ship. I think Ishtars are pretty good, if you can fly Gallente.
"Why is this hammer beating all my nails?"
Descriptions like that have *never* applied well to Eve ships, and should be considered size categories at best. Everything you're drawing from here is based on Earth Naval History. That just doesn't apply here and it's certainly not what Fozzie and Rise are balancing around.
I suggest you go read the original posts on the Confessor and Svipul before declaring how the ships are supposed to work based on a single over-arching class archetype that you're applying from an ancient Navy ~20000 years prior to the current setting. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
293
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 21:20:38 -
[414] - Quote
You sunk my battleship.
Cade, both of those threads only have 16 pages each - So few saw the disaster coming.
CCP Fozzie wrote: If we begin to see a need to restrict their access further in the future (for instance if they start completely dominating FW) we'll adjust their gate access as necessary.
I am glad they've decided to actually try & fix T3Ds, before resorting to artificial limitations that only apply to 33% of Eve's PvP.
:fw:
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
383
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 21:59:42 -
[415] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:You sunk my battleship. Cade, both of those threads only have 16 pages each - So few saw the disaster coming.
New stuff is rarely subject to as much debate as change to old stuff, even if that old stuff isn't so old... Now people have the ships (or not), they're invested, and they're arguing for their side of things so of course the thread is going to be more active. Though this one is still only ~21 pages which is tiny compared to the ~115 the two Entosis threads have hit.
As they saying goes "Any decision or change you make will anger some portion of the player-base, including the decision to change nothing."
Also your battleship balance discussion is in another castle thread |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
234
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 22:57:16 -
[416] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Descriptions like that have *never* applied well to Eve ships, and should be considered size categories at best. Everything you're drawing from here is based on Earth Naval History. That just doesn't apply here and it's certainly not what Fozzie and Rise are balancing around.
I'm not psychic, so I can't say for certain what the good folks at CCP have as their grand, over-arching plan for destroyer hulls and how that fits into the overall game. I just go by my own experience and observations. From those, I would say that . . well, just read the Tech I destroyer descriptions:
Coercer <-seek and destroy Dragoon Cormorant <-wtf, man? Corax Catalyst <-anti-frigate Algos <-readiness Thrasher <-protects Talwar <-evasion
Those descriptions don't stop us from salvaging or mining or doing courier missions, etc. in our destroyers, but that doesn't mean CCP should rebalance the hulls to be better at those tasks. If you had other plans for destroyer hull types, maybe you should inform CCP. I have a feeling they aren't aware your designs.
Really, if you don't like the concept of "destroyer", you should just say that, but you should expect a Tech III destroyer to be at least 2 shades better than a Tech I destroyer. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
298
|
Posted - 2015.04.15 23:01:22 -
[417] - Quote
Tech 3 cruisers isn't exactly new stuff, and look where we are.
The largest issue with T3 cruisers is the exact Tech 2 resist profile - T3Ds, on the other hand, do not have them, and that is their only saving grace right now. Otherwise Eve is kill.
A Confessor has 79%-88% of the racial resists values vs. a Heretic, and 70-75% of the values of a Retribution. Defensive mode puts racial Kin/Exp close to T2, while greatly increasing EM/Therm past T2 levels.
In this regard T3Ds sit in a right place according to this vision - http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg
Strategic cruisers remain broken.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cardano Firesnake
Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation
178
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 03:25:17 -
[418] - Quote
I must say that the Svipul is far more powerful than the Confessor. These changes will make the gap bigger.. It is a shame that the confessor is more beautiful than the Svipul.
Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4]
Erase learning skills, remap all SP.
That's all.
|
khaip ur
K.C.C
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 06:09:49 -
[419] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
For most of it the changes do not really effect the usefulness of the ship. and personally increasing the cost is probably a good thing since they are coming in pretty cheap considering they are 1 new and 2 tech 3.
My main concern is the amount of change in the shield recharge time. A 28% nerf in one go just seems like an over correction. Especially when the current rate is identical to tech 1.
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
384
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 09:05:38 -
[420] - Quote
khaip ur wrote:For most of it the changes do not really effect the usefulness of the ship. and personally increasing the cost is probably a good thing since they are coming in pretty cheap considering they are 1 new and 2 tech 3.
My main concern is the amount of change in the shield recharge time. A 28% nerf in one go just seems like an over correction. Especially when the current rate is identical to tech 1.
T1 Destroyers can't easily fit Medium LSEs and don't have T2++ Resists in Defensive Mode. As things stand they still have the option to tank better than any of the T1 and most of the T2 ships in their weight class.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Descriptions like that have *never* applied well to Eve ships, and should be considered size categories at best. Everything you're drawing from here is based on Earth Naval History. That just doesn't apply here and it's certainly not what Fozzie and Rise are balancing around. I'm not psychic, so I can't say for certain what the good folks at CCP have as their grand, over-arching plan for destroyer hulls and how that fits into the overall game. I just go by my own experience and observations. From those, I would say that . . well, just read the Tech I destroyer descriptions: ...snip... Those descriptions don't stop us from salvaging or mining or doing courier missions, etc. in our destroyers, but that doesn't mean CCP should rebalance the hulls to be better at those tasks. If you had other plans for destroyer hull types, maybe you should inform CCP. I have a feeling they aren't aware your designs. Really, if you don't like the concept of "destroyer", you should just say that, but you should expect a Tech III destroyer to be at least 2 shades better than a Tech I destroyer.
I think perhaps you should check the descriptions for the T3 destroyers, and note the complete lack of any such mandate as that you are describing. Same for the T2, in-fact, which are actually specialized ships.
Instead I suggest you look at the stats and the balance changes CCP are making here, which are making these frigates slower, less maneuverable, and harder to fit while keeping the characteristics that make them so good at killing frigates. You're mistaking me if you think I'm saying "Destroyers shouldn't kill frigates", I'm saying "the relationship between the T3 Destroyers and T2 Frigates is problematic and needs to change, and I'm glad CCP are taking steps toward rectifying this
If CCP were saying "no, these should be all-mighty T2 Frigate killers" then I'd be fine with that as long as I felt it would be good for the game and they had a decent reasoning for it. As things stand though, none of this is the case.
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:New stuff is rarely subject to as much debate as change to old stuff, even if that old stuff isn't so old... Tech 3 cruisers isn't exactly new stuff, and look where we are. The largest issue with T3 cruisers is the exact Tech 2 resist profile - T3Ds, on the other hand, do not have them, and that is their only saving grace right now. Otherwise Eve is kill. A Confessor has 79%-88% of the racial resists values vs. a Heretic, and 70-75% of the values of a Retribution. Defensive mode puts racial Kin/Exp close to T2, while greatly increasing EM/Therm past T2 levels. In this regard T3Ds sit in a right place according to this vision - http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg Strategic cruisers remain broken.
I'd rather not get too into this as it's off topic for the thread. If you want to hash this out please reply via PM.
In short though, T3s were released under a different vision of Tech 3 hulls. CCP have recognized that this created a lot of problems and corrected, but the Tech 3 Cruisers are ships a lot of people have a lot of investment in and I think CCP have been trying to figure out what to do with them that doesn't completely invalidate all of that investment while also not invalidating half the T2 Cruisers in the game currently.
It's a prickly problem and I don't envy them for having to deal with it. Overall though I'm glad they're getting a solid base-line by adjusting all of the other ships into a good state first, since then they can slot T3 Cruisers in among them rather than trying to balance T3 Cruisers first and then touching everything else. |
|
To mare
Advanced Technology
404
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 09:24:50 -
[421] - Quote
Cardano Firesnake wrote:I must say that the Svipul is far more powerful than the Confessor. These changes will make the gap bigger.. It is a shame that the confessor is more beautiful than the Svipul. omg one minmatar ship that doesnt suck, must nerf it quick |
prolix travail
Blue Mountain Trails
26
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 13:20:36 -
[422] - Quote
Ive played around with these ships on sisi and have to say that the nerfs do have a noticable affect on 10mn ab ftis. You can still fit a 10mn ab but it usually means having to upgrade a fitting rig to t2 and use at least one more fitting mod/rig. So you lose tank/damage or both as well as the slower speed and agility.
On the svipul the loss of agility feels pretty significant, even more so in defense or sharpshooter mode. i've been rethinking fitting a 10mn ab on a svipul as the speed/agility of a mwd is that much better, and the extra fitting room means you can do some heavy cap warfare with 2 utility highs and make use of the 4th mid for cap booster.
|
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
505
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 14:06:57 -
[423] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone! Big thanks to everyone who has posted feedback about the first round of changes. We agree with the point that some of you were bringing up, that these first round of changes are a bit too harsh on long range weapon fits compared to short range weapon fits. A certain amount of added fitting pain for long range fits will be necessary, but long range weapon viability is a key part of the character of the tactical destroyers and it would be a shame to limit that more than absolutely necessary. So we've come up with a second iteration of these changes, using a slightly more invasive set of adjustments. To reduce the impact of extremely high fittings while continuing to keep long range weapons competitive with short range weapons we are proposing a change to the turrets of the Confessor and Svipul. Both would lose 2 turrets (going to 4) but gain a new +50% damage role bonus to keep DPS the same. This allows us to reduce fittings significantly without harming long range fits as much, as the weapons will make a smaller percentage of the overall Powergrid and CPU consumption of the ships. These new versions also include a mass reduction for the Svipul (which is how we directly impact the power of oversized prop modules) and a bit more speed reduction. Material requirement changes remain the same as in version one. Confessor:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 62 (-18)
- CPU: 180 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 235 (-45)
- Mass: 2,000,000kg (-400,000)
- Inertia: 2.7 (+0.55)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 320s (+20s)
Svipul:
- New Role Bonus: +50% Small Projectile Turret Damage
- Highslots: 6 (-1)
- Turrets: 4 (-2)
- Powergrid: 59 (-19)
- CPU: 205 (-10)
- Max Velocity: 230 (-60)
- Mass: 1,500,000 (-400,000)
- Inertia: 3.5 (+0.85)
- Shield Recharge Time: 800s (+175s)
- Capacitor Recharge Time: 240s (+15s)
Material Requirements (unchanged): +1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core Like I said above, thanks to everyone who has participated in this feedback thread so far. We're very interested in hearing your thoughts about this second iteration of the changes. 2 utility highs and a sensible fitting balance? What the hell is this, sensible balance week? Goddamn, GO FOZZIE GO!!! |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
325
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 14:50:13 -
[424] - Quote
Yes, the readiness with which they've responded to the issues can be applauded.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3244
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 16:46:27 -
[425] - Quote
i really can't comment on the new changes before being able to test them on SISI.
just a few things which can be said without testing them: - 4 weapons means you can overheat longer - 2 utility highs are kinda cool, reminds me on the flycatcher before the second rebalance which basically made it a better heretic for all usecases - svipul is still the stronger ship
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
dark man Skord
Republic University Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 20:19:42 -
[426] - Quote
Personally, I wish the speed of the svipul wouldn't be nerfed too much. My current load out looses almost 500 m/s. I do enjoy going fast. I understand that there is a problem with it when people use 10mm afterburners, but I'm not one of those players and I feel that the speed nerf is unjust. Regardless, it'll still be one of my favorite ships to fly after the nerf, but a whole lot less favorite. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
632
|
Posted - 2015.04.16 20:35:19 -
[427] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:i really can't comment on the new changes before being able to test them on SISI.
just a few things which can be said without testing them: - 4 weapons means you can overheat longer - 2 utility highs are kinda cool, reminds me on the flycatcher before the second rebalance which basically made it a better heretic for all usecases - svipul is still the stronger ship
Oh man, do your self a favor and don't even fit a Confessor
If only somebody would have told someone that they overnerfed the Amarr for no reason - wait I did.
All hail the barbariens?
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3244
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 00:13:17 -
[428] - Quote
oh changes are already on SISI - didn't know that.
Just a heads up: a bug of the fitting window basically forces you to repackage your old t3 before changing the fit. because no matter what you do it will tell you you have too many turrets fit. (its off by 1)
feedback/observations: - 10mn nerf is quite significant. Acceleration, agility and the amount the ship slows down if you change direction are noticeably worse - fitting them will require empty utility highs and 2 grid rigs in many cases (only tested the confessor)
i predict it will be quite difficult to use 10mn fits in small scale pvp, unless all you are doing is to fly in one direction and hope something is chasing after you. So if that was the goal i can see that it will succeed.
Confessor is hit hardest since the 10mn AB was a good replacement for the lack of a web in the brawling variants due to the slot layout.
i would test more if the bug in the fitting window would not be there
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
389
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 02:16:44 -
[429] - Quote
prolix travail wrote:Ive played around with these ships on sisi and have to say that the nerfs do have a noticable affect on 10mn ab ftis. You can still fit a 10mn ab but it usually means having to upgrade a fitting rig to t2 and use at least one more fitting mod/rig. So you lose tank/damage or both as well as the slower speed and agility.
On the svipul the loss of agility feels pretty significant, even more so in defense or sharpshooter mode. i've been rethinking fitting a 10mn ab on a svipul as the speed/agility of a mwd is that much better, and the extra fitting room means you can do some heavy cap warfare with 2 utility highs and make use of the 4th mid for cap booster.
Just want to say that feedback like this is awesome. Clear, concise, and actually responds to how the changes affected the feel of the ship :)
dark man Skord wrote:Personally, I wish the speed of the svipul wouldn't be nerfed too much. My current load out looses almost 500 m/s. I do enjoy going fast. I understand that there is a problem with it when people use 10mm afterburners, but I'm not one of those players and I feel that the speed nerf is unjust. Regardless, it'll still be one of my favorite ships to fly after the nerf, but a whole lot less favorite.
Edit: Actually, mulling over it at home, I have come to the conclusion I'll just stop playing. I don't pay companies to mess with my fun because losers in other part of the game can't cope with the fact they're getting outplayed. I keep forgetting CCP has a history of catering to whiny losers.
The speed nerf is because these ships massively out-class their closest competition when you take their combination of speed, fire-power, and tank as a sum whole. They're still competitive, and their over-heating bonus even gives them a pretty significant advantage, but they're not longer hands-down better.
I suspect you've enjoyed the ships in-part because they have been over-powered compared to almost anything Frigate or Destroyer sized that they come across, and while it sucks to lose something like that it's hardly "catering to whiners" nor is using a flatly better ship "outplaying" someone. There's a reason 10-man ganks on solo ships end with "outplayed" said sarcastically in local. |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 06:01:21 -
[430] - Quote
I was hoping these changes would also address the performance gap between the Svipul and the Confessor. Or did you actually take the Confessor's better aesthetic design as a balancing factor? |
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
390
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 06:04:54 -
[431] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:I was hoping these changes would also address the performance gap between the Svipul and the Confessor. Or did you actually take the Confessor's better aesthetic design as a balancing factor?
Run the numbers and test some fits on SiSi. I think you'll find that if the performance gap isn't gone it's a lot smaller than it used to be, especially if you can managed a 10MN fit on the Confessor with the new fittings.
That said, where do you think it's lacking? |
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
125
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 06:32:24 -
[432] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:I was hoping these changes would also address the performance gap between the Svipul and the Confessor. Or did you actually take the Confessor's better aesthetic design as a balancing factor? Run the numbers and test some fits on SiSi. I think you'll find that if the performance gap isn't gone it's a lot smaller than it used to be, especially if you can managed a 10MN fit on the Confessor with the new fittings. That said, where do you think it's lacking? 10mn fit nerf hurts Confessor more than Svipul since it needs it for range control. Svipul has other options if it doesn't fit a 10mn. Cap nerf hurts Confessor more as well, since it needs it to run every aspect of the ship - active tank/prop/guns/tackle. Most of the popular Svipul fits only require cap for prop mod and tackle (ASBs and autocannons for the rest). They now have the option to fit a nos to keep tackle or run double neuts. I understand that lasers are lasers and autocannons are autocannons but for small guns, the advantage of scorch is far less pronounced, especially if you're fighting in scram range and don't have any range control.
Basically I would keep the 10mn fitting nerf but the cap/agility nerf for the Confessor IMO was wholly unneeded. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
234
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 10:49:45 -
[433] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:The speed nerf is because these ships massively out-class their closest competition when you take their combination of speed, fire-power, and tank as a sum whole. They're still competitive, and their over-heating bonus even gives them a pretty significant advantage, but they're not longer hands-down better.
I suspect you've enjoyed the ships in-part because they have been over-powered compared to almost anything Frigate or Destroyer sized that they come across, and while it sucks to lose something like that it's hardly "catering to whiners" nor is using a flatly better ship "outplaying" someone. There's a reason 10-man ganks on solo ships end with "outplayed" said sarcastically in local.
If you don't like destroyers, say: "I don't like destroyers. They should be removed from the game." Hell, make a thread in this section with that as the OP. What you are doing now is pushing a narrative where destroyers should perform like frigates, but what you are failing to grasp or accept is this: DESTROYERS ARE NOT FRIGATES.
Spiders do not compete with flies. (The Caldari interdictor is actually named "Flycatcher".) Retrievers do not compete with Veldspar. Balancing a Panther or a Vargur to make a Hurricane or Drake "competitive" with it wouldn't make sense. Balancing a Svipul to make a Wolf or a Hawk competitive with it won't make sense to a lot of people.
You don't like Tech IIIs and want them nerfed into the ground. Fine. You don't like destroyers and want them nerfed into the ground. Fine. But, maybe try reading a little about what a frigate and destroyer are and do and it might make more sense why the hammer keeps beating nails. The real-world terms may not be perfectly analogous to what takes place in EVE, but neither are they perfectly irrelevant. Afterall, we call them space SHIPS. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
632
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 11:39:04 -
[434] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:I was hoping these changes would also address the performance gap between the Svipul and the Confessor. Or did you actually take the Confessor's better aesthetic design as a balancing factor? Run the numbers and test some fits on SiSi. I think you'll find that if the performance gap isn't gone it's a lot smaller than it used to be, especially if you can managed a 10MN fit on the Confessor with the new fittings. That said, where do you think it's lacking?
I can tell you where my Confessor is lacking - in everything!!
Sidenote: After the first lecture in college my professor said, "I told you this, you know this now." - after repeating all of highschool math in 90 minutes..
I have to admint that not everyone on Earth can see as far as I can, my aplogogies - I was born this way.
Moving on, the Confessor was nerfed so much that she is now an expensive gankmail waiting to happen. The agility nerf plus the capacitor nerf go so far over the top that she became unusable in one stroke.
If only someone could have prediceted this - oh wait-
Maybe most of the faction warfare folks are unaware of it but lowsec is not the only environment in EVE. There is more dangerous space out there where you have to make - pun intended - make tactical desicions on a whimp and since you can only go there in a small boat, you want the goodest(est) option available to you.
The tactical destroyer was your best option for those environments.
The matari one may be able to go there but the Amarr one got gutted, violated and made unusable - everywhere.
Can I has my skillpoints back now?
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1693
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 14:12:51 -
[435] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:
Can I has my skillpoints back now?
No.
You invested SP in a ship that could **** all over any of it's intended target. Did you really expect it to stay that way? |
owl titanside
Imperial Dawn. Northern Associates.
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 15:07:17 -
[436] - Quote
Hey fozzie, Is there a way we can keep all 6 guns. But still do your whole nerf. I mean, dessies are big gun little ships, like there big bros the battlecruisers, all these guns and a hard time to fit sounds best .! Just sucks seeing half the nerf being -2 guns. Starting to sound more like a marauder than a Dessie duder.
Why not keep all za gunz bro and toss some fitting aside. Just feels right being in a DESTROYER and having a TON OF GUNZ but a prickly bugger to fit em! :D
I forget your exact words but, I remember you saying you wanted them to be fun, Well, why not step back and take a look at what people find pretty cool about these ships. -seem to be great tackle options -Dope solo pvp -mode swapping on the fly -fast and nimble -great cost vs loss ratio -tank is really nice for such a small ship.
And there is much more, but what id like to point out is that I notice a simularity between the little Dessie's and there cruiser buddys, they can adapt to a situation, but also fit what you feel is required for that situation. Is this nerf intended on taking that away from them? Or just to cramp some other peeps play styles.
Anyways ....KEEP THE GUNS DUDE ditch what you think isnt needed.
|
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic
24
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 18:26:07 -
[437] - Quote
The only "real" issue with the confessor is the lack of a tracking bonus. Every other t3 destroyer will have the ability to apply very well in brawling range. The svipul can get a tracking bonus by swapping modes. The slated jackdaw has a bazillion midslots for webs so rockets will always apply full damage, and I don't even want to talk about how massively _overpowered_ the bonuses on the hecate are.
The confessor basically auto-loses to any competent frigate pilot at close range, which I find very ironic for a destroyer. Well, that's not entirely true. The confessor will just be unable to apply and give the opponent's friends (or your friends) time to arrive and decide the battle. The speed nerf has put the confessor at a level where it is slower than several very common frigates (read: comet) when it has a 10mn ab and is under a web. I don't think this in and of itself is a bad thing, but the inability to then apply damage in a meaningful way is rather concerning to me.
Beam skirmish confessors are still quite decent. I have been on the test server and my current fit swaps a t2 locus coordinator for an ancillary current router, losing a rather significant amount of optimal range (from 63 km to 51km in sniper w/ aurora) in the process, but otherwise retaining its functionality and most of its speed. Unlinked the changes are noticeable, but linked the ship is practically the same as it was, sans some sniping range.
I will personally continue to fly the confessor as I think it is still one of the most fun ships in the game. However, I would love to see the ship get a tracking bonus somewhere (preferably in place of the cap bonus as most close range confessors fit a cap booster). Just to reiterate _every_ _other_ t3 destroyer is capable of/innately has a tracking/damage application bonus at close range. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
634
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 19:20:48 -
[438] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:elitatwo wrote:
Can I has my skillpoints back now?
No. You invested SP in a ship that could **** all over any of it's intended target. Did you really expect it to stay that way?
And you only ever see, what you want to see.
Did I mention that the Confessor was not the ship the kids where complaining about? Please show me where any wormhole resident where complaining about Confessors being overpowered.
Wait, are you saying you where not supposed to be light anti-tackle in cruiser online?
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
340
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 19:39:48 -
[439] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:The speed nerf is because these ships massively out-class their closest competition when you take their combination of speed, fire-power, and tank as a sum whole. They're still competitive, and their over-heating bonus even gives them a pretty significant advantage, but they're not longer hands-down better.
I suspect you've enjoyed the ships in-part because they have been over-powered compared to almost anything Frigate or Destroyer sized that they come across, and while it sucks to lose something like that it's hardly "catering to whiners" nor is using a flatly better ship "outplaying" someone. There's a reason 10-man ganks on solo ships end with "outplayed" said sarcastically in local. If you don't like destroyers, say: "I don't like destroyers. They should be removed from the game." Hell, make a thread in this section with that as the OP. What you are doing now is pushing a narrative where destroyers should perform like frigates, but what you are failing to grasp or accept is this: DESTROYERS ARE NOT FRIGATES. Spiders do not compete with flies. (The Caldari interdictor is actually named "Flycatcher".) Retrievers do not compete with Veldspar. Balancing a Panther or a Vargur to make a Hurricane or Drake "competitive" with it wouldn't make sense. Balancing a Svipul to make a Wolf or a Hawk competitive with it won't make sense to a lot of people. You don't like Tech IIIs and want them nerfed into the ground. Fine. You don't like destroyers and want them nerfed into the ground. Fine. But, maybe try reading a little about what a frigate and destroyer are and do and it might make more sense why the hammer keeps beating nails. The real-world terms may not be perfectly analogous to what takes place in EVE, but neither are they perfectly irrelevant. Afterall, we call them space SHIPS.
3/10
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg
Bienator II wrote:i really can't comment on the new changes before being able to test them on SISI.
just a few things which can be said without testing them: - 4 weapons means you can overheat longer - 2 utility highs are kinda cool, reminds me on the flycatcher before the second rebalance which basically made it a better heretic for all usecases - svipul is still the stronger ship
Regarding Confessor vs. Svipul, they should explain the following first,
Quote:Marian Devers wrote:I guess this is the place to ask why Svipul has 2x defensive bonuses (to armor and shield resists), and the confessor only has one (armor).
That is a fairly valid question. With both ships unfitted and in Defensive mode, Confessor has 4,976, and Svipul 5,658 EHP. Fitting a DC II gives the Confessor 7,055 EHP, and 7,475 for the Svipul. I think the answer may lie in the fact that Confessor's Signature reduction bonus is always being applied in Defensive mode, compared to MWD-use dependent second bonus on the Svipul. CCP Fozzie?
Amarr losing cap & tank superiority er'ryday. Svipul's also 17% faster.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Chrisfighter
Gladdebacher's
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 19:58:23 -
[440] - Quote
I still think the nerf in powergrid is too high.
A confessor fitted with a 10mn ab needs multiple ACR II rigs, not to mention the uselessness of its "new" utility slots. (because of too little pg to play with).
I can understand the need of some balance tweaks, but the pg nerf is too harsh. A reduction of 10-12 pg would be way better than -18 pg. (for the svipul, too)
Nur die harten kommen innen Garten, eh .... Eve xD
|
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
341
|
Posted - 2015.04.17 20:03:29 -
[441] - Quote
That's the whole point. Multiple ACRs, where? The following fit is derived from the data in the first post of the thread:
Quote:[Confessor, Nyaah] Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Heat Sink II Centii A-Type Small Armor Repairer Centii A-Type Adaptive Nano Plating
Experimental 10MN Afterburner I Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Warp Scrambler II
Gatling Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I Gatling Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S Gatling Pulse Laser II, Conflagration S
Small Auxiliary Nano Pump II Small Nanobot Accelerator II Small Ancillary Current Router I
1308 / 1962
2179 / 3279 m/s
You're also slower than previously.
Learn2MWD
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
390
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 01:16:27 -
[442] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:10mn fit nerf hurts Confessor more than Svipul since it needs it for range control. Svipul has other options if it doesn't fit a 10mn. Cap nerf hurts Confessor more as well, since it needs it to run every aspect of the ship - active tank/prop/guns/tackle. Most of the popular Svipul fits only require cap for prop mod and tackle (ASBs and autocannons for the rest). They now have the option to fit a nos to keep tackle or run double neuts. I understand that lasers are lasers and autocannons are autocannons but for small guns, the advantage of scorch is far less pronounced, especially if you're fighting in scram range and don't have any range control.
Basically I would keep the 10mn fitting nerf but the cap/agility nerf for the Confessor IMO was wholly unneeded.
Thanks for the response.
So, this is somewhat just echoing what others have said but I think the performance difference between the Confessor and Svipul has never been that huge. Maybe 5 to 10% at best, that's just enough for one to beat the other in most cases (and be that much better than everything else).
If they left the Confessor alone in cap and agility we would almost certainly be back here again in a few months nerfing the Confessor. As things stand we have two more of these T3Ds to release so there's plenty of time and opportunity for CCP to tweak all four so they sit at about the same relative power level. If the relative status of the Confessor and Svipul doesn't change after these tweaks they'll probably dial back the cap nerf a bit or buff other stats slightly, though I expect the agility changes to stick.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:If you don't like destroyers, say: "I don't like destroyers. They should be removed from the game." Hell, make a thread in this section with that as the OP. What you are doing now is pushing a narrative where destroyers should perform like frigates, but what you are failing to grasp or accept is this: DESTROYERS ARE NOT FRIGATES. Spiders do not compete with flies. (The Caldari interdictor is actually named "Flycatcher".) Retrievers do not compete with Veldspar. Balancing a Panther or a Vargur to make a Hurricane or Drake "competitive" with it wouldn't make sense. Balancing a Svipul to make a Wolf or a Hawk competitive with it won't make sense to a lot of people. You don't like Tech IIIs and want them nerfed into the ground. Fine. You don't like destroyers and want them nerfed into the ground. Fine. But, maybe try reading a little about what a frigate and destroyer are and do and it might make more sense why the hammer keeps beating nails. The real-world terms may not be perfectly analogous to what takes place in EVE, but neither are they perfectly irrelevant. Afterall, we call them space SHIPS.
I do not dislike destroyers, nor have I ever said it. So please and thank you stop putting words in my mouth.
If you'd care to look at the relationship between the T1 Destroyers and T1 Frigates, T2 Destroyers and Frigates, or even the T2 Destroyers to the T1 Frigates you'll note that the stats tend to favor Damage on the Destroyers and Speed and tank (of one sort or another) on the Frigates. Thus the frigates still have plenty of room to do things the Frigates can't and thus room to out-play and destroy them.
Your entire argument is that "But destroyers are MEANT to be better than Frigates!!!" but that's silly and doesn't follow the stats of anything else in the game, nor does it even suggest that a Destroyer should be able to beat a frigate at its own game, which in this case is speed.
Using real life as an excuse for poor game balance is silly, two dimensional, and at the moment completely irrelevant to any sort of productive conversation going on in this thread. The T3Ds are getting nerfed and personally I'm quite looking forward to the changes. They should open up a lot more interesting choices in small ship solo and small gang combat as well as fleet ops. You can either deal with that or not, but either way please stop comparing Eve to any sort of real life naval combat.
Chrisfighter wrote:I still think the nerf in powergrid is too high.
A confessor fitted with a 10mn ab needs multiple ACR II rigs, not to mention the uselessness of its "new" utility slots. (because of too little pg to play with).
I can understand the need of some balance tweaks, but the pg nerf is too harsh. A reduction of 10-12 pg would be way better than -18 pg. (for the svipul, too)
Pretty sure making them make significant trade-offs for that 10MN AB is the point. It's a very very powerful thing, and like anything in Eve you shouldn't be able to have your cake and eat it too. At least not without beating the crap out of everyone else trying to take it first.
Relevant Dwarf Fortress comic, possibly NSFW |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
236
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 05:05:59 -
[443] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:I do not dislike destroyers . . .
If you'd care to look at the relationship between the T1 Destroyers and T1 Frigates, T2 Destroyers and Frigates, or even the T2 Destroyers to the T1 Frigates you'll note that the stats tend to favor Damage on the Destroyers and Speed and tank (of one sort or another) on the Frigates. Thus the frigates still have plenty of room to do things the Frigates can't and thus room to out-play and destroy them.
Your entire argument is that "But destroyers are MEANT to be better than Frigates!!!" but that's silly and doesn't follow the stats of anything else in the game, nor does it even suggest that a Destroyer should be able to beat a frigate at its own game, which in this case is speed.
Using real life as an excuse for poor game balance is silly, two dimensional, and at the moment completely irrelevant to any sort of productive conversation going on in this thread. The T3Ds are getting nerfed and personally I'm quite looking forward to the changes. They should open up a lot more interesting choices in small ship solo and small gang combat as well as fleet ops. You can either deal with that or not, but either way please stop comparing Eve to any sort of real life naval combat.
Destroyers are meant to be better than frigates . . . at combat. No one is arguing that a Confessor should out-probe an Anathema or out-mine a Prospect or out-tracking-disrupt a Sentinel. Even an assault frigate probably has better mobility than a Confessor in 2 of the 3 tactical modes. If people would use that superior mobility to their advantage, they would probably die less often, but there seems to be a severe misalignment of expectations. You are demanding trade-offs that tactical destroyer pilots should have to make to be competitive with frigates, but maybe what you SHOULD be doing is wondering what trade-offs a frigate pilot should have to make to be competitive in combat with a larger, more lethal, more resilient, more advanced, more expensive combat ship and it's skilled pilot.
If I were to judge EVE destroyers by real-world criteria, I would find them woefully inadequate since a real destroyer has the potential to 1-volley a carrier or even a small country. I think we are in agreement that that would be a ridiculous scenario in-game (even out-of-game, frankly). But, if YOU would care to look at the relationship between, say, a Talwar and a Rifter or Breacher, I think you may notice that the destroyer is significantly more imposing than its frigate cousins. Maybe that is purely accidental. Maybe I am reading these stats upside down or backwards or something. Or, maybe you're just having trouble adapting to a new paradigm, one where a single 3-foot pony-dwarf armed with just a magical dagger is no longer a match for an 8-foot, 500lbs., 3-headed, 6-armed, fire-breathing, thick-skinned, balls-of-adamantium ogre of instant death.
Speed has counters. Against some of those counters, rapid assault results in the rapid uncontrolled disintegration of your ship. Should that not be the case? |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
390
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 05:11:46 -
[444] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Destroyers are meant to be better than frigates . . . at combat.
I'm sorry but this just isn't the case in Eve at any level. Not at T1, not at T2, and, if you'll look at the incoming balance changes, not with these new T3 Destroyers compared to Tier 2 Frigates. At this point I'm not demanding anything, I'm fairly happy with the current state of the T3 Destroyers compared to the various T3 Frigates, so at this point I'm just pointing at the changes and saying "see, look, that's not how this is working" and you're pointing me at Wikipedia articles for real-life stuff and saying it somehow applies when it doesn't.
Personally I feel we've gone off topic for the original thread and won't be responding to this line of discussion further. You're welcome to think what you like about what Destroyers should or shouldn't be but that doesn't change what they are or what's good for the game. |
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
24
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 11:10:55 -
[445] - Quote
Can the OP change the topic name to something other than tweaks? Tweak refers to a minor change in the way a ship works; this is a nerfhammer/Major change to how this ships currently work in game and the topic's title should reflect this. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
351
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 12:42:05 -
[446] - Quote
They overshot with the initial concept and overbuffed them, hence they are being fixed now.
You may follow dark man Skord's example and biomass, if it hurts you so.
dark man Skord wrote:Personally, I wish the speed of the svipul wouldn't be nerfed too much. My current load out looses almost 500 m/s. I do enjoy going fast. I understand that there is a problem with it when people use 10mm afterburners, but I'm not one of those players and I feel that the speed nerf is unjust. Regardless, it'll still be one of my favorite ships to fly after the nerf, but a whole lot less favorite.
Edit: Actually, mulling over it at home, I have come to the conclusion I'll just stop playing. I don't pay companies to mess with my fun because losers in other part of the game can't cope with the fact they're getting outplayed. I keep forgetting CCP has a history of catering to whiny losers.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
Snuggle Society Snuggle Society.
1642
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 13:07:24 -
[447] - Quote
I'm glad to see the reduction in hardpoints. Now I can fly an arty svipul without thinking "Hm, how much better would this be if I were using 10mn double MSABs with 200mm autocannons?" Hopefully this will put them at destroyer level stats instead of being super fast unscrammable cruisers that fit in small complexes.
New Player Placement Specialist and Scope Project FC.
Contact me for a free consultation.
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1055
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 15:40:08 -
[448] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:Hopefully this will put them at destroyer level stats
get ready for disappointment |
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
174
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 19:16:28 -
[449] - Quote
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:I'm glad to see the reduction in hardpoints. Now I can fly an arty svipul without thinking "Hm, how much better would this be if I were using 10mn double MSABs with 200mm autocannons?" Hopefully this will put them at destroyer level stats instead of being super fast unscrammable cruisers that fit in small complexes. This is interesting question should they fit in small or not? T3 cruisers can't fit in med, so why should T3D fit in small. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
394
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 19:36:15 -
[450] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote:BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie wrote:I'm glad to see the reduction in hardpoints. Now I can fly an arty svipul without thinking "Hm, how much better would this be if I were using 10mn double MSABs with 200mm autocannons?" Hopefully this will put them at destroyer level stats instead of being super fast unscrammable cruisers that fit in small complexes. This is interesting question should they fit in small or not? T3 cruisers can't fit in med, so why should T3D fit in small.
They mentioned this in the original post on the Tactical Destroyers when they introduced the Confessor.
CCP Fozzie wrote:Tactical Destroyers will have access to all acceleration gates that allow passage of Interdictors. This includes FW Small Complexes. If we begin to see a need to restrict their access further in the future (for instance if they start completely dominating FW) we'll adjust their gate access as necessary.
Given this and the recent changes the answer seems to be that they want these to be competitive with, rather than dominant over, the various T2 frigate options available currently and if they can't manage that or they're too good at this specifically then their access will be restricted. |
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
236
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 20:39:23 -
[451] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Personally I feel we've gone off topic for the original thread
Iroquoiss Pilskin wrote:They overshot with the initial concept and overbuffed them, hence they are being fixed now . . . We can all agree that the new T3Ds are indeed very fun, whatever the base stats.
I hope I haven't gone off topic. The point of my discussing the concept of "destroyer" and how it relates to the concept of "frigate" is to get at an underlying bias that I am perceiving in favor of frigates. If you have a certain bias in favor of small, fast, offensive ships then it absolutely makes sense that you would think destroyers in general and the tactical destroyers specifically were overpowering.
Frigates are about freedom of choice. Should I go here or there? Should I specialize in this or that? Should I attack? Who should I attack? When should I attack? How should I attack? Wheeeeeee! If this is your play style, you probably don't want it restricted by some bully in an overpowered ship.
Destroyers are about a lack of choices. If you can't (or won't) avoid being attacked, if you can't run away, if you must perform a certain task in a certain place at a certain time, if you lack the skillpoints to effectively pilot a more generalist ship in dangerous environments, etc. you need a ship that can combat aggression, preferably in more than one mode, because you don't know ahead of time what you will be facing or how you will have the best chance of facing it successfully.
You and I, Cade Windstalker, have the freedom of choice as to which one of these archetypes we emulate. CCP has the unenviable task of balancing the viability of these archetypes against eachother in the EVE ecosystem and with respect to which one makes them more money and is more in line with their design goals.
Frigate > I should attack people. Destroyer > No, you shouldn't. There is a natural fault line between the two archetypes. By calling for destroyers (Tech I, Tech II, OR Tech III) to be nerfed into slow frigates or for frigates to be buffed into fast destroyers is calling to eliminate that fault line and the resulting conflict that naturally occurs between players emulating each of the archetypes.
We CAN'T all agree as to what is fun, because we're different. We play differently. Forcing destroyers to "compete" with frigates is forcing them to BE frigates. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
394
|
Posted - 2015.04.18 21:16:29 -
[452] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:I hope I haven't gone off topic. The point of my discussing the concept of "destroyer" and how it relates to the concept of "frigate" is to get at an underlying bias that I am perceiving in favor of frigates. If you have a certain bias in favor of small, fast, offensive ships then it absolutely makes sense that you would think destroyers in general and the tactical destroyers specifically were overpowering.
Frigates are about freedom of choice. Should I go here or there? Should I specialize in this or that? Should I attack? Who should I attack? When should I attack? How should I attack? Wheeeeeee! If this is your play style, you probably don't want it restricted by some bully in an overpowered ship.
Destroyers are about a lack of choices. If you can't (or won't) avoid being attacked, if you can't run away, if you must perform a certain task in a certain place at a certain time, if you lack the skillpoints to effectively pilot a more generalist ship in dangerous environments, etc. you need a ship that can combat aggression, preferably in more than one mode, because you don't know ahead of time what you will be facing or how you will have the best chance of facing it successfully.
You and I, Cade Windstalker, have the freedom of choice as to which one of these archetypes we emulate. CCP has the unenviable task of balancing the viability of these archetypes against eachother in the EVE ecosystem and with respect to which one makes them more money and is more in line with their design goals.
Frigate > I should attack people. Destroyer > No, you shouldn't. There is a natural fault line between the two archetypes. By calling for destroyers (Tech I, Tech II, OR Tech III) to be nerfed into slow frigates or for frigates to be buffed into fast destroyers is calling to eliminate that fault line and the resulting conflict that naturally occurs between players emulating each of the archetypes.
We CAN'T all agree as to what is fun, because we're different. We play differently. Forcing destroyers to "compete" with frigates is forcing them to BE frigates.
Then perhaps it might help if you thought of the T3 Destroyers as T3 Frigates that simply share enough base stats with Destroyers that they gained the class name. It's basically how they function, with the option to gain a Frigate's speed, a Cruiser's Tank, or something between Frigate and Cruiser damage projection.
In terms of Eve these don't bear particularly much resemblance to other Destroyer hulls whether specialized or not. They're simply called Destroyers because they borrow their base stats, like sig radius, skill requirements, gun layout (roughly), and general base characteristics with a Destroyer. However the Tactical Modes completely alter them away from this Destroyer base model and push them into direct competition with T2 Frigates in almost every role and situation, which means they need to be competitive with them rather than hard-countering them like you seem to be suggesting they should.
As to CCP and their unenviable task "Any decision or change you make to a game will anger some portion of the player-base, including the decision to change nothing." -Game Design truism. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.20 17:02:02 -
[453] - Quote
That's sad.
The Confessor was pretty balanced, and you killed it by nerfing T3 dessies cause you couldn't balance Svipul.... ?
Really sad.
*cries*
Also, seeing Destroyers with only 4 turrets slots is kinda illogic to see, and differs from the main purpose of a class destroyer. (even though 50% damage shoud make it). |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Friends and Feminists
342
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 02:38:21 -
[454] - Quote
After reviewing fittings on the current iteration of changes, I really think the tactical destroyer skill level "heat damage reduction bonus" should be reduced to 2-3% per level to compensate for the reduced amount of turret slots (which entails a longer duration of OH). Alternatively, one high slot could be removed from the svipul and confessor and the PG further reduced by 3-4 PG.
Otherwise, they will still be too OP IMO. |
crimsonshank
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
15
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 11:18:24 -
[455] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Basically in a nut shell I am catering to goons and making the QQ subcriber base happy then balancing the ships by price for a full trifecta of F you to the players actually using these ships in combat.
Well done Fozzie even though I had to state the truth for you well done sir.
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
176
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 13:51:49 -
[456] - Quote
crimsonshank wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Basically in a nut shell I am catering to goons and making the QQ subcriber base happy then balancing the ships by price for a full trifecta of F you to the players actually using these ships in combat. Well done Fozzie even though I had to state the truth for you well done sir.
Cry more.
I flew a 1mn mwd svipul with 280s and realized how insanely OP it was then. Faster than inties, more dps/projection/tank/speed than jag/wolf (which has obsoleted minny AF for the most part). So a nerf was needed.
That isnt even touching on the goofy ass 10mn fits. T3ds have made me not want to fly frigs. They are everywhere, sometimes in their own blob. Not many frigs can kill a t3d solo.
Now thats not to say i havent killed them. I have killed a lot of t3ds.. but it wasnt done in a frigate. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 18:48:52 -
[457] - Quote
My two cents; Undoubtedly t3 dessies **** over frig balance as a whole. Af's have been made completely redundant but basically all frigs have been hit in the face since t3 dessies excell at everything. The worst decision though was to give them superior speed. Given the abundance of slots base speed is much too high even with the slight nerf. Right know t3 desseis are just super frigs which dominate the current meta. On top of that they are cheaper than pirate frigs and dictors even. A slightly larger sig is just not enough to balance absolute superior projection, dps, tank on top of frig speed.
What needs to change: T3 dessies should remain dessies and therefore be SLOW. Slower than af's and certainly slower than dictors. Since they will still be insanely powerful they should also be expensive. CCP should aim for a 70m picetag. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 19:22:25 -
[458] - Quote
dictors are also completely overshadowed by the d3's. they should be better at the kiting and projection thingy. dictors should behave like hacs and t3 dessies should behave like t3 cruiser when it comes to kiting. if things stay that way eve pvp will become much more boring an onedimensional . not good. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 22:20:02 -
[459] - Quote
Glad I waited to invest skill points in t3 destroyers. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
236
|
Posted - 2015.04.21 23:25:18 -
[460] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:I flew a 1mn mwd svipul with 280s and realized how insanely OP it was then . . . thats not to say i havent killed them. I have killed a lot of t3ds.
On the one hand, it is insanely overpowered, but on the other, you're able to kill a lot of them. Would you mind telling us about the even-more-insanely-overpowered ships you used to kill the insanely overpowered tactical destroyers?
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Faster than inties, more dps/projection/tank/speed than jag/wolf
When you were flying around in your 1MN MWD Svipul, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your speed when you were in sharpshooter or defense mode? Did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your dps projection when you were in propulsion or defense mode? And, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your tank when in sharpshooter or propulsion mode? |
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
6
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 01:21:27 -
[461] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:[quote=Stitch Kaneland] When you were flying around in your 1MN MWD Svipul, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your speed when you were in sharpshooter or defense mode? Did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your dps projection when you were in propulsion or defense mode? And, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your tank when in sharpshooter or propulsion mode?
The issue is that it should be faster than an assault frigate in prop mode, tankier than an EAF in defense mode and it should do more damage than a T1 destroyer in Sharpshooter mode. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 01:34:48 -
[462] - Quote
you people have no idea of balance or of what makes a game fun. It's like watching toddlers playing soccer. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 02:01:36 -
[463] - Quote
Diversity and complexity make eve fun. To ensure diversity and complexity ships must have carefully balanced strenghts and weaknesses. T3 destroyers combinefar too many strenghts of other ships classes with almost no weaknesses. Hence the diversity and complexity provided by tiercide (which was great) turns into svipuls online.
Even T3 cruisers -which are comparable in being the jack of all trades- are inferior to their hac and recon cruiser relatives and still CCP had to balance them with astronomical costs and a horrible sp loss mechanic. T3 dessies combine even more advantages in the frig and dessie world than t3's in the world of cruisers but they are dirt cheap. The current nerf doesn't go nearly far enough. T3 dessies need a real weakness to make up for theirs cruiser dps, tank and projection with small weapon application. Since they are dessies these weaknesses should be speed and sig imo. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
177
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 02:04:01 -
[464] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:I flew a 1mn mwd svipul with 280s and realized how insanely OP it was then . . . thats not to say i havent killed them. I have killed a lot of t3ds. On the one hand, it is insanely overpowered, but on the other, you're able to kill a lot of them. Would you mind telling us about the even-more-insanely-overpowered ships you used to kill the insanely overpowered tactical destroyers? Stitch Kaneland wrote:Faster than inties, more dps/projection/tank/speed than jag/wolf Did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your dps projection when you were in propulsion or defense mode? And, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your tank when in sharpshooter or propulsion mode?
Well to start, good job not finishing my own quote, and leaving off the part that had the context to the rest of what you quoted. Real FOX news quality stuff there. Let me help you with that.
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Now thats not to say i havent killed them. I have killed a lot of t3ds.. but it wasnt done in a frigate.
They were killed by BC's or BS, because i could fit the necessary tackle to hold one/neut them/ and then destroy them without sacrificing my entire tank to do that. Which is something frigates and some cruisers cannot afford to do.
The whole reason why t3d's are OP, and to my point, is that it obsoleted an entire class of ship. Especially the svipul compared to minny AF. The jag and wolf are not as fast, not as tanky, and don't do as much dps as the svipul. The ONLY thing they have is cost, and signature, but this is a fairly minor positive.
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:When you were flying around in your 1MN MWD Svipul, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your speed when you were in sharpshooter or defense mode?
Nope. Because I'm actually experienced in flying minmatar (unlike you), I can leave it in prop mode the entire time, project more dps than an arty wolf, move faster than a crow, and retain 20% tracking w/ high base optimal. The base EHP values + MASB still make it comparable or better than a jag/wolf.
Since you are less experienced, i'll let you in on a secret. Titanium sabot (Or Carbonized lead i think) ammo. Gives me 20% bonus to tracking, and no optimal penalty. My svipul had a 27km optimal + another 15km in fall-off. I could easily shoot out 40-50km and project 190dps. I could outrun crows and other inties w/o issue, normally volleying them. I was able to easily chase down garmurs and gun them down by going 3.5km/s cold, and about 5km/s with heat. This is without links.
On top of that speed, i was able to fit a MASB as tank. Very rarely did i use it, because it was not common to even get hit. Which is more tank than the arty wolf, and about the same as arty jag. Using titanium sabot allowed me to do about 190 dps, the wolf using short range, high damage ammo does about 212 dps. To get the same projection as the svipul means it only does about 142dps. Just for reference, with short range ammo, the svipul did 290dps, and could project it well, out to about 25km.
So yes, the Svipul is better in every way that matters when compared to their AF counterparts, they are OP against an entire class of ships, effectively obsoleting them. 2/10 for spin effort though, needs more spin. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 02:12:56 -
[465] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote: On top of that speed, i was able to fit a MASB as tank. Very rarely did i use it, because it was not common to even get hit. Which is more tank than the arty wolf, and about the same as arty jag. Using titanium sabot allowed me to do about 190 dps, the wolf using short range, high damage ammo does about 212 dps. To get the same projection as the svipul means it only does about 142dps. Just for reference, with short range ammo, the svipul did 290dps, and could project it well, out to about 25km.
So yes, the Svipul is better in every way that matters when compared to their AF counterparts, they are OP against an entire class of ships, effectively obsoleting them. 2/10 for spin effort though, needs more spin.
not to mention cap stabilty with point running and insane agility. They obsolete much more than an entire class of ships. Dictors lose their realtive combat usefulness aswell and that's just the tip of the iceberg. Casuals will still jump into frigs but serious pvpers will feel the need to fly the same ship over and over again since everything else is less effective. CCP doesn't want to lose this type of player to a boring meta. Not good. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
389
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 03:11:50 -
[466] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:[ When you were flying around in your 1MN MWD Svipul, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your speed when you were in sharpshooter or defense mode? Did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your dps projection when you were in propulsion or defense mode? And, did you happen to notice a significant reduction in your tank when in sharpshooter or propulsion mode?
Both are a non-issue on the Svipul as you fofofofo in Prop all day long.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 03:35:09 -
[467] - Quote
Tia Lee wrote:To ensure [fun,] ships must have carefully balanced strenghts and weaknesses.
OK, but how do you carefully balance a ship that may be flown by a player with barely enough skillpoints to sit in it -> (anyone in between) -> a player with perfectly maxed skills to fly the fitting? How do you carfully balance a ship that may be flown 1vs1 against the weakest, most vulnerable ship class in the game -> a ship of the same class of exactly equal fitting -> 1 vs 100 against super capitals or anything in between? How do you carefully balance a ship flying to its strengths and in a tactically superior position against a ship that is being "misused" and starting out in a bad position? Can it be as simple as: "Svipuls are beating Wolfs 1v1 in low sec belts and FW complexes, therefore, nerf."?
Tia Lee wrote:T3 destroyers combinefar too many strenghts of other ships classes with almost no weaknesses.
Assault frigates are fast, with excellent tank, and good damage projection. What are THEIR weaknesses? Interceptors are really fast, with small signatures and good resistances (i.e. tank), and with their mobility, they can use range dictation to control how much damage you do to them and how much damage they do to you (i.e. damage projection). What are THEIR weaknesses? Faction frigates combine the various qualities of speed, tank, and damage (and other qualities), but generally speaking, they have two of the three in spades. What are THEIR weaknesses?
What if frigates were the problem? |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
404
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 03:36:35 -
[468] - Quote
NovemberMike wrote:The issue is that it should be faster than an assault frigate in prop mode, tankier than an EAF in defense mode and it should do more damage than a T1 destroyer in Sharpshooter mode.
This is exactly what they shouldn't be, and what this balance pass as changed. They have access to all three, so they shouldn't all be better than a focused T2 ship. That's what T3s being generalists instead of specialists means. |
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
5368
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 04:34:35 -
[469] - Quote
Removed an off topic post.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 04:40:15 -
[470] - Quote
Firstly . . .
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Since you are less experienced [with Minmatar ships], i'll let you in on a secret. Titanium sabot (Or Carbonized lead i think) ammo. Gives me 20% bonus to tracking, and no optimal penalty.
The other one is Depleted Uranium. I knew that off the top of my head (although I did double check to avoid looking like a idiot). It also reduces your DPS significantly compared to Fusion, EMP, and Phased Plasma (and whatever Tech II ammos projectiles use). I'll let YOU in on a little secret: I've been flying Minmatar ships since before your character was born. (Maybe you could read my first post in the thread, if you have some time.)
Secondly . . .
Stitch Kaneland wrote:They were killed by BC's or BS, because i could fit the necessary tackle to hold one/neut them/ and then destroy them without sacrificing my entire tank to do that. Which is something frigates and some cruisers cannot afford to do.
So, it sounds like you have found a counter to the 1vs1 Svipul menace. Do you think there might be more counters out there, just waiting to be found? What if there was one that involved frigates or cruisers or . . . Svipuls? Would you consider those to be overpowering and in need of being nerfed to stop them from encroaching on the "role" of the Svipul?
Thirdly . . .
Stitch Kaneland wrote:My svipul had a 27km optimal + another 15km in fall-off. I could easily shoot out 40-50km and project 190dps. I could outrun crows and other inties w/o issue, normally volleying them. I was able to easily chase down garmurs and gun them down by going 3.5km/s cold, and about 5km/s with heat. This is without links.
On top of that speed, i was able to fit a MASB as tank. Very rarely did i use it, because it was not common to even get hit. Which is more tank than the arty wolf, and about the same as arty jag. Using titanium sabot allowed me to do about 190 dps, the wolf using short range, high damage ammo does about 212 dps. To get the same projection as the svipul means it only does about 142dps. Just for reference, with short range ammo, the svipul did 290dps, and could project it well, out to about 25km.
So yes, the Svipul is better in every way that matters when compared to their AF counterparts, they are OP against an entire class of ships, effectively obsoleting them. 2/10 for spin effort though, needs more spin.
If you're killing (ASSAULT!) frigates at 40km with 190 dps, something is amiss. You're not telling us something, like that you were using a really expensive warp disruptor (if you were pointing them at 40km), or that they were noobs and didn't know to tanks their ship, phone-a-friend, or warp out, or just had ****** skills, or that you had help (i.e. a friend was tackling them). Congratulations on whatever LOLer fit you have discovered that apparently allows you to overpower 1 frigate by going 5km/s (and presumably burning your MWD out in 3 cycles), but I have a feeling it would die to 2 or 3 artillery fitted Thrashers . . . in 1 volley. (I'm not good with such numbers.) Maybe you could post it.
The entirety of your argument still boils down to the fact that, all else being equal, 1 Svipul > 1 Wolf (or Garmur or whatever). Why don't you QQ about how 1 Tengu > 1 Eris while you are at it? My response: Working As Intended. Although, I'm no authority on the intentions of CCP. |
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
179
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 05:35:27 -
[471] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: stuff
I'm not sure where to start with this. Its like you completely glazed over my post and nerd-raged your keyboard.
Quote:The other one is Depleted Uranium. I knew that off the top of my head (although I did double check to avoid looking like a idiot). It also reduces your DPS significantly compared to Fusion, EMP, and Phased Plasma (and whatever Tech II ammos projectiles use). I'll let YOU in on a little secret: I've been flying Minmatar ships since before your character was born. (Maybe you could read my first post in the thread, if you have some time.)
Cool, if you knew the ammo type (and have been so elite with minmatar) then why did you go on a huge tangent about having to switch modes? With titanium sabot or uranium, you get the 20% bonus to tracking, pretty much making the sharpshooter mode close to useless. With 3500m/s speed, my speed is my tank, therefore the tanking mode is not needed. Which means (like i said), the Svipul does more dps than the jag/wolf, is faster than the jag/wolf, and has a better or equivalent tank as the jag/wolf. Not sure how much more obvious i can make that for you? A T3 ship should NOT be better at a specialized ship's role. A DESTROYER should not be FASTER than a frigate. Pretty simple stuff here.
You vastly underestimate what 190dps does to frigates. To put it into perspective, my jaguar does 180dps with 280's with short range/high damage ammo. It has killed plenty of AF, dessies, and other assorted t1 ships. 190 dps to a garmur is death, same with most inties. You also forget that artillery fits rely more on ALPHA than DPS. That 190dps is giving me 1.2k vollies. Tell me, how many vollies before you start bleeding structure between reps?
Quote:[So, it sounds like you have found a counter to the 1vs1 Svipul menace. Do you think there might be more counters out there, just waiting to be found? What if there was one that involved frigates or cruisers or . . . Svipuls? Would you consider those to be overpowering and in need of being nerfed to stop them from encroaching on the "role" of the Svipul?
What are you talking about? The role of the Svipul is to be flexible, not an "Iwin" button against an entire class of ships. The svipul needs a nerf because its better at everything that AF do. Including speed, tank, dps and projection. Why fly an AF when you can fly a Svipul/T3D and do the AF's role better?
Quote:If you're killing (ASSAULT!) frigates at 40km with 190 dps, something is amiss. You're not telling us something, like that you were using a really expensive warp disruptor (if you were pointing them at 40km), or that they were noobs and didn't know to tanks their ship, phone-a-friend, or warp out, or just had ****** skills, or that you had help (i.e. a friend was tackling them). Congratulations on whatever LOLer fit you have discovered that apparently allows you to overpower 1 frigate by going 5km/s (and presumably burning your MWD out in 3 cycles), but I have a feeling it would die to 2 or 3 artillery fitted Thrashers . . . in 1 volley. (I'm not good with such numbers.) Maybe you could post it.
The entirety of your argument still boils down to the fact that, all else being equal, 1 Svipul > 1 Wolf (or Garmur or whatever). Why don't you QQ about how 1 Tengu > 1 Eris while you are at it? My response: Working As Intended. Although, I'm no authority on the intentions of CCP.
No. Just no. I said the Svipul PROJECTS 190dps out to 40km. Didn't say i was pointing and killing people at 40km. What this means is that when that tackle frig starts to run away because he's in armor/structure after 2-3 vollies, i can still pop him between 40-50km. This is what happened with a garmur and a few inties.
Again, you underestimate dps on an ARTILLERY fit ship. Artillery is not about DPS, but alpha. I killed most ships in 3-5 vollies. Inties are not exactly tanky, garmurs aren't that tanky either. Also, 190dps is for when i'm dealing with fast tackle, that needs to die quick at range.
If i have an AF tackled that can't catch me, i can switch to fusion/emp/plasma and then shoot 290dps out to 25km roughly. Well within point range, and easy to overwhelm an AF tank. Hell, even 190dps can do that.
As i go through this last paragraph of yours, its descends into more ignorance that i can't tell if you're trolling, or just mad. 3 MWD cycles till burnt out? T3D has heat reduction bonus. Not to mention, 1-2 pulses of OH MWD is more than enough to catch an unsuspecting garmur/inty, its not like i need to sustain 5km/s speed. Thats why having 40km of projection is great. Even if they try to run, i can still hit them.
Again, in your flash of nerdrage, you completely missed my point. I didn't say a T3D shouldn't be able to kill frigs, or shouldn't be better than frigs. I'm saying that the Svipul/T3D can do everything better than their AF counterparts. Ships that are specialized in their role. For example, the jag is intended for artillery. Why would i ever fly a jag over a svipul? I've already proved the svipul is faster, projects more dps, and is tankier than any arty kite jag could ever be.
Same as the wolf, the wolf has a few niche arty fits. The wolf literally cannot fit a tank when fit with 280's+mwd, its all speed. The svipul does more dps than the wolf, is faster, and can fit a reasonable tank (MASB), while still getting a defensive web.
Tell me again why a destroyer should be FASTER than an AF, and better at that AF's intended role. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
392
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 05:50:34 -
[472] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:With titanium sabot or uranium, you get the 20% bonus to tracking, pretty much making the sharpshooter mode close to useless. With 3500m/s speed, my speed is my tank, therefore the tanking mode is not needed. Which means (like i said), the Svipul does more dps than the jag/wolf, is faster than the jag/wolf, and has a better or equivalent tank as the jag/wolf.
Yes. People would be fine if T3Ds were proficient in only 2 out of those 3 traits, except they exceed and excel in all three at once at the moment. Especially the Svipul, which practically forgoes the SS mode completely, not to mention the double resistance bonus to shield/armour in Def*.
Nothing more needs to be said.
*the Confessor has 7k EHP vs Svipul's 7.4k, with the Confessor being slower and having to rely on SS to project to the same ranges as the matari boat.
What's up with that, CCP?
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 07:06:24 -
[473] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:The role of the Svipul is to be flexible
This is the problem. The Svipul is a destroyer. Generally speaking, the role of a destroyer is counter-assault. 1 interdictor can literally counter the assault of thousands of players by droping an interdiction sphere probe thingamajig, but generally destroyers do this counter-assault by just being alert, precise and destructive. They lock fast, shoot far, hit hard and just blow you up if you approach something they don't want you to approach, such as themselves.
The Wolf is an ASSAULT frigate. The role of a frigate, generally speaking, is fast assault or just mobility + a special functionality.
Many of the scenarios you are describing involve a lightly-tanked fast-assault ship approaching a counter-assault ship and being destroyed. I don't see a problem with the game balance. I see a problem with those individual players' strategy. Attacking a destructive ship with a lightly-tanked ship ends badly. It's not rocket science. If you don't have the numbers, GTFO the grid or they will interdict and destroy you.
Another grouping of scenarios you are describing involves fast assault ships that aren't assaulting. They're trying to have a stand-off engagement at 40km with a ship specialized at shooting things to death quickly. That's not gonna work either.
I understand you don't like that tactical destroyers are ungodly fast in propulsion mode, but how slow are they supposed to be? (Not a rhetorical question.) So slow that a Tornado warps in at 50km and alphas them off the field before they can respond? So slow that something like a Garmur kites them and pecks them to death? So slow that they cannot even defend themselves from the action they are supposed to defend others from? That doesn't make sense. Unfortunately, in order to react and destroy fast, assaulting ships, they have to be fast themselves.
So, it sounds like these frigates are having trouble with Svipuls conducting fast assaults and destroying them. I sympathize. Being assaulted by really fast ships that do a lot of precision damage sucks, but can you think of some natural counters to that? Hint: Ctrl+Click -> Approach -> Activate Modules is not gonna cut it.
Adapt or die. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 11:58:12 -
[474] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: I understand you don't like that tactical destroyers are ungodly fast in propulsion mode, but how slow are they supposed to be? (Not a rhetorical question.) So slow that a Tornado warps in at 50km and alphas them off the field before they can respond? So slow that something like a Garmur kites them and pecks them to death? So slow that they cannot even defend themselves from the action they are supposed to defend others from? That doesn't make sense. Unfortunately, in order to react and destroy fast, assaulting ships, they have to be fast themselves.
So, it sounds like these frigates are having trouble with Svipuls conducting fast assaults and destroying them. I sympathize. Being assaulted by really fast ships that do a lot of precision damage sucks, but can you think of some natural counters to that? Hint: Ctrl+Click -> Approach -> Activate Modules is not gonna cut it.
Adapt or die.
I know it must be hard to comprehend but when some people talk about game balance they don't talk about themselves losing to svipuls or losing their favorite toy. I'm flying confessors and svipuls since they were introduced and i had roughly 200 solo kill with them. I killed small gangs, hacs and stuff i shouldn't be able to kill in a brawling dessie hull. I know from first hand experience that right know and even with the upcoming nerf it's not worth flying anything else. Svipuls should die to bigger hulls, it's their intended weakness. dessies one strenght always has been dps. They could get lowish cruiser dps on squishy hulls except t3 dessies hulls are far from squishy. They got cruiser tanks which in combination with frig speed and their still small sig amd abundance of slots makes them insanely powerful against cruiser and bc hulls on top of their ABSOLUTE TACTICAL SUPERIORITY in the world of frigs. This is highly ironic since well balanced t3 dessies could have had the potential to bring more cruisers into the current frig meta but now there is even less reason flying them.
The obvious solution would be to make t3 dessies dessies again: Kind of slow and kind of squishy. More specialized dictors should be kind of better slightly at kiting (speed, projection) and af's should be faster aswell. Even in speed mode. I just hope CCP realizes that now and not after a year of svipuls online.
|
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 12:12:31 -
[475] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: Assault frigates are fast, with excellent tank, and good damage projection. What are THEIR weaknesses? Interceptors are really fast, with small signatures and good resistances (i.e. tank), and with their mobility, they can use range dictation to control how much damage you do to them and how much damage they do to you (i.e. damage projection). What are THEIR weaknesses? Faction frigates combine the various qualities of speed, tank, and damage (and other qualities), but generally speaking, they have two of the three in spades. What are THEIR weaknesses?
What if frigates were the problem?
The fact that you are asking these questions shows that you have no clue when it comes to balancing
Af's are not fast as you stated but slow. Infact they are by far the slowest frigs -even slower than Attack cruisers in some cases. That is their balancing trait.
Pirate frigs on the other hand have tiny tanks. That is their balancing trait.
Now what's the balancing trait of T3 dessies? See?
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
182
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 14:32:07 -
[476] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:The role of the Svipul is to be flexible This is the problem. The Svipul is a destroyer. Generally speaking, the role of a destroyer is counter-assault. 1 interdictor can literally counter the assault of thousands of players by droping an interdiction sphere probe thingamajig, but generally destroyers do this counter-assault by just being alert, precise and destructive. They lock fast, shoot far, hit hard and just blow you up if you approach something they don't want you to approach, such as themselves. The Wolf is an ASSAULT frigate. The role of a frigate, generally speaking, is fast assault or just mobility + a special functionality. Many of the scenarios you are describing involve a lightly-tanked fast-assault ship approaching a counter-assault ship and being destroyed. I don't see a problem with the game balance. I see a problem with those individual players' strategy. Attacking a destructive ship with a lightly-tanked ship ends badly. It's not rocket science. If you don't have the numbers, GTFO the grid or they will interdict and destroy you. Another grouping of scenarios you are describing involves fast assault ships that aren't assaulting. They're trying to have a stand-off engagement at 40km with a ship specialized at shooting things to death quickly. That's not gonna work either. I understand you don't like that tactical destroyers are ungodly fast in propulsion mode, but how slow are they supposed to be? (Not a rhetorical question.) So slow that a Tornado warps in at 50km and alphas them off the field before they can respond? So slow that something like a Garmur kites them and pecks them to death? So slow that they cannot even defend themselves from the action they are supposed to defend others from? That doesn't make sense. Unfortunately, in order to react and destroy fast, assaulting ships, they have to be fast themselves. So, it sounds like these frigates are having trouble with Svipuls conducting fast assaults and destroying them. I sympathize. Being assaulted by really fast ships that do a lot of precision damage sucks, but can you think of some natural counters to that? Hint: Ctrl+Click -> Approach -> Activate Modules is not gonna cut it. Adapt or die.
Stop reading what you want to read, and actually read what im posting plz.
Its not that a dessie is killing frigs, its that the t3d has made it so there is no reason to fly an AF. More dps, more tank, more SPEED, and similar/better projection as AF. How many times do i need to say this till you understand that the ship is OP? It obsoletes an entire class of ships. T3s are about flexability to be decent at multiple fits, not to be a top tier best of the best (which seems to be what you are implying). It means it needs to have drawbacks or be worse in some way than the more specialized t2 ships.
For example. Compare the loki to the vagabond, or the muninn (depending on subsystem). Loki can get the same dps, similar tank and projection as the vaga. But is not nearly as fast.
Or, if fit with arty and a different subsystem, it has slightly more dps than a muninn, about the same speed, more tank but is very vulnerable to frigates (no drone bay).
Where is the T3d trade-off? Ive proved already that its better in all ways when compared to its SPECIALIZED t2 counterparts. You just seem like your mad cause your favorite toy is getting nerfed.
As to the nado comment, learn to transversal. Or use dscan to see him coming and gtfo. Or.. just suck it up? People get sniped by nados all the time. Doesnt mean the ship is weak.
Also.. lol at fast assault ships. The jag/wolf are the fastest, and the svipul is about 600m/s faster in prop mode than both of them. And only about 400-500m/s slower in defense mode. Not accounting for unscrammable 10mn fits.
|
Erasmus Grant
From Our Cold Dead Hands The Kadeshi
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 15:19:08 -
[477] - Quote
Will this fix the instalocking near instablap Svipuls? I have lost many intys to these kind of svipuls. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
413
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 15:20:57 -
[478] - Quote
The Scan Resolution in and out of Sharpshooter mode remains the same.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
abrasive soap
State Protectorate Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 16:02:19 -
[479] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Tia Lee wrote:To ensure [fun,] ships must have carefully balanced strenghts and weaknesses. OK, but how do you carefully balance a ship that may be flown by a player with barely enough skillpoints to sit in it -> (anyone in between) -> a player with perfectly maxed skills to fly the fitting? How do you carfully balance a ship that may be flown 1vs1 against the weakest, most vulnerable ship class in the game -> a ship of the same class of exactly equal fitting -> 1 vs 100 against super capitals or anything in between? How do you carefully balance a ship flying to its strengths and in a tactically superior position against a ship that is being "misused" and starting out in a bad position? Can it be as simple as: "Svipuls are beating Wolfs 1v1 in low sec belts and FW complexes, therefore, nerf."? Tia Lee wrote:T3 destroyers combinefar too many strenghts of other ships classes with almost no weaknesses. Assault frigates are fast, with excellent tank, and good damage projection. What are THEIR weaknesses? Interceptors are really fast, with small signatures and good resistances (i.e. tank), and with their mobility, they can use range dictation to control how much damage you do to them and how much damage they do to you (i.e. damage projection). What are THEIR weaknesses? Faction frigates combine the various qualities of speed, tank, and damage (and other qualities), but generally speaking, they have two of the three in spades. What are THEIR weaknesses? What if frigates were the problem? AF's are slow Interceptors have low damage and are far from being the anti frig frig they used to be
Faction frigs are op if you have the isk (garmur, worm, etc)
Svipuls are pretty damn overpowered, but the confessor is balanced |
Braccer
The Senate and People of Rome Fortis Et Certus
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 16:48:12 -
[480] - Quote
Glad to see them getting a small nerf. Having a confessor shooting me from 70-80km and kiting anything tanky enough to get close is annoying at best.
Only thing i do find somewhat annoying is that the amarr ship is faster than a minmatar, just seems to go against the nature of the rest of their respective ship tree's. |
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
289
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 17:10:04 -
[481] - Quote
Braccer wrote:Glad to see them getting a small nerf. Having a confessor shooting me from 70-80km and kiting anything tanky enough to get close is annoying at best.
Only thing i do find somewhat annoying is that the amarr ship is faster than a minmatar, just seems to go against the nature of the rest of their respective ship tree's.
FYI I've been doing that to peeps for weeks now with a 1mn mwd fit. This upcoming patch is going to let me upgrade to the better guns, so I'll be able to add 15km optimal to that range, and an extra 50 dps. Sure I'm losing some speed/agility, but sniper fits don't really need it. Maybe just to get off gates a bit faster, we'll see after the patch. |
Kel Kun
The Body Of Christ
7
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 18:16:41 -
[482] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:
Still trying to balance with price huh... thought you learned that lesson..
hahaha! What kind of power you think you have on the nerfs except for crying? |
Kel Kun
The Body Of Christ
7
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 18:19:00 -
[483] - Quote
Braccer wrote:Glad to see them getting a small nerf. Having a confessor shooting me from 70-80km and kiting anything tanky enough to get close is annoying at best.
Only thing i do find somewhat annoying is that the amarr ship is faster than a minmatar, just seems to go against the nature of the rest of their respective ship tree's.
You just have to warp out, confessors can't pin you at that distance, and also their dps is very small...
The crusader is the fastest interceptor and is amarr. The matars have the lowest mass ships, not the fastest ones. Big difference. |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 20:47:13 -
[484] - Quote
Tia Lee wrote:Af's are not fast as you stated but slow. Infact THEY ARE BY FAR THE SLOWEST FRIGS -even slower than Attack cruisers in some cases.
abrasive soap wrote:AF's are slow
Stitch Kaneland wrote:The jag/wolf are the fastest, and the svipul is about 600m/s faster in prop mode than both of them. And only about 400-500m/s slower in defense mode.
So, on the one hand, assault frigates are obsolete because they are 600m/s slower than a propulsion mode Svipul (presumably MWD fitted). On the other hand, Svipul is overpowered even when Wolf and Jaguar are 400-500m/s faster than Svipul in 2 of its 3 tactical modes.
Tactical destroyers are overpowered for being able to catch and destroy the slowest ships in the frigate class (Stealth bombers seem pretty damn slow, but whatever.), but the rest of the frigates, which are presumably faster, are NOT overpowered in any way.
What if frigates were the problem?
Tia Lee wrote:Pirate frigs on the other hand have tiny tanks.
Stitch Kaneland wrote:With 3500m/s speed, my speed is my tank, therefore the tanking mode is not needed.
So, on the one hand, the Svipul's speed tank is overpowered, but on the other hand, a pirate frigate's speed tank, which is as fast or faster than a Svipul, is no problem.
I'll ask again: What if frigates were the problem? |
Orob Ninebands
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 20:48:37 -
[485] - Quote
What a bunch of whiners! Most ships can fit an AB one size larger, why shouldn't a T3D?
I've gotten my but kicked by T3Ds plenty, but rather than cry about it, I learned to fly them myself. Come up with a counter folks.
I'm not opposed to making them cost a bit more to reflect their capability, but ffs, do we have to nerf every good thing just because people can't adapt?
|
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 21:21:37 -
[486] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:
So, on the one hand, the Svipul's speed tank is overpowered, but on the other hand, a pirate frigate's speed tank, which is as fast or faster than a Svipul, is no problem.
I'll ask again: What if frigates were the problem?
I sincerely hope that you are either trolling or that you are just fighting tooth and nail to farm kills until everybody is sick of the t3d meta and quits eve. Whatever it may be, i won't entangle myself in a discussion with you since you are obviously either unwlling or unable to respond rationally.
Anyway, the level of idiocy in this thread has reached a new high. I'm not used to this anymore
Basically it comes down to this: Some people will just be happy with an op ship aslong as they can kill the occasional noob who doesn't fly one. Some people on the other hand like balance and variety and interesting gameplay. The latter doesn't like t3 dessies in their current form. They make EVE a worse game. It's as simple as that.
|
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 21:25:34 -
[487] - Quote
Orob Ninebands wrote:What a bunch of whiners! Most ships can fit an AB one size larger, why shouldn't a T3D?
I've gotten my but kicked by T3Ds plenty, but rather than cry about it, I learned to fly them myself. Come up with a counter folks.
I'm not opposed to making them cost a bit more to reflect their capability, but ffs, do we have to nerf every good thing just because people can't adapt?
lmao |
Ivarr Kerensky
Kerensky Tactical Group
57
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 22:31:18 -
[488] - Quote
Orob Ninebands wrote:What a bunch of whiners! Most ships can fit an AB one size larger, why shouldn't a T3D?
I've gotten my but kicked by T3Ds plenty, but rather than cry about it, I learned to fly them myself. Come up with a counter folks.
I'm not opposed to making them cost a bit more to reflect their capability, but ffs, do we have to nerf every good thing just because people can't adapt?
So your idea of adapting is to fly them yourself, and now that you do you don't want them changed because :reasons:.
Excellence is an attitude.
|
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.04.22 22:50:35 -
[489] - Quote
Ivarr Kerensky wrote:Orob Ninebands wrote:What a bunch of whiners! Most ships can fit an AB one size larger, why shouldn't a T3D?
I've gotten my but kicked by T3Ds plenty, but rather than cry about it, I learned to fly them myself. Come up with a counter folks.
I'm not opposed to making them cost a bit more to reflect their capability, but ffs, do we have to nerf every good thing just because people can't adapt?
So your idea of adapting is to fly them yourself, and now that you do you don't want them changed because :reasons:.
stop it! he learned to fly them HIMSELF!11 sneaky, adaptable pvper he is. IMHO all the folks who say that t3 dessies are op and create a boring meta are just not smart enough to fly them themselves!
Adapt or die!!!11 :D
|
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 00:17:26 -
[490] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Now thats not to say i havent killed them. I have killed a lot of t3ds.. but it wasnt done in a frigate. . . . They were killed by BC's or BS, because i could fit the necessary tackle to hold one/neut them/ and then destroy them without sacrificing my entire tank to do that. Which is something frigates and some cruisers cannot afford to do.
So you see, Ivar Kerensky and Tia lee, you don't have to use a Tech III destroyer to kill a Tech III destroyer. Don't take it from me. Take it from a Minmatar ship expert. He has a lot of experience. Battleships, battlecruisers, and some cruisers can counter the Tech III destroyers 1 vs 1. And, as a non-expert, I'll just throw another ship class out there as food for thought: Electronic Attack Frigates. Put one next to your Wolf while you're attacking (or being attacked by) a Svipul and, maybe it can do something to help you. |
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
182
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 04:51:15 -
[491] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote: So, on the one hand, assault frigates are obsolete because they are 600m/s slower than a propulsion mode Svipul (presumably MWD fitted). On the other hand, Svipul is overpowered even when Wolf and Jaguar are 400-500m/s faster than Svipul in 2 of its 3 tactical modes.
I was really debating on commenting back, i was debating between if you lack the skills of reading comprehension, or if you're just trolling. But here goes, you'll probably just ignore everything but the stuff you want to cherry pick to suit your argument.
The svipul when fit with arty and mwd + prop mode, NEVER needs to leave that mode. Therefore, yes it is faster than the 2 fastest AF in the game. It does more or almost equal dps with the lowest damage ammo, than the wolf/jag do with high damage ammo. It has better projection than the jag/wolf, is faster, and has an equivalent tank doing the EXACT same role as the t2 specialized AF.
And if you want to compare on equal footing. The Svipul outclasses the Sabre easily in the same situation. In fact, it does it far better because it can fit arty + tank w/o gimping the fit in fitting mods. Plus it can fit TE's since it has 4 lows to play with, compared to the 2 on the sabre.
Since the jag/wolf are the fastest AF, how bout we compare the Svipul to the other AF.
Hawk w/ MWD = 2205 m/s Harpy w/ MWD = 2199 m/s Retribution w/ MWD = 2297 m/s Vengeance w/ MWD = 2265 m/s Enyo w/ MWD = 2380 m/s Ishkur w/ MWD = 2319 m/s Jaguar w/ MWD = 2688 m/s Wolf w/ MWD = 2553 m/s
Svipul in defense mode w/ MWD = 2041m/s (my fit) and then in prop mode = `3500 m/s
200-600 m/s difference is not much, especially when you can flip a switch and go 3500 m/s and catch every AF in game with no problem. Or, even in d-mode, can slingshot a harpy, hawk, ret, venge while being tanky and getting a SIG REDUCTION bonus (AF territory again).
Comparing the minny AF to the svipul again. The svipul can go faster than both in prop mode, sport a better tank in prop mode, and project more dps farther than both of them in prop mode. Meanwhile, not sacrificing tracking. Not even my nano jag can touch the Svipul's speed, and its the fastest AF in the game.
Why would you fly a Jaguar or Wolf over a Svipul? Also, what kind of fit you would you make in a solo frigate to fight a Svipul or confessor? And don't give me that BS about a dessie killing frigs. All manner of t1 dessies and dictors die to frigs daily, why should T3D be any different? T3 is not an "Iwin" button that you so desperately want it to be.
Quote:Tactical destroyers are overpowered for being able to catch and destroy the slowest ships in the frigate class (Stealth bombers seem pretty damn slow, but whatever.), but the rest of the frigates, which are presumably faster, are NOT overpowered in any way.
Frigates are supposed to be fast. What world do you live in where things with MORE mass are faster and more agile than things with less mass?
Quote:What if frigates were the problem?
So if they were, you think the best way to handle it is to release a ship that destroys solo pvp play in frigates, and also obsoletes an entire class of ships? You see nothing wrong with T3D? I think you're delusional, or trying to pretend like they weren't OP to try and avoid the nerfbat that is so desperately needed. Thanksfully you're not in control, and CCP recognized an issue and is tweaking their stats.
Quote:So, on the one hand, the Svipul's speed tank is overpowered, but on the other hand, a pirate frigate's speed tank, which is as fast or faster than a Svipul, is no problem.
Svipul = Destroyer Pirate Frigate = Frigate
Frigates are supposed to be fast with small tanks and small sigs (they tackle). Destroyers are supposed to be slower to make up for the increased firepower and slightly higher EHP levels. The T3D does not suffer from any of these setbacks.
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
182
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 05:01:46 -
[492] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Now thats not to say i havent killed them. I have killed a lot of t3ds.. but it wasnt done in a frigate. . . . They were killed by BC's or BS, because i could fit the necessary tackle to hold one/neut them/ and then destroy them without sacrificing my entire tank to do that. Which is something frigates and some cruisers cannot afford to do. So you see, Ivar Kerensky and Tia lee, you don't have to use a Tech III destroyer to kill a Tech III destroyer. Don't take it from me. Take it from a Minmatar ship expert. He has a lot of experience. Battleships, battlecruisers, and some cruisers can counter the Tech III destroyers 1 vs 1. And, as a non-expert, I'll just throw another ship class out there as food for thought: Electronic Attack Frigates. Put one next to your Wolf while you're attacking (or being attacked by) a Svipul and, maybe it can do something to help you.
Yes, cause lets just ignore an entire playstyle (solo)
"Oh, this SINGLE ship is so easy to counter with a hyena, wolf, and kitsune. Its not OP at all!" Delusional is what you are. You are just like the guy that said the best counter to a T3D, is another T3D. Hmm.. why does that sound familiar? Oh right, Ishtars+1 fleets. Because Ishtars were not OP either right?
Looking at your KB, i see you normally fly small gang/blob. So its expected to see this attitude. Try fighting a T3D solo in a frigate, tell me how that goes.
And like i mentioned earlier, don't use the lame excuse of dessies kill frigs. Its been proven many times over that a competent frig pilot can kill dessies/dictors in most solo cases due to their slower speeds, or lack of range control/webs.
AC and arty thrashers can get killed by a condor by out ranging them, or getting into a tight orbit to outtrack its guns for example. Why can't the jag outrun a svipul at least? |
Eter Andromad
Virtual Democracy C0VEN
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 08:36:41 -
[493] - Quote
I am sorry for my self for skilling another **** that will be unusefull like already ishart |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 09:46:09 -
[494] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Its been proven many times over that a competent frig pilot can kill dessies/dictors in most solo cases due to their slower speeds, or lack of range control/webs.
AC and arty thrashers can get killed by a condor by out ranging them, or getting into a tight orbit to outtrack its guns for example.
What if frigates were the problem? You've been conditioned to a meta where speed is a perfect defense.
Why should a larger ship be faster and more agile than a smaller one? It's probably the same reason that a Wolf or a Jaguar are so much better than a Rifter. ::technology:: Higher octane fuel. Better space traction. Are we bringing reality into this?! Don't do it!
On the one hand, you readily accept that a projectile turret fitted to a Wolf is qualitatively better than that exact same projectile turret fitted to a Rifter (or an Erebus), yet reject the notion that a Svipul's engines are qualitatively better than a Wolf's. What's the difference?
By the way:
Svipul + Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive = 1721.88 m/s Svipul (propulsion mode) + Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive = 2869.79 m/s Rifter + Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive = 3076.70 m/s
gg |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
419
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 10:28:59 -
[495] - Quote
The new Svipul 1MN MWD is:
293 m/s base speed * (1 + (6.25 MWD boost * (1,500,000 thrust / (1,500,00 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1,666 / 2499 OH m/s.
In Propulsion mode: 2766 / 4149 OH m/s.
You do realise T3Ds have a bonus to overheating?
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
183
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 12:38:33 -
[496] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:Its been proven many times over that a competent frig pilot can kill dessies/dictors in most solo cases due to their slower speeds, or lack of range control/webs.
AC and arty thrashers can get killed by a condor by out ranging them, or getting into a tight orbit to outtrack its guns for example. What if frigates were the problem? You've been conditioned to a meta where speed is a perfect defense. Why should a larger ship be faster and more agile than a smaller one? It's probably the same reason that a Wolf or a Jaguar are so much better than a Rifter. ::technology:: Higher octane fuel. Better space traction. Are we bringing reality into this?! Don't do it! On the one hand, you readily accept that a projectile turret fitted to a Wolf is qualitatively better than that exact same projectile turret fitted to a Rifter (or an Erebus), yet reject the notion that a Svipul's engines are qualitatively better than a Wolf's. What's the difference? By the way: Svipul + Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive = 1721.88 m/s Svipul (propulsion mode) + Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive = 2869.79 m/s Rifter + Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive = 3076.70 m/s gg
Reading comprehension fails again!
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Svipul in defense mode w/ MWD = 2041m/s (my fit) and then in prop mode = `3500 m/s
That was the last time i flew my Svipul. Going by numbers in game since EFT doesn't show the ship in prop mode.
Since you love to not read things. The rifter is FASTER than the jaguar and wolf. The jaguar is 300k kg heavier than a rifter. The jag and wolf are better than the rifter because they're focused in a role and because the wolf has an extra turret and a double damage bonus. The rifter is t1 and has more variety in what it theoretically could do (can't do much, rifters are pretty terrible).
The rifter also has better cap than the jag/wolf with a MWD! This is your problem, you immediately assume that if something is t2 or t3, it should automatically be better than other ships. Thats not how EVE works cupcake. Every ship has its own role/niche, when you introduce broken ships like T3D's (Svipul more than fessor), you make the ships and their roles pretty much useless.
Jag/wolf were slowed down and have a worse cap pool to compensate for their high resists, low sig, and better dps. Where is the T3D's weakness? How can another frigate (or dessie) actually attack a T3D without being face-rolled? |
Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 13:28:16 -
[497] - Quote
Stitch Kaneland wrote:The jag and wolf are better than the rifter because they're focused in a role and because the wolf has an extra turret and a double damage bonus.
It also has more slots, longer targeting range, way more base HP, stronger sensor strength, smaller signature radius, more scan resolution, a larger cargohold (lol) etc., etc., etc. It's pretty much better in every way than a Rifter.
Stitch Kaneland wrote:you immediately assume that if something is t2 or t3, it should automatically be better than other ships. Thats not how EVE works cupcake.
Please stop. |
Tia Lee
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 13:44:59 -
[498] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:The jag and wolf are better than the rifter because they're focused in a role and because the wolf has an extra turret and a double damage bonus. It also has more slots, longer targeting range, way more base HP, stronger sensor strength, smaller signature radius, more scan resolution, a larger cargohold (lol) etc., etc., etc. It's pretty much better in every way than a Rifter. Stitch Kaneland wrote:you immediately assume that if something is t2 or t3, it should automatically be better than other ships. Thats not how EVE works cupcake. Please stop.
are you seriously still posting? You have proven that you are absolutely cluesless when it comes to game balance whatsoever. You know, the thingy t3d's and atm especially the svipul are messing with. Your whole notion that t3 should outclass t2 in all areas because they have "better technology" (LOL) is so incredibly stupid that one doesn't even know where to start. How can you not comprhend what has been written in this thread?! Anyway: Stop posting you ridiculous statements on how t3d's are fine because they can be killed by bs's and gangs with e-war support according to your "minmatar ship expert" (LOL). Statements like these may be be funny when you first read them but they also make my brain hurt. Like srsly |
Captain Highfield
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 14:02:10 -
[499] - Quote
I don't if I'm the first to say this; this Re-balancing of Tactical Destroyer(s) of two, isn't good...
Could you(CCP) wait until all the Races in the game have one?
I am thinking that doing so soon is because of those players that have been victims of these ship have complained to you enough...
To them, I say; either do your best to avoid these ships or stop and skill train yourself to fly one.
Doing this Re-balancing now isn't going to make players want to train or continue training skills for these ships as the ships will lose their "tactical" presence.
I do say, these ships are bring some excitement to the game as they actually are feared; let's keep it that way... Well, change the game to where more ships are that way; feared.
Should this still go through to the patch release, you should rename them "Tactical Frigates" because that is what they will be, losing two turrets. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
183
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 14:25:27 -
[500] - Quote
Mayhaw Morgan wrote:Stitch Kaneland wrote:The jag and wolf are better than the rifter because they're focused in a role and because the wolf has an extra turret and a double damage bonus. It also has more slots, longer targeting range, way more base HP, stronger sensor strength, smaller signature radius, more scan resolution, a larger cargohold (lol) etc., etc., etc. It's pretty much better in every way than a Rifter. Stitch Kaneland wrote:you immediately assume that if something is t2 or t3, it should automatically be better than other ships. Thats not how EVE works cupcake. Please stop.
The derp is strong with this one. Grasping at straws much?
"Its pretty much better than everything" Wow. You are really good at not reading. So its pretty much better at everything, EXCEPT the wolf/jag are-áslower and have noticably worse cap. Thats a significant difference you cant just toss aside because "more cargohold, SS and targeting range ". T3d do not have this trade-off. They also perform the role of the jag/wolf better, meaning there is no reason to use them over a svipul. Unless you are a poor.
I wont stop till you pull your head out of your ass. Your toy is getting a needed nerf. Get over it. |
|
Erasmus Grant
From Our Cold Dead Hands The Kadeshi
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 15:36:43 -
[501] - Quote
GG CCP way to get me back to PvEing. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 19:56:33 -
[502] - Quote
Why people are arguing on how T3 Dessies should or shouldn't be better than AFs, while T3 Cruisers can compete with BSs ??
I don't get it. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
424
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 20:15:05 -
[503] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Why people are arguing on how T3 Dessies should or shouldn't be better than AFs, while T3 Cruisers can compete with BSs ??
I don't get it.
Because those are broken too with T2 resist profiles.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
410
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 20:16:02 -
[504] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Why people are arguing on how T3 Dessies should or shouldn't be better than AFs, while T3 Cruisers can compete with BSs ??
I don't get it.
They're not, almost everyone agrees that the T3 Cruisers need a serious working over with the nerf-bat. |
Stitch Kaneland
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
184
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 20:18:51 -
[505] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Why people are arguing on how T3 Dessies should or shouldn't be better than AFs, while T3 Cruisers can compete with BSs ??
I don't get it.
Um.. because its a dev thread discussing changes to t3d? Seriously.. what kind of question is that? I just felt a few of my brain cells commit suicide by reading that.
Im sure there will be a threadnaught when t3 cruisers go under the knife. I'll be sure to say "Why all this arguing about T3 cruisers, when T3D are ruining frigate pvp and running around in cruiser sized tanks in a dessy?".
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 20:39:28 -
[506] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:They're not, almost everyone agrees that the T3 Cruisers need a serious working over with the nerf-bat.
T3 Cruisers can't compete with BSs ? Really ? That's not what i can witness in game actually.
Stitch Kaneland wrote:Um.. because its a dev thread discussing changes to t3d? Seriously.. what kind of question is that? I just felt a few of my brain cells commit suicide by reading that.
Im sure there will be a threadnaught when t3 cruisers go under the knife. I'll be sure to say "Why all this arguing about T3 cruisers, when T3D are ruining frigate pvp and running around in cruiser sized tanks in a dessy?".
You should really think about getting laid, you hold so much hatred in yourself, it saddens me.
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Because those are broken too with T2 resist profiles.
Yes, that was my point actually. Nobody cries about how T3 Cruisers can destroy T2 Dessies, but they do for AFs. I mean, i see no pb about that, they are a superior class after all, aren't they ? Dessies are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their unique role, right ? So a T3 Dessy shouldn't have any problem at all to reck an AF i guess. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
411
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 21:12:06 -
[507] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:They're not, almost everyone agrees that the T3 Cruisers need a serious working over with the nerf-bat. T3 Cruisers can't compete with BSs ? Really ? That's not what i can witness in game actually.
That's not what I said (or at least certainly not what I meant)
No one is saying that the current state of T3 Cruisers is okay, especially not CCP. (from this old dev blog on ship rebalancing)
This thread is about T3 Destroyers, not T3 Cruisers, so lets fix these before they stick around too much longer. The current state of T3 Cruisers is both healthier and more stable than the state of T3 Destroyers so it'll keep for a while longer still. They are going to get their turn in Fozzie and Rise's rebalance-o-matic though. (or get taken out behind the wood shed with the nerf bat, whichever analogy you prefer)
Cleanse Serce wrote: Yes, that was my point actually. Nobody cries about how T3 Cruisers can destroy T2 Dessies, but they do for AFs. I mean, i see no pb about that, they are a superior class after all, aren't they ? Dessies are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their unique role, right ? So a T3 Dessy shouldn't have any problem at all to reck an AF i guess.
Most T1 Cruisers can deal with a T2 Destroyer, so T2 Destroyer pilots don't fight Cruisers unless they know they can win.
A T2 Destroyer can give an AF a run for its money if flown well but the reverse is equally true. Neither class overwhelms the other and Destroyers aren't particularly more powerful than Frigates in general, they just have different strengths and weaknesses. These Tactical Destroyers were just flat better in almost every way than an AF (or any other T2 Frigate).
Also the more appropriate comparison would be T3 Cruisers wrecking a T2 Cruiser, which is exactly what happens right now and people do have complaints about it... |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 21:20:03 -
[508] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:That's not what I said (or at least certainly not what I meant) No one is saying that the current state of T3 Cruisers is okay, especially not CCP. (from this old dev blog on ship rebalancing) This thread is about T3 Destroyers, not T3 Cruisers, so lets fix these before they stick around too much longer. The current state of T3 Cruisers is both healthier and more stable than the state of T3 Destroyers so it'll keep for a while longer still. They are going to get their turn in Fozzie and Rise's rebalance-o-matic though. (or get taken out behind the wood shed with the nerf bat, whichever analogy you prefer)
Oh, ok, i apologize for misunderstanding your statement. :x
I agree.
I was just pointing that people are arguing about a T3 Dessies being OP compared to their lower class while T3 Cruisers can easily compete with their upper class.
I do know though that ship classes shouldn't be compared like i'm doin so there.
One should just not forget that Destroyers are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their role, that's what they were invented for. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
411
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 21:54:04 -
[509] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Oh, ok, i apologize for misunderstanding your statement. :x
I agree.
I was just pointing that people are arguing about a T3 Dessies being OP compared to their lower class while T3 Cruisers can easily compete with their upper class.
I do know though that ship classes shouldn't be compared like i'm doin so there.
One should just not forget that Destroyers are MEANT to destroy frigates, that's their role, that's what they were invented for.
I don't think anyone is forgetting that, it's just not the topic of this thread. Until CCP finds a way to clone devs they'll continue to have limited development bandwidth so they have to fix one thing at a time. These Tactical Destroyers haven't settled yet so it's best to fix them early when they're not so much of a problem. T3 Cruisers on the other hand have a fairly stable state, even if they are out-classing HACs rather badly.
Cleanse Serce wrote:I don't know what appropriate comparison should be actually.
But i'm not agree with this, Destroyers have been invented to destroy frigs, and they should excell doin so, especially T3 Dessies vs AFs.
In Eve this has never been the case. T1 Destroyers trade the speed and sig-tank ability of a Frigate for more firepower and projection. T2 Destoryers make a similar trade-off but have increased surviveability because of their T2 resists and fittings.
They've never been flat better than comparable frigates, they just have different strengths and weaknesses. The only exception was, for a long time, the Sabre but even then it was best at catching and killing Interceptors and a good AF could still go toe to toe with it. This went away with the Interdictor rebalance though.
Cleanse Serce wrote:Also, balancing is a very difficult thing to do, and must be a tough job. I'm impressed by the CCP guys workin on that, really.
It depends on so many variables, skills (book), skills (player), solo, fleet, small gang, fitting, links, boosters, implants, etc, etc...
I'm sad that this rebalance comes with the statement that advanced pilots (player with piloting skills) are pushing the limit so far of those ships that they HAVE TO be nerfed.
I concider myself as a relatively normal pilote, not bad, not good, and i never felt OP in a Confessor for which i felt in love, and which improved my piloting skills.
(sry for bad english, it's getting late, and i'm tired :p)
Powerful ships are a lot of fun, but in this case the ship was flat better in a direct numbers comparison than the ships it fights against and that's both counter to CCP's philosophy for T3 ships and bad for gameplay. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.23 23:48:38 -
[510] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Powerful ships are a lot of fun, but in this case the ship was flat better in a direct numbers comparison than the ships it fights against and that's both counter to CCP's philosophy for T3 ships and bad for gameplay.
I would tell for the Svipul, sure. I found the Confessor balanced though.
But i might not be quite objective there. |
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
414
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 02:07:04 -
[511] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote:Powerful ships are a lot of fun, but in this case the ship was flat better in a direct numbers comparison than the ships it fights against and that's both counter to CCP's philosophy for T3 ships and bad for gameplay. I would tell for the Svipul, sure. I found the Confessor balanced though. But i might not be quite objective there.
Svipul was better than the Confessor, but the Confessor was still better than basically everything else. |
Maradusa Macarthy
Hedion University Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 04:54:21 -
[512] - Quote
So glad I ignored them and continue training for the Loki. Well done CCP nerf nerf nerf them T3D's to the ground until they're completely worthless. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 05:52:04 -
[513] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:While I always like nerfs to the barbarian rust-buckets, my Confessor most certainly doesn't need one.
Maybe most of you do not know this but laser turrets and armor reps are taxing very heavy on your capacitor and I don't see a reason to nerf a boat that is doing it's job correctly.
Edit:
Maybe this comes as total news for you but my Confessor goes ~2400m/s (rounded) in propulsion mode and the super-OMG-BBQ-WTF-pwn-mobile ab fit but my Imperial Navy Slicer goes >3200m/s with the mobility of an angel-boat.
Is my Imperial Navy Slicer op?
No, she is not.
The Confessor in propulsion mode prior to the nerf had the agility of a nano-titan, so you would rely on long-range damage projection.
Still at 2400m/s you will get kited by regular tech one frigates like there is no tomorrow and in the same market catergory you will already have counters for here for less than 10m isk, if at all that much.
A three day old noob with brains can kill one. That some of the kiddy plexers in lowsec started crying is not my concern - they choose to life in very dangerous space and can honestly not expect that someone has the intention to remove them from said plex.
In wormhole space this is an even more dangerous environment where you will choose all advantages you can muster to deal with all situation you may come across.
The thing with Tactical Destroyer is that they could deal with those situation even when you chose to earny some isk by shooting nasty NPCs and someone would like to get a drop on you - business as usual on a wormhole office Monday.
Your d-scan says, coast is clear up to 14.3AU, okay go kill some Sleepers and collect blue stuff later.
Reports of a straying Astero come in and you warp to your static or other connections of the day and investigate. Yes early response and rapid launch.
My first Confessor succumed to Gila drones - the End.
Everything is fine, I bought another one.
Now you make my Confessor slower and the perfect capacitor usage : recharge ratio goes down the drain with it, are you nuts??
Now the minmatar one is a little too strong, I mean 100.000ehp destroyers are what I would call out of whack but my Confessor with 5697ehp most certainly wasn't.
And no, I will not give you counters here on the forums, figure them out on your own.
Leave my Confessor as she is and maybe increase the price a bit, she is so far from op I don't even know if you have ever flown one.
The reason she is popular is because it's an Amarr tech 3 boat done right at first try, do not take it away.
Agreed, there is nothing wrong with the confessor. It was a great introduction to a brand new class of ships and that finally gave Amarr a worthy small scale solo PVP ship. There was no talk at all about nerfing the T3D's until that Svipul came out and yes it was way overpowered. Just because the Confessor is also a T3D, CCP decided to nerf it as well assuming it was also overpowered which it wasn't. All the confessor needed was an increase in price to around 70 mill isk and it'd have it's own perfect niche right between AF and HAC's. Even in Prop mode using an 1mn AB the confessor can only go around 1500 m/s (and that is with using links), so now in Prop mode i'd be lucky to hit 1300 m/s in my confessor. I see many kiting deaths on the horizon in my confessor now, great job CCP you really know how to wreck a good thing. Btw I had to use ACR's in all 3 rig slots to fit the 10mn Ab, so what's with this extreme fitting room you were referring too huh??
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 09:49:25 -
[514] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Svipul was better than the Confessor, but the Confessor was still better than basically everything else.
Confessor rely way more than the Svipul on the mode switch mechanic. That's what made it balanced in my opinion.
If CCP is really and only pushing this mecanic, not just nerf-bat T3 Dessies randomly here and there like they did for Ishtars, it's all good i guess. Time will tell. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
644
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 11:15:57 -
[515] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Svipul was better than the Confessor, but the Confessor was still better than basically everything else.
Congratulations, you finally figured out the bullet point.
Now please share with the class at what the Confessor is better at and you believe is too strong to be allowed to undock?
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
426
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 11:45:26 -
[516] - Quote
I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.
CCPlease
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
6
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:05:15 -
[517] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.
CCPlease It makes a certain amount of sense. The Svipul will either be shield or armor tanked, so one of the bonuses is going to be much less useful depending on the actual loadout of the Svipul. If the Svipul is still tankier than a Confessor after they've been fitted then I'd see a problem. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
415
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 19:31:35 -
[518] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Confessor rely way more than the Svipul on the mode switch mechanic. That's what made it balanced in my opinion.
If CCP is really and only pushing this mecanic, not just nerf-bat T3 Dessies randomly here and there like they did for Ishtars, it's all good i guess. Time will tell.
Sure, to get the most out of the hull, but you could still take a Confessor, throw it into Propulsion Mode, and be faster, tankier, and have more DPS than most of the things you'd be fighting.
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I'm still trying to get the answer why the Svipul has 7.4k EHP vs. Confessor's 7k thanks to its double armour+shield resists bonus, while also being 15% faster and not having to rely on Sharpshooter mode to project damage.
CCPlease
I'm going to take a guess and say that it's because the Sig bonus in Defense mode is extremely strong at mitigating incoming damage, especially on a MWD fit. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
428
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 20:02:04 -
[519] - Quote
A dual MASB Svipul tanks just as much as a dual SAR Confessor with the latter having 400 less EHP, and a MSE Svipul has the same EHP as a 400mm Confessor.
Armour resist part of the double bonus has to go - can't have 15% more speed, same/better tank, equal cap regen and better ~applied~ projection as the AMARR VICTOR.
:CCP:
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
19
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 20:11:56 -
[520] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Armour resist part of the double bonus has to go - can't have 15% more speed, same/better tank, equal cap regen and better ~applied~ projection at the same time vs. the AMARR VICTOR.
It's good to see specific bonuses for each T3 Dessy. Instead of erasing double bonus, it would've been smart to set htem at 22.2% or 16% instead of 33%. |
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
428
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 20:12:47 -
[521] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Armour resist part of the double bonus has to go - can't have 15% more speed, same/better tank, equal cap regen and better ~applied~ projection at the same time vs. the AMARR VICTOR. It's good to see specific bonuses for each T3 Dessy. Instead of erasing double bonus, it would've been smart to set htem at 22.2% or 16% instead of 33%.
Also a good option, tone down the Armour resist part of that double bonus.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 20:55:45 -
[522] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Also a good option, tone down the Armour resist part of that double bonus. Confessor is actually how the T3D concept should be: All three Modes are employed, vs. people nanugafing in Prop all day long on the Svipul because of the innate Optimal range hull bonus.
Double bonuses are cancer - see Ishtar with its 6 bonuses vs 4 on other HACs, or 3 on the Zealot, because :cap:.
I really like the fact that it reflects the specification of each race tanking, like the Gallente T3 Dessy will tank hull.. Minmatar has always been capable of double tank, so why lower armor and not shield ? What will we do when Jackdaw comes out ? Because Caldari are masters in shield-tanking we should lower Svipul's shield bonuses as well ? No, lower them both at same ratio. Best choice. ;)
22.2% for shield/tank resists would've been better than this overall wipe of the original idea of T3 Dessies. And the raise of the price as well of course.
But hey, we can talk as long as we want, it's done anyway. Just wait and see how it goes with the changes announced. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
435
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 21:03:05 -
[523] - Quote
I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 21:30:27 -
[524] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top. Any more double bonuses being introduced into the game and I'm going to lose complete faith in CCP, primarily as a pilot of Amarr spaceships, which most of the time require an Energy Turret Activation reduction bonus merely to function, which DOES count towards the 2 total bonuses on Tech 1 ships and 4 on Tech 2. See the PvP damage link in my signature - Light blue is Drone damage, Orange - Energy weapons, Yellow - Projectiles, Dark blue - Hybrids.
I'm an Amarr pilot as well, i do know how Eve plyaers in general put low interest in Laser gunnery at the moment. I thought the last cruiser rebalance (rail and ishtar nerfs) would've raised the interest, which it did in the region i live (more Abso fleets roaming for instance), but i guess that's a bit too soon to tell.
I don't know what should be done to raise the overall interest in Laser gunnery, but it's clearly lacking something. Your point on capacitor consomption bonuses is true and it kinda handicaps armar hull in general cause their counter part has other bonuses more 'usefull'. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
437
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 21:36:33 -
[525] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote: I don't know what should be done to raise the overall interest in Laser gunnery, but it's clearly lacking something. Your point on capacitor consomption bonuses is true and it kinda handicaps armar hull in general cause their counter part has other bonuses more 'usefull'.
Combining Energy Turret Activation with some other existing hull bonus, like Damage, to create a double bonus would be the best thing ever for Amarr.
Hmm, maybe I should start a thread on that.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
6
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 22:39:18 -
[526] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top.
Possibly, but I'd need to see real fits in action before I'd be comfortable saying for sure. The two ships are very different and the dual bonus that the Svipul gets is hard to exploit, as far as I can tell. I could be wrong but I don't see anything completely off yet. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
417
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 22:50:52 -
[527] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top. Any more double bonuses being introduced into the game and I'm going to lose complete faith in CCP, primarily as a pilot of Amarr spaceships, which most of the time require an Energy Turret Activation reduction bonus merely to function, which DOES count towards the 2 total bonuses on Tech 1 ships and 4 on Tech 2. See the PvP damage link in my signature - Light blue is Drone damage, Orange - Energy weapons, Yellow - Projectiles, Dark blue - Hybrids.
The orange bar is actually pretty healthy. Hybrids are a bit heavier but they also have short-range blasters which are some of the highest DPS guns in the game, and medium rails were blatantly OP for most of the time that graph was pulling data from. Drones are expected to be a big chunk because so many ships use them.
If you split up the various categories per ship type that uses a weapon system the position of lasers gets even better. For example CBCs only have a single laser ship, but it still does almost half the damage of Hybrids, of which there are three that use them (if you include the Myrm, so maybe 2.5?)
Destroyers are skewed because of high-sec ganks with Blaster Catalysts. No data for the Svipul, but the Confessor by itself was doing almost as much damage as the entire Interceptor class despite not being out for very long. In Frigates lasers are actually beating out Projectiles and Missiles, and running competitively with Hybrids despite there being more Hybrid frigates than Laser ones. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
21
|
Posted - 2015.04.24 23:07:53 -
[528] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:The orange bar is actually pretty healthy. Hybrids are a bit heavier but they also have short-range blasters which are some of the highest DPS guns in the game, and medium rails were blatantly OP for most of the time that graph was pulling data from. Drones are expected to be a big chunk because so many ships use them.
If you split up the various categories per ship type that uses a weapon system the position of lasers gets even better. For example CBCs only have a single laser ship, but it still does almost half the damage of Hybrids, of which there are three that use them (if you include the Myrm, so maybe 2.5?)
Destroyers are skewed because of high-sec ganks with Blaster Catalysts. No data for the Svipul, but the Confessor by itself was doing almost as much damage as the entire Interceptor class despite not being out for very long. In Frigates lasers are actually beating out Projectiles and Missiles, and running competitively with Hybrids despite there being more Hybrid frigates than Laser ones.
You should re-look that graph, cause hybrids out-class lasers in ALL ship classes except BS (thanks to ApoSnipe).
About CBCs it's more like a third than almost a half to be fair.
About frigs, it's still less than hybrids, plus, those numbers must have taken Navy frigs in count. (thank you slicer)
And, no, sorry, there is not more hybrid frigates than laser frigates :
Lasers : Executioner / Punisher / Tormentor + (crucifier) = 3.5 [+ slicer = 4.5] Hybrid : Merlin / Atron / Incursus + (tristan) = 3.5 [+ comet = 4.5]
Projo : Slasher / Rifter = 2 [+ firetail = 3] Missile : Condor / Kestrel / Breacher = 3 [+ hookbill = 4]
Let's not talk about AFs, that's pretty obvious. (ishkur/enyo/harpy vs ....hum........ Retribution !!!! yay \o/) |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 02:16:08 -
[529] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cleanse Serce wrote: I don't know what should be done to raise the overall interest in Laser gunnery, but it's clearly lacking something. Your point on capacitor consomption bonuses is true and it kinda handicaps armar hull in general cause their counter part has other bonuses more 'usefull'.
Combining Energy Turret Activation with some other existing hull bonus, like Damage, to create a double bonus would be the best thing ever for Amarr. Hmm, maybe I should start a thread on that.
I'm glad someone has finally pointed out this handicap on Laser boats in general. To compensate this annoying drawback bonus CCP should give all lasers a built in tracking bonus and make them the best tracking turret weapon system in the game. Either that or give Amarr T2 Hulls another mid slot so they can fit a tracking comp. Otherwise laser boats will always be underpowered compared to the other weapon systems even with their range bonus as lasers can't hit anything reliably moving faster than 1k m/s.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 02:45:42 -
[530] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top. Any more double bonuses being introduced into the game and I'm going to lose complete faith in CCP, primarily as a pilot of Amarr spaceships, which most of the time require an Energy Turret Activation reduction bonus merely to function, which DOES count towards the 2 total bonuses on Tech 1 ships and 4 on Tech 2. See the PvP damage link in my signature - Light blue is Drone damage, Orange - Energy weapons, Yellow - Projectiles, Dark blue - Hybrids.
The double resist bonus alone would've been fine in defensive mode and move the -66% MWD Sig Radius Reduction to the Prop Mode (don't need the inertia bonus since you no longer can fit 10mn AB).
|
|
SuperNova's Revenge
Hoogalish Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 02:56:09 -
[531] - Quote
These ships should suffer the same sig penalty that destroyers seem to have where they take full damage from small and medium weapons. Destroyers always seemed to have the weakness of paper thin. I dunno why these were treated like anything but superior glass cannons. Maybe make moduels you fit to the ship to pick a mode but the OP part is the switching on the fly ability from speed to defense to offense. come on that is the single most versatile combat ship in the game.
I'd like to see missiles make these t3 destroyer pilots **** bricks.
making a kiting ship fast without all the skills moduels and implants is just a BS way to get skill point poor players a ship to pvp in with their bad skills :/ This is a reflection of the I want it now mind set of today. where before you needed atleast 2 accounts and combined 80mil skill points to fly a respectable kite boat and booster but it was still paper thin. these things have way too much tank hahah its a fckn desy.
And people are using mode switching to insta warp past gate camps like the MWD cloak trick you don't seem to want to stop. UGh LOW sec is way too SAFE ! |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 02:59:02 -
[532] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:I agree in principle, but the current 33% for a double bonus is over the top. Any more double bonuses being introduced into the game and I'm going to lose complete faith in CCP, primarily as a pilot of Amarr spaceships, which most of the time require an Energy Turret Activation reduction bonus merely to function, which DOES count towards the 2 total bonuses on Tech 1 ships and 4 on Tech 2. See the PvP damage link in my signature - Light blue is Drone damage, Orange - Energy weapons, Yellow - Projectiles, Dark blue - Hybrids. The orange bar is actually pretty healthy. Hybrids are a bit heavier but they also have short-range blasters which are some of the highest DPS guns in the game, and medium rails were blatantly OP for most of the time that graph was pulling data from. Drones are expected to be a big chunk because so many ships use them. If you split up the various categories per ship type that uses a weapon system the position of lasers gets even better. For example CBCs only have a single laser ship, but it still does almost half the damage of Hybrids, of which there are three that use them (if you include the Myrm, so maybe 2.5?) Destroyers are skewed because of high-sec ganks with Blaster Catalysts. No data for the Svipul, but the Confessor by itself was doing almost as much damage as the entire Interceptor class despite not being out for very long. In Frigates lasers are actually beating out Projectiles and Missiles, and running competitively with Hybrids despite there being more Hybrid frigates than Laser ones.
Hmm, Are you referring to Pulse II or Beams II?
|
SuperNova's Revenge
Hoogalish Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 03:04:00 -
[533] - Quote
im an idiot oops |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
442
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 03:45:07 -
[534] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote: Edit: Ah i see the point of your post is to combine the activation cost with the damage bonus and I think it's a brilliant idea. Yes I agree you should make a post on that in features and ideas.
Confessor is also one of the boats that has the dedicated Energy Turret Activation bonus. I'll make an inventory of ships affected and perhaps post it later. Drone boats have it, why not us?
Could become the next best thing that happened to Amarr spaceships since 60->50% armour EM resist reduction across all hulls in Eve.
P.S. Tracking hull bonuses is Gallente territory, Optimal - Caldari, Fall-Off - Minmatar and Amarr... I'm trying to remember what was this special turret trait that we always had - I bet people will point to the instant crystal swapping and shut the case down.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
417
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 05:05:37 -
[535] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:You should re-look that graph, cause hybrids out-class lasers in ALL ship classes except BS (thanks to ApoSnipe). About CBCs it's more like a third than almost a half to be fair. About frigs, it's still less than hybrids, plus, those numbers must have taken Navy frigs in count, (thank you slicer) as, to be honest, we don't see much punishers and tormentors roaming around compared to merlins or incursuses. And, no, sorry, there is not more hybrid frigates than laser frigates : Lasers : Executioner / Punisher / Tormentor + (crucifier) = 3.5 [+ slicer = 4.5] Hybrid : Merlin / Atron / Incursus + (tristan) = 3.5 [+ comet = 4.5] Projectile : Slasher / Rifter = 2 [+ firetail = 3] Missile : Condor / Kestrel / Breacher = 3 [+ hookbill = 4] Let's not talk about AFs, that's pretty obvious. (ishkur/enyo/harpy vs ....hum........ Retribution !!!! yay \o/) ________ Edit : I've redone the graph and separated each gunnery and lowered drones a bit to be less visible. I must admit for CBC that it's quite half the damage, which reflects the number of ships available for each gunnery. 1 for 2 (or 2.5 if you insist). It appears that only BSs and Cruisers seem balanced for the use of gunnery in PvP. (and therefore maybe CBCs as well) Dessies are frucked up by suicide-ganking-Catalysts and gate-camping-Thrashers. >>>>> http://i.imgur.com/afJycoE.png?1
You're forgetting the gun non-specific ships, plus the navy and pirate faction ones, so you have 6 Gallente Hybrid ships, 6 Amarr Laser boats, and then the Merlin. Plus the Daredevil is just sort of generally better and more popular than the Sucubus. Either way the difference between Hybrids and Lasers on Frigates isn't that big, and on Cruisers there's almost no difference despite Medium Rails being OP for a while.
In all of the other categories where Lasers are seriously losing in PvP damage there are either way fewer Laser ships. This includes HACs (2 Gallente with the Ishtar using them as secondary guns, and the Eagle for Caldari), T3 Cruisers (Missile loadouts are more popular on the Legion, and both the Tengu and Proteus run hybrids, also the class hasn't been rebalanced at all and needs it), Battleships they're almost even, as I already said Dessies are skewed by ganking with Catalysts and Arty Thrashers, and that leaves Frigates where Hybrids are *still* beating out Projectiles. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
446
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 06:28:02 -
[536] - Quote
Don't look for excuses to justify the imbalances, Cade.
TL;DR Fix Ishtar.
Cleanse Serce wrote:I've redone the graph and separated each gunnery and lowered drones a bit to be less visible. I must admit for CBC that it's quite half the damage, which reflects the number of ships available for each gunnery. 1 for 2 (or 2.5 if you insist). It appears that only BSs and Cruisers seem balanced for the use of gunnery in PvP. (and therefore maybe CBCs as well) Dessies are frucked up by suicide-ganking-Catalysts and gate-camping-Thrashers. >>>>> http://i.imgur.com/afJycoE.png?1
That is a most-awesome rendition of the data. Put it in your signature to remind everyone that they are playing Drone Cruisers Online.
On-topic: As I've said, Confessor is how T3Ds should be - All 3 Modes are employed in almost equal measure, versus the Svipul being in Propulsion mode most of the time, with Sharpshooter mode almost completely neglected due to the innate hull Optimal Range bonus - a complete inverse of the concept.
The only saving grace is that ACs suck without a Fall-Off bonus, and they suck in general.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 07:53:50 -
[537] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:You're forgetting the gun non-specific ships, plus the navy and pirate faction ones, so you have 6 Gallente Hybrid ships, 6 Amarr Laser boats, and then the Merlin. Plus the Daredevil is just sort of generally better and more popular than the Sucubus. Either way the difference between Hybrids and Lasers on Frigates isn't that big, and on Cruisers there's almost no difference despite Medium Rails being OP for a while.
In all of the other categories where Lasers are seriously losing in PvP damage there are either way fewer Laser ships. This includes HACs (2 Gallente with the Ishtar using them as secondary guns, and the Eagle for Caldari), T3 Cruisers (Missile loadouts are more popular on the Legion, and both the Tengu and Proteus run hybrids, also the class hasn't been rebalanced at all and needs it), Battleships they're almost even, as I already said Dessies are skewed by ganking with Catalysts and Arty Thrashers, and that leaves Frigates where Hybrids are *still* beating out Projectiles.
Lasers : - Punisher - Tormentor - Executioner - Crucifier - Slicer - Cruor - Succubus - Astero
==>> 8
Hybrids : - Merlin - Atron - Incursus - Tristan - Comet - Daredevil
==>> 6
Wasn't your point saying that there are more Hybrid frigates and despite that (false) fact, lasers are pretty high ? That's false.
The only reason why lasers are that "high" on frigates is due to the Slicer popularity first of all, then Succubus/Cruor on a lower hand, THEN because there is simply more Lasers frigates then Hybrid.
I don't know where you live, but in my region (LowSec) i do see way more Succubuses and Cruors than Daredevils.
___
On the Cruiser case : 7 Laser ships (Navy + Pirate included), 8 with Arbitrator. 3 Hybrid ships (Navy + Pirate included), 5 with Vexor and VNI.
Same thing than frigates : - Aug NI are way more populare than Exeq NI when it comes to fleets. - Omen NI are way more populare when it comes to solo. - Vigilants are more like a support role cruiser like the Ashimuu when it comes to fleet. - And Phantasm tend to be more and more populare than Vigilants when it comes to solo. - Stratios, super popular Cloaking Cruisers to gank in NullSec is using Lasers.
So in those 2 cases, Frigates and Cruisers, despite their higher number in Hulls Lasers are doin lower than Hybrids (Frigates) or even (Cruisers).
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:That is a most-awesome rendition of the data. Put it in your signature to remind everyone that they are playing Drone Cruisers Online.
Thanks. GÖÑ |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
417
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 08:50:03 -
[538] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Lasers : - Punisher - Tormentor - Executioner - Crucifier - Slicer - Cruor - Succubus - Astero
==>> 8
Hybrids : - Merlin - Atron - Incursus - Tristan - Comet - Daredevil
==>> 6
Wasn't your point saying that there are more Hybrid frigates and despite that (false) fact, lasers are pretty high ? That's false.
The only reason why lasers are that "high" on frigates is due to the Slicer popularity first of all, then Succubus/Cruor on a lower hand, THEN because there is simply more Lasers frigates then Hybrid.
I don't know where you live, but in my region (LowSec) i do see way more Succubuses and Cruors than Daredevils. On the other hand, concerning strict T1 Hulls, i do see way more Merlins or Incursuses than Punishers or Tormentors.
*sighs*
Laser Frigates: Magnate (no specific bonus but has 2 turrets and 2 launchers, and it's Amarr, someone doing solo exploration in it would use lasers) Cruicifier Executioner Tormentor Punisher Navy Slicer Cruor Sucubus Astero
Hybrids Frigates: Heron (included for the same reason as the Magnate, it can run missiles and hybrids) Merlin Imicus Maulus Atron Incursus Tristan Navy Comet Daredevil
I'll grant you I forgot the Cruor. That said, the laser using Pirate Frigates just aren't as popular as the others. Personally I think that has way less to do with them using lasers (they don't really suffer the cap use because they have those nice turret damage multipliers) and more to do with their bonuses just being unpopular. Either way it seems pretty clear that the majority of this damage is coming from T1 frigate hulls, which makes sense given their relatively low cost. Given that? Yeah small lasers are doing pretty well.
Cleanse Serce wrote:On the Cruiser case : 7 Laser ships (Navy + Pirate included), 8 with Arbitrator. 3 Hybrid ships (Navy + Pirate included), 5 with Vexor and VNI.
Same thing than frigates : - Aug NI are way more populare than Exeq NI when it comes to fleets. - Omen NI are way more populare when it comes to solo. - Vigilants are more like a support role cruiser like the Ashimuu when it comes to fleet. - And Phantasm tend to be more and more populare than Vigilants when it comes to solo. - Stratios, super popular Cloaking Cruisers to gank in NullSec is using Lasers.
So in those 2 cases, Frigates and Cruisers, despite their higher number in Hulls, Lasers are doing lower than Hybrids (Frigates) or even (Cruisers). It shouldn't be that way if lasers were 'that' good.
Five? Really?
Hybrid Cruisers: Moa Celestis Thorax Vexor (actually does have a hybrids damage bonus) Exequror Navy Issue Vexor Navy Issue (also has two turret slots) Vigilant
Lasers Cruisers: Arbitrator Omen Maller Augoror Navy Issue Omen Navy Issue Ashimmu Phantasm Statios
No data on the Navy Cruisers but regarding the Pirate ones the only assumption of yours that holds up is the one about the Stratios which sees more use than any two of the Ashimmu, Vigilant, or Phantasm. So by my count lasers are up by one fairly unpopular pirate cruiser, and if you want to nit-pick the Blackbird can fit turrets, though I feel that's even more of an edge-case than the Heron fitting turrets so I left it off.
Plus Hybrids should be getting a bump because Medium Rails were still pretty hilariously OP at the time that graph was made.
The data just doesn't support this idea that lasers are oh so bad off because their cap use is bad any more than it supports the idea that Projectiles are good because they don't use cap.
Lesson of the day, always go looking for real data rather than trusting your little slice of experience to be representative of the whole pie. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 09:26:42 -
[539] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:*sighs* Laser Frigates: Magnate (no specific bonus but has 2 turrets and 2 launchers, and it's Amarr, someone doing solo exploration in it would use lasers) Cruicifier Executioner Tormentor Punisher Navy Slicer Cruor Sucubus Astero Hybrids Frigates: Heron (included for the same reason as the Magnate, it can run missiles and hybrids) Merlin Imicus Maulus Atron Incursus Tristan Navy Comet Daredevil I'll grant you I forgot the Cruor. That said, the laser using Pirate Frigates just aren't as popular as the others. Personally I think that has way less to do with them using lasers (they don't really suffer the cap use because they have those nice turret damage multipliers) and more to do with their bonuses just being unpopular. Either way it seems pretty clear that the majority of this damage is coming from T1 frigate hulls, which makes sense given their relatively low cost. Given that? Yeah small lasers are doing pretty well.
Ok so, let's go Quote Battle till a moderator comes.
That's what you said :
Cade Windstalker wrote:[...]In Frigates lasers are actually beating out Projectiles and Missiles, and running competitively with Hybrids despite there being more Hybrid frigates than Laser ones.
First of all, counting exploration firgates is pure non-sense, but whatever, if you want to. So that makes 9 for each weapon. That's not what you said.
Secondly, about the video you linked, if you combined Astero + Cruor + Succubus, that makes almost twice the use of Daredevil the only Hybrid Pirate Frigate.
Thirdly, without proper and actual data, you can't make the statement that Firgate damage in original PvP damage by class graph come from strict T1 hulls, you just cannot.
To conclude, despite having more hulls using Lasers than hulls using Hybrids, Laser are doin less than Hybrid. Or if you prefer : despite having more damage done in Pirate hulls, Lasers do less in overall Frigate PvP damage.
It wouldn't be that way if lasers were doin "pretty well".
In french what you just done here is called "mauvaise foi", dishonest / insecere.
Cade Windstalker wrote:Five? Really? Hybrid Cruisers: Moa Celestis Thorax Vexor (actually does have a hybrids damage bonus) Exequror Navy Issue Vexor Navy Issue (also has two turret slots) Vigilant Lasers Cruisers: Arbitrator Omen Maller Augoror Navy Issue Omen Navy Issue Ashimmu Phantasm Statios No data on the Navy Cruisers but regarding the Pirate ones the only assumption of yours that holds up is the one about the Stratios which sees more use than any two of the Ashimmu, Vigilant, or Phantasm. So by my count lasers are up by one fairly unpopular pirate cruiser, and if you want to nit-pick the Blackbird can fit turrets, though I feel that's even more of an edge-case than the Heron fitting turrets so I left it off. Plus Hybrids should be getting a bump because Medium Rails were still pretty hilariously OP at the time that graph was made. The data just doesn't support this idea that lasers are oh so bad off because their cap use is bad any more than it supports the idea that Projectiles are good because they don't use cap. Lesson of the day, always go looking for real data rather than trusting your little slice of experience to be representative of the whole pie.
Again, counting Ewar Cruiser hulls is complete non sense, cause high slots are use to deal with drones mostly, and the best choice to do so are Projectiles, and not the faction hull based weaponry. Battle Arbitrator are way more commun than battle Celestis (just like crucifier / maulus), but whatever, if you want to ?
I forgot the Moa, sorry for that. So it makes, 8 hulls for Lasers, 7 for Hybrids, and here again Vexors and VNI are half of the time neut-fitted and not Hybrid... but whatever.
If you're bein insecere by counting useless hulls as hybrid boats, i'll be insecere by not taking in fact Rails. But as i can see in the video you linked, if you combined Stratios + Ashimuu + Phantasm, it's like the quadruple ? of the Vigilant damage ? Also, those numbers just show what i said : Vigilant and Phantasm are even popularity-wise. Phantasm TEND to be more popular nowadays.
Therefore, despite the higher number of honnestly-stated-Laser-boats, the data show that they are even. If Lasers were doin that "pretty well", it wouldn't be that way.
Lesson of the day : yes, data are important to look at, but you need to be honest with them. |
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
148
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 13:24:01 -
[540] - Quote
cant say yay or nay to the changes but just wondering, why is the svipul slower than the confessor, isnt minmatar the guys relying mostly on speed |
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 14:06:58 -
[541] - Quote
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:cant say yay or nay to the changes but just wondering, why is the svipul slower than the confessor, isnt minmatar the guys relying mostly on speed
After Mosaic Svipul = 230 | Fessor = 235. That's a significant diffrence indeed. :D
Not to mention mass after Mosaic : Svipul 1m500k kg | Fessor 2m kg
Confessor is tiny-slightly faster but also a third heavier than svipul. Svipul is tiny-slightly slower but a quarter lighter.
Which will result in a faster Svipul than the Confessor after Mosaic, but a slower Svipul compared to the pre-Mosaic Svipul with the same configuration (nanofibers / armor tanked or not).
It really depends on the class you pick to compare Amarr/Matar mass/base speed actually. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
446
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 14:31:25 -
[542] - Quote
Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:cant say yay or nay to the changes but just wondering, why is the svipul slower than the confessor, isnt minmatar the guys relying mostly on speed
This again.
Less mass - more thrust to mass ratio - moar speed.
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Svipul 1MN MWD: 293 m/s base speed * (1+(6.25 MWD boost * (1,500,000 thrust / (1,500,00 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1,666 / 2499 OH m/s. In Propulsion mode: 2766 / 4149 OH m/s.
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Confessor 1MN MWD:
299 m/s * (1 + (6.25 MWD bonus * (1,500,000 MWD thrust / (2,000,000 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1424 / 2136 OH m/s.
In Prop mode: 2373 / 3560 OH m/s.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Bob Donovitch
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 15:49:19 -
[543] - Quote
I usually never complain about CCP... Even though it does seem as soon as I take a fancy to a ship they nerf it. As with the T3 Destroyers... Give you a Ferrari and a patch later recall it and stuff a Volkswagen engine in it.
I have a great idea... Just issue one ship.... that's all you need. Then make EvE browser based and playable only through FaceBook. /SARC |
Jeanne-Luise Argenau
Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
148
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 16:16:30 -
[544] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Jeanne-Luise Argenau wrote:cant say yay or nay to the changes but just wondering, why is the svipul slower than the confessor, isnt minmatar the guys relying mostly on speed This again. As Cleanse Serce has mentioned: Less ship mass on the Svipul - more thrust to mass ratio - moar speed. (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Svipul 1MN MWD:
293 m/s base speed * (1 + (6.25 MWD boost * (1,500,000 thrust / (1,500,00 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1,666 / 2499 OH m/s.
In Propulsion mode: 2766 / 4149 OH m/s. Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Confessor 1MN MWD:
299 m/s * (1 + (6.25 MWD bonus * (1,500,000 MWD thrust / (2,000,000 shipmass + 500,000 MWD mass))) = 1424 / 2136 OH m/s.
In Prop mode: 2373 / 3560 OH m/s.
ah right forgot about the mass on prop mods |
HazeInADaze
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
91
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 16:19:03 -
[545] - Quote
I've been out of the loop for a while, so maybe I have it all wrong.
Was not the intent of T3 greater versatility? I dislike the idea that a ship is just absolutely better than every alternative and in my first few encounters with the T3D's I was stunned at how effective it is. The presence and power of these ships absolutely impact the meta in a poor way: displacing frigates, destroyers, and cruisers. |
Pierre Fonulique
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 17:10:46 -
[546] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:
Lasers : - Punisher - Tormentor - Executioner - Crucifier - Slicer - Cruor - Succubus - Astero
==>> 8
Hybrids : - Merlin - Atron - Incursus - Tristan - Comet - Daredevil
==>> 6
The Astero doesn't tend to use guns (and has no bonus to lasers) and the Crucifier has no laser bonus and generally runs autocannons or hybrids. I'd drop those from the list. |
Lug Muad'Dib
Wise Humans Sword
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 18:11:42 -
[547] - Quote
Beam, arty and pule are more powerfull than hybrids (small size).
D-Scan immunity is dumb.
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
26
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 18:15:28 -
[548] - Quote
Yes we can drop Astero from the list, they are exploration frigates after all, and use drones more than turrets anyway. Same for the Crucifier i guess, although, it is more common to see Crucifier with lasers as it is kind of an Amarr Tristan (less than the Sentinel, the only eWar frigate viable in combat (not strictly as a pure eWar frigate)) i would be ok to drop it, if we drop Tristans. ;)
It still reflects my point anyway, more or even Laser hulls than hybrid hulls, the fact is that lasers are doin less damage overall anyway, despite their relativly easier applications than hybrids with less tracking and short short optimal.
http://i.imgur.com/afJycoE.png?1
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:Beam, arty and pule are more powerfull than hybrids (small size). I wish it was true, though, the statistics don't really show that. |
Lug Muad'Dib
Wise Humans Sword
40
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 18:36:45 -
[549] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote: I wish it was true, though, the statistics don't really show that.
I do not take into account the statistics, but the in-game experience in small gang.
Beams are the most powerfull small gun, by far.
D-Scan immunity is dumb.
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
26
|
Posted - 2015.04.25 19:42:10 -
[550] - Quote
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:Cleanse Serce wrote: I wish it was true, though, the statistics don't really show that.
I do not take into account the statistics, but the in-game experience in small gang. Beams are the most powerfull small gun, by far.
Well then you might have noticed what most of the small gangs and solo pvpers had not, go ahead and create a new meta ! :p
I do know that Beam tormentors and Beam Slicers are quite effective when well piloted. But "well piloted" is rare, and people who uses those kind of fits are already experienced pilots just by the fact they passed time on EFT or PYFA or just testing those shipsand theorizing about them. Most of the Eve players just follows meta stuffs or "battle-clinic"fits.. :D |
|
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
419
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 01:37:21 -
[551] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Lesson of the day : yes, data are important to look at, but you need to be honest with them.
So, not quoting all that because there's no point. So, regarding T1 hulls, a quick glance over at the stats on zKillboard (which I can't link here, because rules) shows that T1 hulls are way more common/popular than Faction and T2 hulls. They're cheaper, they get used a lot more, and they do similar enough damage.
Also you're throwing around a lot of "This hull generally does this but not X" and you don't have any data to back that up. You're just going off of what you personally think is better, and may even be right, but that doesn't say anything about how these ships are fitted out overall by all of the various "never done PvP before" T1 pilots.
If you want to talk stats and misrepresentation then this one we're going with is fairly simplistic. Looking at number of hulls is one dimensional, I was trying to make a simple point of analysis along one dimension, since we don't have detailed stats of which ships are dealing the damage or how much damage they're doing.
If you want an actual analysis of the health of the various weapon systems then overall damage is a poor metric. It's too easily skewed by stuff like Null fleet doctrines and other factors. An actually useful metric of balance is the performance of various specific ships relative to other specific ships. We don't have the data for that.
So, I'm dropping this. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 02:43:40 -
[552] - Quote
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:Cleanse Serce wrote: I wish it was true, though, the statistics don't really show that.
I do not take into account the statistics, but the in-game experience in small gang. Beams are the most powerfull small gun, by far.
What proof do you have of this?
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
27
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 10:11:33 -
[553] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:Cleanse Serce wrote:Lesson of the day : yes, data are important to look at, but you need to be honest with them. So, not quoting all that because there's no point. So, regarding T1 hulls, a quick glance over at the stats on zKillboard (which I can't link here, because rules) shows that T1 hulls are way more common/popular than Faction and T2 hulls. They're cheaper, they get used a lot more, and they do similar enough damage. Also you're throwing around a lot of "This hull generally does this but not X" and you don't have any data to back that up. You're just going off of what you personally think is better, and may even be right, but that doesn't say anything about how these ships are fitted out overall by all of the various "never done PvP before" T1 pilots. If you want to talk stats and misrepresentation then this one we're going with is fairly simplistic. Looking at number of hulls is one dimensional, I was trying to make a simple point of analysis along one dimension, since we don't have detailed stats of which ships are dealing the damage or how much damage they're doing. If you want an actual analysis of the health of the various weapon systems then overall damage is a poor metric. It's too easily skewed by stuff like Null fleet doctrines and other factors. An actually useful metric of balance is the performance of various specific ships relative to other specific ships. We don't have the data for that. So, I'm dropping this.
We don't have enough precise datas to know exactly this or that weaponry is doing good or bad, for sure. But yet, youmade the exact same thing than me : make statements based on what you think, and not actual data. (number of hulls, which hull is most representativ of the overall frigate damage, etc...).
zKillboard may show that T1 hulls are more used than Pirate or Navy hulls, but you're forgetting the damage multiplier of those ones.
I live in LowSec FW WarZone. zKillboard shows by Faction those Datas :
For Gallente Federation that Comets are the top ship, then Tristan, then destroyers to the 6th rank. At the 8th rank comes the Slicer. For Minmatar Republic, first frigate is Tristan (3th) then Firetail (5th), then Comet (8th). For Amarr Empire, first firgate is Slicer (2nd), then Comet (6th), then Tristan (9th). For Caldari State, comes first frigate the Tristan (2nd, 1st is Svipul) then Condor (4th) then Merlin (6th).
I chose to watch by faction, but could be interesting to look at the same stats by Region Black Rise and the Citadel being the most active in LowSec. Sadly zKillboard seems to have some issues with statistics. :D
I'm ok to say that some frigate doctrines in NullSec may change the data a bit, but i can tell that other LowSec region (i mean else than FW LS regions) aren't using Frigates to fight, that's another level of war. Just like NullSec doctrine won't use T1 frigate hull, except maybe Brave Newbie i guess with their T1 inties swarm.
So yeah, the Navy frigs are not "that" expensive anymore once you start to figure how Eve's PvP works and how to make ISK in the game.. The pure PvP-noob guys are really few and i'm sure not to be wrong stating that they are not influencing the data in anyway whatsoever, due to their few nombers, and to their low skill, and therefore low dps (meta 0 / meta4 fits).
We don't need that much data to notice if a ship is balanced or not, if he needs love or nerfs. You just need to watch the rate of its use.
If people make doctrines out of the ship, and the doctrine stand for a long time, ship is viable. If in the same class only one single doctrine is used, that means there might be a problem, and the hull may need a closer look, or the weapon it uses. If in the same class of ship different doctrines are used depending of various variables, we can tell the class is healthy. |
Arla Sarain
384
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 10:28:55 -
[554] - Quote
Lol at statistics.
T1 frigs are used more in fleets because it easy to organise and equip a group in T1 frigs, and more people can fly them. They have NO WHERE near the DPS of faction and T2 frigs and are in general no where near as good. They are just convenient. Few people in Black Rise and Citadel actually fly T1 frigs on a regular basis in small gangs. Its either Navy, Pirate or T3Ds.
People in Calmil/Galmil tend to train for those ships because of shared hybrid weapons. Then they train for drones because Ishtards, or generally sentries, which consequently brings them on the path of Tristans and Algoses which have excellent damage projection throughout what, 60km? They are no brainer ships.
Beams have one of the highest raw DPS. Plug it in EFT. Beam Executioners are rektasauruses. Their only real downside is limited damage types. But at frig levels all small turrets deal roughly half of their EFT damage as there are limited slots to blow on resists. 3 bonused beams deal roughly 200 per hit, and no less than 150 unless tracking is involved. This puts beams marginally on top of other ships in terms of damage, and tips the scale in their favor when considering the range.
Kiting and scram kiting is dominant, hence beams are on top of the food chain. zKillboard says otherwise, and you intend to interpret beam superiority as a false statement, because not that many people have Amarr/Beam skilled into, and they have a limited playstyle. |
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
174
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 12:28:08 -
[555] - Quote
This thread went places. |
Cyerus
Eternal Strife
261
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 18:10:11 -
[556] - Quote
I think I've found a bug on the test-server, while trying to test out tuesdays changes.
While checking my Confessor, which is set up in the form of "gun gun gun empty gun gun gun" highslots, I noticed that the last gunslot has just disappeared.
Yes, the slots have been reduced from 7 to 6, thus removing the last highslot, but in turn the actual gun seems to just be invisible.
When I removed all the guns (the 5 I can see), and I try to readd the 4 I'm allowed, I can only add 3 as the 4th brings up an error that all my turret slots are filled. Even the circles underneath the turret-icon are all 4 filled, while I only added 3 guns.
This is not a bigproblem on the test-server as I can simply repackage and readd rigs, but I prefer not to waste money on something so silly when released to TQ. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
27
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 18:21:01 -
[557] - Quote
I noticed that as well.
I simply stripped my fit, and readd the guns. I noticed a -30 dps with the same fit (with a mid slot empty due to PWG nerf). |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
420
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 18:27:03 -
[558] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:We don't have enough precise datas to know exactly this or that weaponry is doing good or bad, for sure. But yet, youmade the exact same thing than me : make statements based on what you think, and not actual data. (number of hulls, which hull is most representativ of the overall frigate damage, etc...).
I'm running off of stats and the numbers I've run on the different guns. If I've stated an opinion I've tried to make sure that it's clearly labeled and that my argument isn't hinging on it.
Cleanse Serce wrote:zKillboard may show that T1 hulls are more used than Pirate or Navy hulls, but you're forgetting the damage multiplier of those ones.
I live in LowSec FW WarZone. zKillboard shows by Faction those Datas :
For Gallente Federation that Comets are the top ship, then Tristan, then destroyers to the 6th rank. At the 8th rank comes the Slicer. For Minmatar Republic, first frigate is Tristan (3th) then Firetail (5th), then Comet (8th). For Amarr Empire, first firgate is Slicer (2nd), then Comet (6th), then Tristan (9th). For Caldari State, comes first frigate the Tristan (2nd, 1st is Svipul) then Condor (4th) then Merlin (6th).
I chose to watch by faction, but could be interesting to look at the same stats by Region. Black Rise and the Citadel being the most active in LowSec. Sadly zKillboard seems to have some issues with statistics. :D
I'm not forgetting the damage multipliers on T2 or Faction hulls, the number of T1 hulls is just that much greater than T2 hulls, even though there are more T2 and Faction hulls overall. That's not really the case in Faction Warfare but Faction Warfare is a tiny fraction of the overall PvP in Eve. If you're having trouble with the stats pages on zKillboard try the Monthly Top page for the various ship Groups.
Cleanse Serce wrote:I'm ok to say that some frigate doctrines in NullSec may change the data a bit, but i can tell that other LowSec region (i mean else than FW LS regions) aren't using Frigates to fight, that's another level of war. Just like NullSec doctrine won't use T1 frigate hull, except maybe Brave Newbie i guess with their T1 inties swarm, but it's more like a swarm than a doctrine.
So yeah, the Navy frigs are not "that" expensive anymore once you start to figure how Eve's PvP works and how to make ISK in the game.. The pure PvP-noob guys are really few and i'm sure not to be wrong stating that they are not influencing the data in anyway whatsoever, due to their few nombers, and to their low skill, and therefore low dps (meta 0 / meta4 fits).
Citation needed, on all of this. Plenty of Null groups will use frigates for roams and fleets outside of Sov defense or assaults.
Cleanse Serce wrote:We don't need that much data to notice if a ship is balanced or not, if he needs love or nerfs. You just need to watch the rate of its use.
If people make doctrines out of the ship, and the doctrine stand for a long time, ship is viable. If in the same class only one single doctrine is used, that means there might be a problem, and the hull may need a closer look, or the weapon it uses. If in the same class of ship different doctrines are used depending of various variables, we can tell the class is healthy.
That's not really the case. You need to look at why a ship is being used as much or as little as it is. For example the Bhaalgorn does't see a ton of use relative to the other Faction Battleships, and certainly does less damage than any of the others, but that's because it's a fairly specialized hull and tends to mount Neuts and NOS over guns and is only used in those specific situations, where as more combat focused Faction ships will see higher damage rates and greater use.
Another example, and one that's more applicable to this thread (unlike the rest of this topic, which is in an whole other zip code at this point ) is the relative use of the various T3 Cruisers. These are generally accepted to be headed for a major re-balance, probably an overall nerf to performance if not utility. The Tengu is currently the least used of the four. This doesn't mean that it does't need a nerf, even if its performance metrics compare favorably to its T2 and Faction competition, it just means that the other T3 Cruisers are relatively better and therefore being used instead.
Stuff like this is why CCP does, in-fact, use a lot of data when deciding whether or not a ship needs to be balanced or not, and even more data when looking at how to balance it. For example a single ship or ship type being used in Null doctrines or for any specific and very popular role will bump all of its performance metrics. That doesn't necessarily mean that the ship is OP, but it doesn't mean that it isn't either.
That's why I'm really starting to hate that damage graph because it's being thrown around like definitive proof of all sorts of problems when it's a single statistic and not even a particularly well defined one either. We have no historical context, no scale, and no idea which ships are generating how much of that data. For example you can be very sure that gank Catalysts are generating a lot of that Hybrids spike in the Destroyer class, but we don't know how much. |
Cyerus
Eternal Strife
261
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 18:40:02 -
[559] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:I noticed that as well. I simply stripped my fit, and readd the guns. You don't need to repackage. :D I noticed a -30 dps with the same beam fit (with a mid slot empty due to PWG nerf). and a -24 dps to my pulse fit on which i can't put a 400mn meta4 anymore.... Which quite funny actually, cause my Beam 10MN AB seems to be more flexible to fit (with downgraded guns), than my Pulse fit leta 4 400mm plate (with 1mn MWD) and Focused Pulse.... Thanks CCP. And i forgot to mentioned that on each fit i have a Small Ancillary Current Router T2. :p I'll need to put 2 of those... *sighs*
Thanks for the tip!
Mine showed a reducting in DPS aswell (according to the Fitting panel), might be because skillbonusses or something aren't applied to the role bonusses. -12 DPS difference here.
*EDIT: Ohh ffs, I keep finding bugs. I can't even Quote your edited post... wth? |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
29
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 18:46:24 -
[560] - Quote
Cyerus wrote:Thanks for the tip!
Mine showed a reducting in DPS aswell (according to the Fitting panel), might be because skillbonusses or something aren't applied to the role bonusses. -12 DPS difference here.
*EDIT: Ohh ffs, I keep finding bugs. I can't even Quote your edited post... wth?
I have ATD to level 4 on TQ and SiSi. You might have yours to 5 then so your -12 dps would be the "real" dps nerf from Mosaic i guess.
I've put 2 SACR T2 rigs + One trimark i could therefore swap my meta 400mm for a T2, but no utilitary HighSlots. (no utilitary highslots with a meta 4 400mm either anyway.
On TQ 1 SACR T2 rig + 2 T1 Trimark = 11 611 EHP on Def Mode On Sisi 2 SACR T2 rigs + 1 T2 Trimark = 11 392 EHP |
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
973
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 21:26:09 -
[561] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote: If you want an actual analysis of the health of the various weapon systems then overall damage is a poor metric. It's too easily skewed by stuff like Null fleet doctrines and other factors. An actually useful metric of balance is the performance of various specific ships relative to other specific ships. We don't have the data for that.
It might be outdated, but there was a 1v1 T1 frig tournament. The results of those 1v1s got interpreted and were showing a trend of tristan>breacher>tormentor dominance in sort of a late '13 snapshot I think. |
Cade Windstalker
Donohue Enterprises Ad-Astra
421
|
Posted - 2015.04.26 22:23:04 -
[562] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:Cade Windstalker wrote: If you want an actual analysis of the health of the various weapon systems then overall damage is a poor metric. It's too easily skewed by stuff like Null fleet doctrines and other factors. An actually useful metric of balance is the performance of various specific ships relative to other specific ships. We don't have the data for that.
It might be outdated, but there was a 1v1 T1 frig tournament. The results of those 1v1s got interpreted and were showing a trend of tristan>breacher>tormentor dominance in sort of a late '13 snapshot I think.
That's only one specific situation though, not overall health. Also that came before this series of tweaks and changes which affected some of the frigates you just listed, as well as others.
One example of why this doesn't make a good balance metric. A ship may be best in a certain type of role, for example the Harpy is good in a fleet setup where its ability to fit a large tank, good mobility, and damage projection can all be useful and its lack of mids when fitting said tank doesn't hurt so much. If that type of setup is popular then the ship will see an increase in metrics despite being in a fairly healthy place. Conversely if a type of play that a ship excels in isn't happening as much, even relative to other types of play, that ship may show lower metrics despite also being in a healthy place. Even the two different hypothetical styles of play can be in good overall places even if one is more popular or involving more players (for example Wormholes relative to High Sec Incursion, to pull two random game elements out of some hole or other).
To sort of vaguely tie this back into the thread...
The problem with the Tactical Destroyers is they quickly became very dominant in an area of PvP that was formerly extremely diverse, and that's not healthy. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.27 21:34:58 -
[563] - Quote
Ya know what? Go ahead and just really fix these ships. Let's reduce the PG by another 15, CPU by 10, cut that damage bonus to 25. ,and increase the mass by 15%, reduce the cap by 15% and be able to only fit two turrerts. |
Soridar Ravencroft
Duragon Pioneer Group Goonswarm Federation
23
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 02:21:12 -
[564] - Quote
So when did the notoriously slowest ship race decide to build ships faster than the classically fastest race? I mean seriously Mim ships have lower overall tanks and to compensate get a speed bonus, yet here the tankier ship is also the faster of the 2. Smart play there! |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
29
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 07:12:39 -
[565] - Quote
Soridar Ravencroft wrote:So when did the notoriously slowest ship race decide to build ships faster than the classically fastest race? I mean seriously Mim ships have lower overall tanks and to compensate get a speed bonus, yet here the tankier ship is also the faster of the 2. Smart play there!
Omen Navy Issue has a faster base speed than Stabber Navy Issue. What you describe is not a "god-rule". Also you forget the exceptional double tank bonus of the Svipul.
And the MASS of the Confessor, what do you think about the mass ?
*sigh* |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 08:25:58 -
[566] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Lol at statistics.
T1 frigs are used more in fleets because it easy to organise and equip a group in T1 frigs, and more people can fly them. They have NO WHERE near the DPS of faction and T2 frigs and are in general no where near as good. They are just convenient. Few people in Black Rise and Citadel actually fly T1 frigs on a regular basis in small gangs. Its either Navy, Pirate or T3Ds.
People in Calmil/Galmil tend to train for those ships because of shared hybrid weapons. Then they train for drones because Ishtards, or generally sentries, which consequently brings them on the path of Tristans and Algoses which have excellent damage projection throughout what, 60km? They are no brainer ships.
Beams have one of the highest raw DPS. Plug it in EFT. Beam Executioners are rektasauruses. Their only real downside is limited damage types. But at frig levels all small turrets deal roughly half of their EFT damage as there are limited slots to blow on resists. 3 bonused beams deal roughly 200 per hit, and no less than 150 unless tracking is involved. This puts beams marginally on top of other ships in terms of damage, and tips the scale in their favor when considering the range.
Kiting and scram kiting is dominant, hence beams are on top of the food chain. zKillboard says otherwise, and you intend to interpret beam superiority as a false statement, because not that many people have Amarr/Beam skilled into, and they have a limited playstyle.
I thought CCP nerfed the tracking of small Beams in the last patch, are they really that good?
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 08:27:56 -
[567] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:I noticed that as well. I simply stripped my fit, and readd the guns. You don't need to repackage. :D I noticed a -30 dps with the same beam fit (with a mid slot empty due to PWG nerf). and a -24 dps to my pulse fit on which i can't put a 400mn meta4 anymore.... Which quite funny actually, cause my Beam 10MN AB seems to be more flexible to fit (with downgraded guns), than my Pulse fit leta 4 400mm plate (with 1mn MWD) and Focused Pulse.... Thanks CCP. And i forgot to mentioned that on each fit i have a Small Ancillary Current Router T2. :p I'll need to put 2 of those... *sighs*
Can you really fit a 10MN AB with Small Beams on the Confessors?
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 09:01:34 -
[568] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:Ya know what? Go ahead and just really fix these ships. Let's reduce the PG by another 15, CPU by 10, cut that damage bonus to 25. ,and increase the mass by 15%, reduce the cap by 15% and be able to only fit two turrerts.
Here comes the Trolling Party. Where's the Troll Patrol when you need em?
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
29
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 10:07:51 -
[569] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Can you really fit a 10MN AB with Small Beams on the Confessors?
Fed nav 10mn AB yes. Downgraded Beam (dual light beam)
[Confessor, Esnaelc Sin'led's Confessor] Damage Control II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer Heat Sink II Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Warp Scrambler II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II
Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Trimark Armor Pump II Small Trimark Armor Pump II |
Amyclas Amatin
SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation
683
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 12:08:10 -
[570] - Quote
wait what. 2 utility highs?
For more information on the New Order of High-Sec, please visit: http://www.minerbumping.com/
Remember that whenever you have a bad day in EVE, the correct reponse is "Thank you CCP, may I please have another?"
|
|
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
29
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 12:44:14 -
[571] - Quote
Amyclas Amatin wrote:wait what. 2 utility highs?
Yes 2 utility high slots, but it's actually 1 with PWG and CPU nerf, and if you fit a Probe Launcher |
Liev Dleg
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.28 14:42:57 -
[572] - Quote
My Client is loading the patch, but for me it looks like unusual anymore. I used the Svipul to chase and kill gankers. Now it looks the Svipul is to expensive for that and don't do enought damage against a ganker. The last years i said everytime: Think positive about that patch, but CCP takes away good weapons against gankes. I will test it the next hours. I feel sad.
|
Nou Mene
Out of Focus Odin's Call
4
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 04:48:22 -
[573] - Quote
so now deff confessor is faster than svipul... |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
465
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 05:41:47 -
[574] - Quote
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 17:01:28 -
[575] - Quote
The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
30
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 17:31:43 -
[576] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%.
What ?
What is giving you the feeling that they are still overpowered ?
They are ******* T3 ships guys, don't expect them to be like T1 destroyers... |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
293
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 18:43:43 -
[577] - Quote
It's a DESTROYER. It DESTROYS. These are not 5mil talwars. You got your nerf, not my fault I can put bigger guns on now and hit further and harder than before. That was paid for in agility. And price. Which I now filter down to you, the recipient of Holy Beams of Joy. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 19:20:40 -
[578] - Quote
For the small price of another pg rig you get awesome tank oversized ab great dps. Sure non of the above is as overpowered as before but still they're overpowered and will remain that way until they recieve another balance pass. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 19:22:35 -
[579] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%. What ? What is giving you the feeling that they are still overpowered ? They are ******* T3 ships guys, don't expect them to be like T1 destroyers... They HAVE TO be feared. They HAVE TO be a ship you'd concider more than twice engaging. The only thing wrong in my opinion is its price. But it won't get higher if it's getting bat-nerfed each patch. xD
Also they don't have to be anything that CCP doesn't want them to be and clearly CCP feels they were to much. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 19:46:24 -
[580] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%.
You know these are T3 ships right? It really should be better than a lot of other ships of comparable size.
I'm not seeing any combat records on zKill or BattleClinic for you.... maybe you don't really know what you are talking about. |
|
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 19:51:32 -
[581] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%. You know these are T3 ships right?
You mean the new tactical destroyers the t3 ships, those known as Confessor and Svipul are t3 ships...
|
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
178
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 20:42:23 -
[582] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%. What ? What is giving you the feeling that they are still overpowered ? They are ******* T3 ships guys, don't expect them to be like T1 destroyers... They HAVE TO be feared. They HAVE TO be a ship you'd concider more than twice engaging. The only thing wrong in my opinion is its price. But it won't get higher if it's getting bat-nerfed each patch. xD The question is should they be? ( feared, consider more than twice engaging, etc)
'Cause if this is still the guideline for how all ships supposed to be, then t3d still need more work. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 21:20:35 -
[583] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote:'Cause if this is still the guideline for how all ships supposed to be, then t3d still need more work.
I dunno, how do you feel T3 Cruisers really fit into that chart? Cuz I feel like they are waaaaay better than Navy and Pirate Faction Cruisers and usually better than T2- except that T2 is good at certain roles (like ECM and interdiction) for cheaper.
I feel like the end result for T3Ds should be that they are as good or better for direct combat than Interdictors, but Interdictors have the bubble launcher along with less ISK/skill overhead to balance the differences. (I feel with the 10mn AB problem out of the way, the only issue I see with T3Ds is they are super easy to skill up....and at least prior to yesterday only cost 40mil.) |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2362
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 21:40:45 -
[584] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Ashlar Vellum wrote:'Cause if this is still the guideline for how all ships supposed to be, then t3d still need more work. I dunno, how do you feel T3 Cruisers really fit into that chart? Cuz I feel like they are waaaaay better than Navy and Pirate Faction Cruisers and usually better than T2- except that T2 is good at certain roles (like ECM and interdiction) for cheaper. That's because T3's have not been fully balanced yet. Barely been touched at all, really. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 21:48:58 -
[585] - Quote
I said it earlier and I'll say it again, I predict when all four ships are released these ships will receive another balance pass. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 21:53:11 -
[586] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:I said it earlier and I'll say it again, I predict when all four ships are released these ships will receive another balance pass.
Right....and I don't think you can even fit a Merlin properly, so I don't know or care what you are basing your assumptions on. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1139
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 21:59:57 -
[587] - Quote
the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP.
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 22:03:12 -
[588] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Jet Silf wrote:Ashlar Vellum wrote:'Cause if this is still the guideline for how all ships supposed to be, then t3d still need more work. I dunno, how do you feel T3 Cruisers really fit into that chart? Cuz I feel like they are waaaaay better than Navy and Pirate Faction Cruisers and usually better than T2- except that T2 is good at certain roles (like ECM and interdiction) for cheaper. That's because T3's have not been fully balanced yet. Barely been touched at all, really.
If anything, they should just fix the skill requirements- for T3 Cruisers I needed 6 or so skills trained to 5, and then needed to train 6 different skills for the actual ship and it's subsystems. For Interdictor I needed 4 skills to 5, and then needed to train the Interdictor skill at 5x....for T3 Dessies I need Dessy 5 and Tac Dessie, which only takes about 2 weeks to train because its an x3 skill.
Maybe the problem isn't that people are flying the ships so much because they are good, but because they are so easy to get.
|
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.29 22:03:24 -
[589] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:I said it earlier and I'll say it again, I predict when all four ships are released these ships will receive another balance pass. Right....and I don't think you can even fit a Merlin properly, so I don't know or care what you are basing your assumptions on.
That's ok you're entitled to believe whatever you want. Doesn't mean you're beliefs are correct. |
khaip ur
K.C.C
1
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 01:53:59 -
[590] - Quote
Okay posted this elsewhere first because i simply could not find this thread.
What am I suppose to do with the second high utility slot? Anyone please a hint would be nice. I tried Nos and Nuet, neither really added anything to my arty svipul what with me being out of range for the one and the other draining my cap faster then most of what I want to kill. And logi stuff is for logi ships I can't be asked to orbit and rep with my one small shield/cap transfer that has no ship bonuses. Probes go in the first but what is the second good for.
I am seriously tempted to put a bomb on there I have no idea why maybe hypothetical drones but its the only option at this point.
CCP all will be forgiven if you take that extra high and move it to mid for Svipul and low for Confessor. |
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 03:33:35 -
[591] - Quote
khaip ur wrote:Okay posted this elsewhere first because i simply could not find this thread.
What am I suppose to do with the second high utility slot? Anyone please a hint would be nice. I tried Nos and Nuet, neither really added anything to my arty svipul what with me being out of range for the one and the other draining my cap faster then most of what I want to kill. And logi stuff is for logi ships I can't be asked to orbit and rep with my one small shield/cap transfer that has no ship bonuses. Probes go in the first but what is the second good for.
I am seriously tempted to put a bomb on there I have no idea why maybe hypothetical drones but its the only option at this point.
CCP all will be forgiven if you take that extra high and move it to mid for Svipul and low for Confessor.
For my Confessor, I put a small nuet in it. (After dropping 10mn AB for 1mn MWD) |
khaip ur
K.C.C
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 03:54:03 -
[592] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote: For my Confessor, I put a small nuet in it. (After dropping 10mn AB for 1mn MWD) It's not great, but it is a possible defense against scram frigs. Bomb could work but I don't know how good small smarties really are.
I had to switch from passive to active tank to fit in the arty so I suddenly have a cap problem. I tried the neut but did not like how fast I ran out of cap myself. And small smartbombs are really not very good 3km 60 damage every 7.5 sec at max skill. The most effective use I have found is if you get the timing exactly right you can take out a missile and it annoys light drones. But again uses my cap I would rather be saving for hardeners and boosters.
I think most fits are going to just leave it as a heat break as it stands.
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 04:08:31 -
[593] - Quote
khaip ur wrote:Jet Silf wrote: For my Confessor, I put a small nuet in it. (After dropping 10mn AB for 1mn MWD) It's not great, but it is a possible defense against scram frigs. Bomb could work but I don't know how good small smarties really are.
I had to switch from passive to active tank to fit in the arty so I suddenly have a cap problem. I tried the neut but did not like how fast I ran out of cap myself. And small smartbombs are really not very good 3km 60 damage every 7.5 sec at max skill. The most effective use I have found is if you get the timing exactly right you can take out a missile and it annoys light drones. But again uses my cap I would rather be saving for hardeners and boosters. I think most fits are going to just leave it as a heat break as it stands.
I was just going to say, leaving it empty is an option too....since the ship already has a heat reduction bonus, it would be interesting to know if that makes a noticable difference. Small nuet is def. not a great option...I went with it because it might save my neck in the right circumstances. (My fit also already have a cap booster to help back it up if I need it.) |
khaip ur
K.C.C
2
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 05:40:35 -
[594] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:khaip ur wrote:Jet Silf wrote: For my Confessor, I put a small nuet in it. (After dropping 10mn AB for 1mn MWD) It's not great, but it is a possible defense against scram frigs. Bomb could work but I don't know how good small smarties really are.
I had to switch from passive to active tank to fit in the arty so I suddenly have a cap problem. I tried the neut but did not like how fast I ran out of cap myself. And small smartbombs are really not very good 3km 60 damage every 7.5 sec at max skill. The most effective use I have found is if you get the timing exactly right you can take out a missile and it annoys light drones. But again uses my cap I would rather be saving for hardeners and boosters. I think most fits are going to just leave it as a heat break as it stands. I was just going to say, leaving it empty is an option too....since the ship already has a heat reduction bonus, it would be interesting to know if that makes a noticable difference. Small nuet is def. not a great option...I went with it because it might save my neck in the right circumstances and my fit also already has a cap booster to help back it up if I need it.
I have decided I am going back to my roots all those years ago when I first flew destroyers and put on a salvager. Tech 1 mind, no need to go posh. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 07:09:59 -
[595] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%. You know these are T3 ships right? They really should be better than a lot of other ships of comparable size. I'm not seeing any combat records on zKill or BattleClinic for you, and your toon is only like 4 months old.... I'm thinking you don't really know what you are talking about here.
He doesn't, he's just another troll obviously who can only fly at best T1 & T2 Frigs.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 07:17:21 -
[596] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:I said it earlier and I'll say it again, I predict when all four ships are released these ships will receive another balance pass.
Quit whining troll. You have no concept of what TD3's are suppose to be. Just stick with your AF's and continue Warp Drive Activating to your safe spots when you see Svipuls/Confessors on D-scan.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 09:09:53 -
[597] - Quote
Cleanse Serce wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Can you really fit a 10MN AB with Small Beams on the Confessors?
Fed nav 10mn AB yes. Downgraded Beam (dual light beam) [Confessor] Damage Control II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer Heat Sink II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Warp Scrambler II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Trimark Armor Pump II Small Trimark Armor Pump II
Confessor] Damage Control II Heat Sink II Small Armor Repairer II EANM II Small Armor Repairer II
10MN Afterburner II Small Capacitor II (Navy 400's) J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I
Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II
Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router I
No Implants Dps= 311 to 7.2 /9.7 (navy multi) Speed = 1313m/s (prop mode+link=2679 m/s) Resist= 69 59 65 75 (Def Mode+link= 84 79 82 87) Sig= 60 (def mode+link= 26) Tanks= 190 Dps per 3.4 sec
CPU= 19/225 PWG= 8.3/112.7
By comparison (with 1 Heat Sink II) using 4 Small Focus Beam Lasers II with navy multi dps is 373 and with Small Focus Pulse Lasers II with conflags dps is 396. I believe the best weapon when fighting within 5m is the Small Focus Pulse Lasers II, but you'll need a 3% implant to make everything fit. Btw this mini brick orbits like a BS now.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 09:32:49 -
[598] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP.
I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
650
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 10:24:07 -
[599] - Quote
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:Beam, arty and pule are more powerfull than hybrids (small size).
Yep. I was having some arragned 1 vs 1's on SiSi and one of the pilots was very fond of the Navy Comet. I have'nt flown one in quite some time but when I trained Gallente, I really love this small ship a lot.
So I put on my old blaster fit and it went very well but with small railguns it was really terrible.
Small railguns could use a bit more pshhhhhh.
Don't forget, beams are high alpha turrets and the Navy Slicer with beams is sooo cool, oh and the Succubus doesn't suck anymore, which is great for dangerous tackle work.
I don't know about the matari destroyer but the Confessor now has the turn-speed of an oil-tanker which is frozen in the arctic.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1303
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 18:06:56 -
[600] - Quote
Small rail guns are pretty pos. tried to kill two pods I had a rammed with 75mm rails on a keres.
I had to slow down to under 100km to hit them. Then I had to shoot them about 5 times to pop them.
Terrible example I know. I just found it funny that I couldn't hit a pod with that due to tracking (pods are small though).
Yaay!!!!
|
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 18:43:51 -
[601] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Cleanse Serce wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Can you really fit a 10MN AB with Small Beams on the Confessors?
Fed nav 10mn AB yes. Downgraded Beam (dual light beam) [Confessor] Damage Control II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer Heat Sink II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Warp Scrambler II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Trimark Armor Pump II Small Trimark Armor Pump II Confessor] Damage Control II Heat Sink II Small Armor Repairer II EANM II Small Armor Repairer II 10MN Afterburner II Small Capacitor II (Navy 400's) J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router I No Implants Dps= 311 to 7.2 /9.7 (navy multi) Speed = 1313m/s (prop mode+link=2679 m/s) Resist= 69 59 65 75 (Def Mode+link= 84 79 82 87) Sig= 60 (def mode+link= 26) Tanks= 190 Dps per 3.4 sec CPU= 19/225 PWG= 8.3/112.7 By comparison (with 1 Heat Sink II) using 4 Small Focus Beam Lasers II with navy multi dps is 373 and with Small Focus Pulse Lasers II with conflags dps is 396. I believe the best weapon when fighting within 5m is the Small Focus Pulse Lasers II, but you'll need a 3% implant to make everything fit. Btw this mini brick orbits like a BS now.
Since I use my Confessor in an environment where the offense and speed are more important than tank, I went for 1mn MWD instead of trying to stick with 10mn AB fit:
1mn MWD Beam Kite (Cheap Version)-
Dual Light Beam Laser II x4 Core Probe Launcher II Small Unstable Power Flucuator
1mn MWD Small Electrochemical Capacitor Booster (Navy 400 Batteries) Faint Warp Disruptor
Heat Sink II x2 Tracking Enhancer II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer Damage Control II
Small Polycarbon Engine Housing II x2 Small Energy Locus Coordinator I
All stats @lvl5, no implants or links included:
Speed: 331m/s regular- 1573m/s MWD (Propulsion Mode: 552m/s regular- 2621m/s MWD) 4.07 second align time, 2.71 second align time in Prop mode.
Damage: 209DPS w/ Aurora, 32km optimal regular- 54km optimal in sharpshooter mode 366DPS w/ Gleam, 4km optimal- 7km optimal in sharpshooter- 301DPS w/ IN X-Ray, 13km optimal- 22km optimal in sharpshooter. 406mm scan res., 813mm scan res. in sharpshooter.
Tank: 57/44/52/66 resists regular, 71/63/68/77 resists in defense mode SAAR reps for 156hp per cycle while loaded with paste (115 hp/s according to PYFA)
My fit skimps on tank, but I usually don't need it since I use the ship to scan/chase down scanner ships and pods in lower class WH space. (More often than not, I fly cloakies instead....but every once in a while it's useful to have a pursuit/interceptor type ship handy instead of cloaky) |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1139
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 19:23:11 -
[602] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them.
so my comparison is comparing dessies against each other, you on the other hand throw in e-war ships as counters... that makes sense how exactly???
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, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:03:55 -
[603] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Jet Silf wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:The two ships are still way to overpowered. I feel fairly confident that when the other two tech 3 destroyers are released CCP will make another "balance" pass at this class of ship. When that happens the ships really should lose another 15pg and 5 cpu. Also reduce that damage bonus to 30%. You know these are T3 ships right? They really should be better than a lot of other ships of comparable size. I'm not seeing any combat records on zKill or BattleClinic for you, and your toon is only like 4 months old.... I'm thinking you don't really know what you are talking about here. He doesn't, he's just another troll obviously who can only fly at best T1 & T2 Frigs.
Again you're entitled to believe anything you want. Doesn't mean your beliefs are correct. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2363
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:06:24 -
[604] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. so my comparison is comparing dessies against each other, you on the other hand throw in e-war ships as counters... that makes sense how exactly??? Not just ewar cruisers, but T2 and faction cruisers.
And then flycatcher, lol. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:08:02 -
[605] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:I said it earlier and I'll say it again, I predict when all four ships are released these ships will receive another balance pass. Quit whining troll. You have no concept of what TD3's are suppose to be. Just stick with your AF's and continue Warp Drive Activating to your safe spots when you see Svipuls/Confessors on D-scan.
One of the more clueless people in this thread. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:12:44 -
[606] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them.
Rofl this post about using ships that far outclass T3's as a means to kill them shows how ignorant you are...not counting the flycatcher, but a Rapier or Ashimmu just to kill a destroyer Lord help you. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:39:32 -
[607] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Harvey James wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. so my comparison is comparing dessies against each other, you on the other hand throw in e-war ships as counters... that makes sense how exactly??? Not just ewar cruisers, but T2 and faction cruisers. And then flycatcher, lol.
At least the way I am imagining them, T3Ds should fall somewhere between Interdictors and T3 Cruisers in terms of ability/power....so his comparison to those types of ships for T3Ds is valid enough. (I'm using mine very much like a miniature Vagabond) T3Ds don't just insta-win against everything...and there are ships that can really hose T3Ds given the right chance.
Again, it's like the biggest problem with the T3Ds is that CCP set the ISK/Skill cost way too low, and so people are expecting them to be weak. T3 is the highest tech level available to players, it really should be accordingly more powerful. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2363
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 21:50:44 -
[608] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Rowells wrote:Harvey James wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. so my comparison is comparing dessies against each other, you on the other hand throw in e-war ships as counters... that makes sense how exactly??? Not just ewar cruisers, but T2 and faction cruisers. And then flycatcher, lol. At least the way I am imagining them, T3Ds should fall somewhere between Interdictors and T3 Cruisers in terms of ability/power....so his comparison to those types of ships for T3Ds is valid enough. (T3Ds don't just insta-win against everything...and there are ships that can really hose T3Ds given the right chance) Again, it's like the biggest problem with the T3Ds is that CCP set the ISK/Skill cost way too low. (And so people are expecting them to be weak) T3 is the highest tech level available to players, it really should be accordingly more powerful. That would go against the design goals for T3s. With strategic you should have a ship capable of filling multiple roles at once, while not exceeding the Specialized counterparts, similar to the current balance between T3 ewar subsystems and their T2 counterparts.
The tactical version takes the same route, but allows the changes on the fly. The problem with trying to balance the T3Ds is that they have no T2 destroyer filling similar roles, so your reference points lay somewhere between frigates and cruisers. Trying to compare them to interdictors would not be the best option since their primary role and specialization is with bubbles.
Isk/skill cost should not be the primary balancing point. It doesn't end well. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.04.30 22:13:34 -
[609] - Quote
Rowells wrote: That would go against the design goals for T3s. With strategic you should have a ship capable of filling multiple roles at once, while not exceeding the Specialized counterparts, similar to the current balance between T3 ewar subsystems and their T2 counterparts.
The tactical version takes the same route, but allows the changes on the fly. The problem with trying to balance the T3Ds is that they have no T2 destroyer filling similar roles, so your reference points lay somewhere between frigates and cruisers. Trying to compare them to interdictors would not be the best option since their primary role and specialization is with bubbles.
Isk/skill cost should not be the primary balancing point. It doesn't end well.
ISK/Skill shouldn't be the primary balance point....but it is one worth mentioning for T3Ds- I posted about it a page or two ago, they are super super easy to train for compared to Interdictors and other T2/T3 ships Destroyer sized and up.
As for comparison's sake, I'm currently using my Confessor very much like a classic kiting/teabagging Vagabond.... just smaller with a couple more small tricks up it's sleeve.
|
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
135
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 00:49:51 -
[610] - Quote
Post-nerf review:
Having refit my Confessors and Svipuls post-patch I'm now of the opinion that the powergrid changes don't really do anything. I can still fit 10mn AB with negligble loss in DPS/tank. I would go so far as to say the powergrid changes did nothing because they just had so much powergrid to play around with (and still do).
The main drop in performance rather comes from the speed/agility nerfs, especially for the Svipul. Because of its agility, its scram range changes quite drastically that I think loading barrage might possibly be the best option in 80% of fights. Confessor is slightly at adapting to the agility nerf since instant ammo changes let its it cope with the variation in brawl ranges that come with 10mn ABs.
If Svipul is arty fit, MWD is almost always better because unless you 1-2 shot your target, anything moderately fast and agile can just run away from a 10mn fit if they find themselves losing the engagement and you don't have the agility to stop them leaving your point range.
Killing these ships is pretty much the same as it always has been... i.e. neuts and webs. That its now easier to neut and web them because of their lower agility/speed seems balanced IMO. Svipul still has the advantage because it doesn't care as much about neuts and I imagine the same will apply to the Caldari Jackdaw when that comes out.
As far as roles go, they still crap on all the other dessies and frigs (except maybe a well flown sentinal vs a confessor). |
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 01:56:01 -
[611] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Ashlar Vellum wrote:'Cause if this is still the guideline for how all ships supposed to be, then t3d still need more work. I dunno, how do you feel T3 Cruisers really fit into that chart? Cuz I feel like they are waaaaay better than Navy and Pirate Faction Cruisers and usually better than T2- except that T2 is good at certain roles (like ECM and interdiction) for cheaper. I feel like the end result for T3Ds should be that they are as good or better for direct combat than Interdictors, but Interdictors have the bubble launcher along with less ISK/skill overhead to balance the differences. (I feel with the 10mn AB problem out of the way, the only issue I see with T3Ds is they are super easy to skill up....and at least prior to yesterday only cost 40mil.)
Agreed, They should lengthen the time sink it takes to max them out and increase their cost somewhere b/t 80-100 mill. I would've paid 120 mill for them pre-nerfed.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 02:31:11 -
[612] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. Rofl this post about using ships that far outclass T3's as a means to kill them shows how ignorant you are...not counting the flycatcher, but a Rapier or Ashimmu just to kill a destroyer Lord help you.
It's a T3, A T3. Meaning it's suppose to punch above it's class and since the other 2 T3D's aren't even out yet their are only a few ships in similar class that you can compare them too. The ones I listed are just an example of ships that can kill the current T3D's since you whiners makes them seem invincible. And yes there are others like the VNI, Stabber/Scythe FI's, and the Nomens that can tear the T3D's apart (assuming the pilot is competent which I doubt you are).
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 02:39:09 -
[613] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Harvey James wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. so my comparison is comparing dessies against each other, you on the other hand throw in e-war ships as counters... that makes sense how exactly??? Not just ewar cruisers, but T2 and faction cruisers. And then flycatcher, lol.
I honestly don't know about the Flycatcher, I only threw it in because I saw a clip of a Flycatcher taken out a Svipul but that could be due to pilot error etc.. Other than the Flycatcher, the Saber is the only T2D that you can compare the T3D's with atm. From there you have to go into the cruiser line of ships for comparison which are suppose to be their rivals.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2364
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 02:41:57 -
[614] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. Rofl this post about using ships that far outclass T3's as a means to kill them shows how ignorant you are...not counting the flycatcher, but a Rapier or Ashimmu just to kill a destroyer Lord help you. It's a T3, A T3. Meaning it's suppose to punch above it's class and since the other 2 T3D's aren't even out yet their are only a few ships in similar class that you can compare them too. The ones I listed are just an example of ships that can kill the current T3D's since you whiners makes them seem invincible. And yes there are others like the VNI, Stabber/Scythe FI's, and the Nomens that can tear the T3D's apart (assuming the pilot is competent which I doubt you are). No, being T3 does not designate it as being more powerful. T3 is supposed to have flexibility as its key trait. T3 cruisers are expected to receive the same reductions once they get around to the balance. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 02:56:42 -
[615] - Quote
Rowells wrote: No, being T3 does not designate it as being more powerful. T3 is supposed to have flexibility as its key trait. T3 cruisers are expected to receive the same reductions once they get around to the balance.
Yeah well, "flexibility" ends up essentially meaning "more powerful" at the end of the day.
I don't care how much you think CCP should nerf them, T3 ships should be better than their T2/Faction counterparts, and for the most part T1 ships should flee in terror from T3 ships in 1v1 scenarios. |
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 03:05:54 -
[616] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. Rofl this post about using ships that far outclass T3's as a means to kill them shows how ignorant you are...not counting the flycatcher, but a Rapier or Ashimmu just to kill a destroyer Lord help you. It's a T3, A T3. Meaning it's suppose to punch above it's class and since the other 2 T3D's aren't even out yet their are only a few ships in similar class that you can compare them too. The ones I listed are just an example of ships that can kill the current T3D's since you whiners makes them seem invincible. And yes there are others like the VNI, Stabber/Scythe FI's, and the Nomens that can tear the T3D's apart (assuming the pilot is competent which I doubt you are).
Lol there you go again with your mediocre attempt at insulting me and or your ridiculous assumptions regading my piloting/fitting ability. And all that just because I disagree with your opinion about the T3 destroyer. Your remarks and attempted trolling doesn't change the fact the T3's need more balance and will more then likely receive said balance once the other two ships are released. |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 04:18:33 -
[617] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote: Lol there you go again with your mediocre attempt at insulting me and or your ridiculous assumptions regading my piloting/fitting ability. And all that just because I disagree with your opinion about the T3 destroyer. Your remarks and attempted trolling doesn't change the fact the T3's need more balance and will more then likely receive said balance once the other two ships are released.
I disagree with the idea that the ships are too powerful for what they should be or too powerful compared to other existing ships.
I do agree that there should be and probably will be more balancing for these...but based more on making the isk/skill investment match the ability of the ship, maybe even make it so that it has a "ship death penalty" of some sort like T3 Cruisers do. (Also that making them cost 100-150mil ISK for the hull, as if buying a T2/Faction cruiser hull seems pretty fair based on their abilities.) |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2365
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 04:56:40 -
[618] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Rowells wrote: No, being T3 does not designate it as being more powerful. T3 is supposed to have flexibility as its key trait. T3 cruisers are expected to receive the same reductions once they get around to the balance.
As it turns out, "flexibility" ends up essentially meaning "more powerful" at the end of the day (and vice versa).....more flexible=more bonuses=more power=more better. T3 ships should be better than their T2/Faction counterparts, and many T1 ships should flee in terror from T3 ships in 1v1 scenarios. I'd like to see you tell me the flexibility of the old missile/turret typhoon made it more powerful than its single weapon counterparts with a straight face. Like I have said before, T3 is a class of ship with bonuses for multiple roles, while not exceeding all other ships in any particular function. That is why the current T3 subsystem lineup is due for a total overhaul. Some subs are way too powerful, others in a good spot, and then there are some that are almost completely worthless. Tactical destroyers take the spin of, rather than choosing more than one role at a time, you can switch at will.
Jet Silf wrote:Parity and Balance are cool in games and all, but no matter how much you try to level the playing field, something always ends up being better even if only by a small margin...in the end, games are actually more fun if you just allow some things to be more powerful than others and roll with it. (Example: Chess. Are all the pieces in a game of Chess equal? Hell No. Is there a forum discussion on the internet on how the makers of Chess need to nerf Queens and Bishops because of how useful they seem to be compared to all the other pieces? Hell No.....been that way for hundreds of years and nobody cares. they made a rule that says you can only have one or two of those pieces on the board at a time and called that "balanced" and rolled with it.) That doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue the best balance we can. Otherwise the game was fine years ago, and rolling back all the balance changes shouldn't be an issue. In which case, we enter a new era of dozens of worthless ships. Tiericide meant every ship has a purpose or specialty, not just more isk more power.
And honestly, trying to compare chess to a game like Eve? It's like comparing tic-tac-toe a game like Civ V. You might as well compare a rock to a planet and say they have the exact same properties. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 05:45:16 -
[619] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Cleanse Serce wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Can you really fit a 10MN AB with Small Beams on the Confessors?
Fed nav 10mn AB yes. Downgraded Beam (dual light beam) [Confessor] Damage Control II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer Heat Sink II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Warp Scrambler II Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Trimark Armor Pump II Small Trimark Armor Pump II Confessor] Damage Control II Heat Sink II Small Armor Repairer II EANM II Small Armor Repairer II 10MN Afterburner II Small Capacitor II (Navy 400's) J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Dual Light Beam Laser II [Empty High slot] Dual Light Beam Laser II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router I No Implants Dps= 311 to 7.2 /9.7 (navy multi) Speed = 1313m/s (prop mode+link=2679 m/s) Resist= 69 59 65 75 (Def Mode+link= 84 79 82 87) Sig= 60 (def mode+link= 26) Tanks= 190 Dps per 3.4 sec CPU= 19/225 PWG= 8.3/112.7 By comparison (with 1 Heat Sink II) using 4 Small Focus Beam Lasers II with navy multi dps is 373 and with Small Focus Pulse Lasers II with conflags dps is 396. I believe the best weapon when fighting within 5m is the Small Focus Pulse Lasers II, but you'll need a 3% implant to make everything fit. Btw this mini brick orbits like a BS now. Since I use my Confessor in an environment where the offense and speed/agility are way more important than the tank, I went for 1mn MWD instead of trying to stick with 10mn AB fit: 1mn MWD Beam Kite (Cheap Version)-
Dual Light Beam Laser II x4 Core Probe Launcher II Small Unstable Power Flucuator 1mn MWD Small Electrochemical Capacitor Booster (Navy 400 Batteries) Faint Warp Disruptor Heat Sink II x2 Tracking Enhancer II Small Ancillary Armor Repairer Damage Control II Small Polycarbon Engine Housing II x2 Small Energy Locus Coordinator I All stats @lvl5, no implants or links included: Speed: 331m/s regular- 1573m/s MWD (Propulsion Mode: 552m/s regular- 2621m/s MWD) 4.07 second align time, 2.71 second align time in Prop mode. Damage: 209DPS w/ Aurora, 32km optimal regular- 54km optimal in sharpshooter mode 366DPS w/ Gleam, 4km optimal- 7km optimal in sharpshooter- 301DPS w/ IN X-Ray, 13km optimal- 22km optimal in sharpshooter. 406mm scan res., 813mm scan res. in sharpshooter. Tank: 57/44/52/66 resists regular, 71/63/68/77 resists in defense mode SAAR reps for 156hp per cycle while loaded with paste (115 hp/s according to PYFA) Basically this fit is pretty close to what I had before the nerf, just w/out the 10mn AB...which I wasn't really utilizing anyways. I get most of the speed/agility from the nerf back from the polycarb rigs while keeping the same damage and range capabilities....and it now has a small nuet for defense. (for what it's worth) My fit really skimps on tank, but I usually don't need it since I use the ship to scan/chase down scanner ships, pods and other stuff that doesn't shoot back very much in lower class WH space. More often than not, I fly cloakies instead....but every once in a while it's useful to have a pursuit/interceptor type ship handy instead of cloaky.
Hmm I haven't even thought about using the 1MWD on the Confessor since they're already too cap dependent unlike the Svipul. Gosh even with cheap implants and links you're only looking at around 3630 m/s in prop mode. Idk if that's fast enough for soloing when some faction cruisers hitting around the 4k mark. How's the tracking with Aurora moving at those speeds?
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 06:15:07 -
[620] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Post-nerf review:
Having refit my Confessors and Svipuls post-patch I'm now of the opinion that the powergrid changes don't really do anything. I can still fit 10mn AB with negligble loss in DPS/tank. I would go so far as to say the powergrid changes did nothing because they just had so much powergrid to play around with (and still do).
The main drop in performance rather comes from the speed/agility nerfs, especially for the Svipul. Because of its agility, its scram range changes quite drastically that I think loading barrage might possibly be the best option in 80% of fights. Confessor is slightly at adapting to the agility nerf since instant ammo changes let its it cope with the variation in brawl ranges that come with 10mn ABs.
If Svipul is arty fit, MWD is almost always better because unless you 1-2 shot your target, anything moderately fast and agile can just run away from a 10mn fit if they find themselves losing the engagement and you don't have the agility to stop them leaving your point range.
Killing these ships is pretty much the same as it always has been... i.e. neuts and webs. That its now easier to neut and web them because of their lower agility/speed seems balanced IMO. Svipul still has the advantage because it doesn't care as much about neuts and I imagine the same will apply to the Caldari Jackdaw when that comes out.
As far as roles go, they still crap on all the other dessies and frigs (except maybe a well flown sentinal vs a confessor).
Although I'm using the T3D's for C2 wormholes atm I trained them for PVP specifically since all the other ships I can fly are mostly laser bricks(with the exception of the slicer & nomen). If they receive another nerf then it would've been better if CCP NEVER BOUGHT THEM OUT IN THE FIRST PLACE because they would have no role or purpose. And CCP should refund every player that was deceived their 4 mill SP that was wasted training for them because these ships would then be utterly useless.
|
|
Lug Muad'Dib
Wise Humans Sword
43
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 07:03:58 -
[621] - Quote
IMO D3 are still way too fast, and too strong for small plex, they killed diversity in FW.
D-Scan immunity is dumb.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 07:16:57 -
[622] - Quote
Leonardo Adami wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Leonardo Adami wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Harvey James wrote:the nerf's still don't cut it really, in comparison to interdictors and even T1 dessies these have MUCH better slot layouts and hugely better tank and at least in propulsion mode a confessor is quicker and much more agile than a heretic with same fits, so besides the obvious role bonuses that interdictors get, T3 dessies are much like T3 cruisers really.. OP. I bet you don't even fly TD3's. People tend to whine about a ship that owned them because they are too lazy to figure out a proper strategy when fighting against them. A Rapier, Ashimmu or even a Flycatcher would wreck TD3's when proper strategies are implemented when engaging against them. Or you can warp to safes when you spot them on D-scan and continue whining in the forums about them. Rofl this post about using ships that far outclass T3's as a means to kill them shows how ignorant you are...not counting the flycatcher, but a Rapier or Ashimmu just to kill a destroyer Lord help you. It's a T3, A T3. Meaning it's suppose to punch above it's class and since the other 2 T3D's aren't even out yet their are only a few ships in similar class that you can compare them too. The ones I listed are just an example of ships that can kill the current T3D's since you whiners makes them seem invincible. And yes there are others like the VNI, Stabber/Scythe FI's, and the Nomens that can tear the T3D's apart (assuming the pilot is competent which I doubt you are). Lol there you go again with your mediocre attempt at insulting me and or your ridiculous assumptions regading my piloting/fitting ability. And all that just because I disagree with your opinion about the T3 destroyer. Your remarks and attempted trolling doesn't change the fact the T3's need more balance and will more then likely receive said balance once the other two ships are released.
Yea that statement was a troll remark and I apologize. It just pisses me off when people whine and whine about a particular ship just to induce CCP to nerf it to oblivion. The only REAL reason people would still complain about the T3D's being OP is because they STILL fear the ships or just flat out don't like them because they make their favorite ships obsolete. Since players now realize that CCP "listen to the players" the forums have become a paradise for whiners. In short, quit whining like a whimper when something new comes out and learn to adjust.
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 07:36:14 -
[623] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote: Hmm I haven't even thought about using the 1MWD on the Confessor since they're already too cap dependent unlike the Svipul. Gosh even with cheap implants and links you're only looking at around 3630 m/s in prop mode. Idk if that's fast enough for soloing when some faction cruisers hitting around the 4k mark. How's the tracking with Aurora moving at those speeds?
With deadspace MWD and cap booster, I can all but permarun the MWD, even while running a lot of my other mods...and the ship can speed tank on the MWD much like 10mn AB despite the sig radius bloom. (Not as good, reliant on defense mode more- which is cool because with 10mn AB I wasn't needing defense mode at all)
Tracking on the Dual Lights w/Aurora seems really good at speed actually.....I was using mostly the same setup prior to the nerf, but with oversize AB. |
Cleanse Serce
Lonesome Capsuleer
31
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 08:01:26 -
[624] - Quote
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:IMO D3 are still way too fast, and too strong for small plex, they killed diversity in FW.
I can still see hookbills, and merlins, and slicers, and comets, and dramiels, and garmurs, and algoses, and thrashers, and dragoons, and, and, and, and, and, and, and...
I really don't understand, it's like Garmurs had killed Interceptors.... (talkin for a LS environment.) Or like the unscannable Recons had killed medium plexes .....
I agree they should be not allowed to enter small plexes. But not anymore, concidering the nerfs, and the one probably comin again, if people keeps whining about them instead of thinking a way to counter them...
*sigh* |
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 08:07:29 -
[625] - Quote
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:IMO D3 are still way too fast, and too strong for small plex, they killed diversity in FW.
See, this is where using isk/skill investment as a balance factor is important....it isn't that T3Ds are the only ships that could be out there harshing your FW mellow... it's that they are much more powerful than anything as cheap and low SP- stuff that is on par with T3Ds like HACs and Recons cost 3 times as much isk, and at least that much more in skill time- way more considering stuff like T2 drones and T2 Medium Turrets/Launchers to fit them out with.
|
Lug Muad'Dib
Wise Humans Sword
43
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 08:52:51 -
[626] - Quote
Combat recon are problematic too, and ? Just never do medium plex without cloacky eyes on gate. It's just an intel problem for solo account after all..
And yes, hopefully you can still see a lot of things in small plexes, until a D3 come... Combat environnement in small plex was better before their introduction, and the nerf wasn't enough strong to shake that.
If you want to raise cost to 300m or nerf it more, it's your opinion, mine is don't allow them in small plex will be enough and good for FW area.
D-Scan immunity is dumb.
|
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
178
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 17:15:37 -
[627] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Rowells wrote: No, being T3 does not designate it as being more powerful. T3 is supposed to have flexibility as its key trait. T3 cruisers are expected to receive the same reductions once they get around to the balance.
As it turns out, "flexibility" ends up essentially meaning "more powerful" at the end of the day (and vice versa).....more flexible=more bonuses=more power=more better. T3 ships should be better than their T2/Faction counterparts, and many T1 ships should flee in terror from T3 ships in 1v1 scenarios. CCP should answer this question once and for all, then half of the questions and arguments will solve themselves out. Saying they should be "flexible" can be interpreted in so many ways, they could probably say something like t3s supposed to be "good" with same success and leave it at that.
So someone should poke Fozzie or Rise about this. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2365
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 17:57:19 -
[628] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote:Jet Silf wrote:Rowells wrote: No, being T3 does not designate it as being more powerful. T3 is supposed to have flexibility as its key trait. T3 cruisers are expected to receive the same reductions once they get around to the balance.
As it turns out, "flexibility" ends up essentially meaning "more powerful" at the end of the day (and vice versa).....more flexible=more bonuses=more power=more better. T3 ships should be better than their T2/Faction counterparts, and many T1 ships should flee in terror from T3 ships in 1v1 scenarios. CCP should answer this question once and for all, then half of the questions and arguments will solve themselves out. Saying they should be "flexible" can be interpreted in so many ways, they could probably say something like t3s supposed to be "good" with same success and leave it at that. So someone should poke Fozzie or Rise about this. They already stated the design goal for T3 a while back (don't ask exactly when, it's been a while). They even had illustrations for people to see (one was even linked in this thread). I'm not pulling this "generalization over specialization" out of nowhere.
The problem was when they first designed the ships, the goal was to give wormholes a ship with a lot of power per m3. This was also done before teiricide, thus, the idea of ships having roles wasn't as big a topic then either. |
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
178
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 18:39:28 -
[629] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Ashlar Vellum wrote:Jet Silf wrote:Rowells wrote: No, being T3 does not designate it as being more powerful. T3 is supposed to have flexibility as its key trait. T3 cruisers are expected to receive the same reductions once they get around to the balance.
As it turns out, "flexibility" ends up essentially meaning "more powerful" at the end of the day (and vice versa).....more flexible=more bonuses=more power=more better. T3 ships should be better than their T2/Faction counterparts, and many T1 ships should flee in terror from T3 ships in 1v1 scenarios. CCP should answer this question once and for all, then half of the questions and arguments will solve themselves out. Saying they should be "flexible" can be interpreted in so many ways, they could probably say something like t3s supposed to be "good" with same success and leave it at that. So someone should poke Fozzie or Rise about this. They already stated the design goal for T3 a while back (don't ask exactly when, it's been a while). They even had illustrations for people to see (one was even linked in this thread). I'm not pulling this "generalization over specialization" out of nowhere. The problem was when they first designed the ships, the goal was to give wormholes a ship with a lot of power per m3. This was also done before teiricide, thus, the idea of ships having roles wasn't as big a topic then either. Yes, this picture, I posted it a page back.
So I will reiterate what I posted earlier, if that is a guideline for how they should be (navy ships that can change on the fly) then they are indeed op. But at the same time if that is the case why did CCP gave svipul more speed, agility etc. in comparison to sabre if it supposed to be balanced around navy variants, it doesn't make sense. (same goes for price point change, why was it needed then.) |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2366
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:07:44 -
[630] - Quote
Ashlar Vellum wrote:Yes, this picture, I posted it a page back. So I will reiterate what I posted earlier, if that is a guideline for how they should be (navy ships that can change on the fly) then they are indeed op. But at the same time if that is the case why did CCP gave svipul more speed, agility etc. in comparison to sabre if it supposed to be balanced around navy variants, it doesn't make sense. (same goes for price point change, why was it needed then.) I find with destroyers being the class they chose for T3 introduction, there is going to be much more of a challenge trying to balance it. There are no other ships that really fit the roles that its modes provide bonuses for. Interdictors aren't the best comparison since their primary role is interdiction, which the T3Ds do not do. Arguably they both share the same role as destroyers, firepower against frigates, but that only helps us so much. And with the recent addition of drone/missile destroyers, the destroyer line-up is all over the place in terms of specialties, while still somehow trying to be the same role, anti-frigate.
If CCP had say, chosen frigate as a T3 project, there would be much more to work with. There are distinct specialties each ship tends to have and their T2 variants offer much in the way of options for modes or subsystems.
The problem in balancing T3Ds is the lack of a reference point, leaving a very vague, grey area for them to play in, while still needing to be balanced against each other.
Not that it can't be done, but the work needed to get there is drastically more. Hopefully they will touch on all the destroyers agan in a secondary balance pass soon. |
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
295
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:16:27 -
[631] - Quote
I'm actually content with the current pass on the confessor. Sure, 10mn fits are now very limited, but 1mn fits have opened up quite a bit.
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 19:52:48 -
[632] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Ashlar Vellum wrote:Yes, this picture, I posted it a page back. So I will reiterate what I posted earlier, if that is a guideline for how they should be (navy ships that can change on the fly) then they are indeed op. But at the same time if that is the case why did CCP gave svipul more speed, agility etc. in comparison to sabre if it supposed to be balanced around navy variants, it doesn't make sense. (same goes for price point change, why was it needed then.) I find with destroyers being the class they chose for T3 introduction, there is going to be much more of a challenge trying to balance it. There are no other ships that really fit the roles that its modes provide bonuses for. Interdictors aren't the best comparison since their primary role is interdiction, which the T3Ds do not do. Arguably they both share the same role as destroyers, firepower against frigates, but that only helps us so much. And with the recent addition of drone/missile destroyers, the destroyer line-up is all over the place in terms of specialties, while still somehow trying to be the same role, anti-frigate. If CCP had say, chosen frigate as a T3 project, there would be much more to work with. There are distinct specialties each ship tends to have and their T2 variants offer much in the way of options for modes or subsystems. The problem in balancing T3Ds is the lack of a reference point, leaving a very vague, grey area for them to play in, while still needing to be balanced against each other. Not that it can't be done, but the work needed to get there is drastically more. Hopefully they will touch on all the destroyers agan in a secondary balance pass soon.
Vagabond....Cruiser that flies like a Frigate. T3Ds are a smaller version that have a probe launcher and some other interesting quirks in the right "mode"- HACs and other T2/Pirate ships are still better at dealing with bigger targets. CCP just needs to fix the isk/skill investment to match at this point.
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.01 23:46:15 -
[633] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:I'm actually content with the current pass on the confessor. Sure, 10mn fits are now very limited, but 1mn fits have opened up quite a bit.
As it's turning out, the "drawbacks" for having a MWD instead of the oversized AB are not very dramatic- the ship can permarun a 1mn MWD and in defense mode it only has a little over 200m sig radius while doing so....which at 1500m/s, is speed tank worthy. It doesn't speed tank as crazy good as the 10mn AB used to, but it can still do it- you just have to be smarter about it. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 00:02:43 -
[634] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:I'm actually content with the current pass on the confessor. Sure, 10mn fits are now very limited, but 1mn fits have opened up quite a bit.
I'm content with these changes as well but the whiners in this forum are trying to induce CCP into nerfing the T3D's further for no other reason than to oust them from the meta entirely. So your thoughts on this balance pass is much appreciated otherwise the whiners are gonna spawn like rabbits and take over this sticky forum.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 00:24:24 -
[635] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:SFM Hobb3s wrote:I'm actually content with the current pass on the confessor. Sure, 10mn fits are now very limited, but 1mn fits have opened up quite a bit.
As it's turning out, the "drawbacks" for having a MWD instead of the oversized AB are not very dramatic- the ship can permarun a 1mn MWD and in defense mode it only has a little over 200m sig radius while doing so....which at 1500m/s, is speed tank worthy. It doesn't speed tank as crazy good as the 10mn AB used to, but it can still do it- you just have to be smarter about it. As an added kicker the ship seems to have nicer agility with MWD post-nerf than it did with 10mnAB pre-nerf. I think I am actually liking the ship a lot more after the balance pass- the nerf did a good job of targeting the thing they wanted to get people away from while keeping the other really good aspects of the ship intact.
So the Confessor really was OP pre-nerfed with the 10mn AB huh. And now it looks like I have to get use to using the 1mn mwd, but gosh that 1500 m/s is a bit slow and in prop mode you're still only looking at 2500 m/s(3250 m/s with links). I wish they kept the base speed intact, the agility, pwd, cpu, -30dps, and capacitor recharge rate nerfs were enough. I guess I can only use the Confessors to plow through neutral+ Effect C2 WH's and start playing around with the Svipuls for pvp.
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 00:37:35 -
[636] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Jet Silf wrote:SFM Hobb3s wrote:I'm actually content with the current pass on the confessor. Sure, 10mn fits are now very limited, but 1mn fits have opened up quite a bit.
As it's turning out, the "drawbacks" for having a MWD instead of the oversized AB are not very dramatic- the ship can permarun a 1mn MWD and in defense mode it only has a little over 200m sig radius while doing so....which at 1500m/s, is speed tank worthy. It doesn't speed tank as crazy good as the 10mn AB used to, but it can still do it- you just have to be smarter about it. As an added kicker the ship seems to have nicer agility with MWD post-nerf than it did with 10mnAB pre-nerf. I think I am actually liking the ship a lot more after the balance pass- the nerf did a good job of targeting the thing they wanted to get people away from while keeping the other really good aspects of the ship intact. So the Confessor really was OP pre-nerfed with the 10mn AB huh. And now it looks like I have to get use to using the 1mn mwd, but gosh that 1500 m/s is a bit slow and in prop mode you're still only looking at 2500 m/s(3250 m/s with links). I wish they kept the base speed intact, the agility, pwd, cpu, -30dps, and capacitor recharge rate nerfs were enough. I guess I can only use the Confessors to plow through neutral+ Effect C2 WH's and start playing around with the Svipuls for pvp.
Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them- if there are no ships that the T3Ds have to fear then yeah, that's not good balance. The 10mn AB was too automatic, and had too few counters....now with 1mn MWD, you'll need to pay a lot more attention to what mode you are using and you have to fear really fast frigates with scrams.
I only have Confessor for my oldest toon so far, I had been waiting to see how this re-balance played out (and also waiting for the Caldari and Gallente T3Ds) to train for them on other toons....probably going to just go ahead and "green light" that now. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
652
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 10:43:24 -
[637] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them...
Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones...
They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end.
I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
652
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 10:44:20 -
[638] - Quote
oops double post
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 21:25:22 -
[639] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen.
You can't be serious, Condor, Atron, Executioner are all t1 frigs. If what you're saying is true then this is very big problem that I'll address to CCP directly and demand my SP back. Sigh... I would've been flying a Vagabond and Loki by now if I wasn't seduce by these T3D's.
|
NovemberMike
Hole Violence Whole Squid
6
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 22:43:49 -
[640] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. I don't see how they'll kill a Confessor in 20 seconds. I don't see a specific fit, but even a Beam + MWD fit should be able to hit T1 frigates easily and kill them before they can chew through the buffer (which will take much longer than 20 seconds). A properly fit confessor will still outduel just about any other frigate if it's piloted properly. T1 frigates can probably take it down in a cost effective manner but that's been true for every ship ever. |
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2371
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 22:52:07 -
[641] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:Rowells wrote:Ashlar Vellum wrote:Yes, this picture, I posted it a page back. So I will reiterate what I posted earlier, if that is a guideline for how they should be (navy ships that can change on the fly) then they are indeed op. But at the same time if that is the case why did CCP gave svipul more speed, agility etc. in comparison to sabre if it supposed to be balanced around navy variants, it doesn't make sense. (same goes for price point change, why was it needed then.) I find with destroyers being the class they chose for T3 introduction, there is going to be much more of a challenge trying to balance it. There are no other ships that really fit the roles that its modes provide bonuses for. Interdictors aren't the best comparison since their primary role is interdiction, which the T3Ds do not do. Arguably they both share the same role as destroyers, firepower against frigates, but that only helps us so much. And with the recent addition of drone/missile destroyers, the destroyer line-up is all over the place in terms of specialties, while still somehow trying to be the same role, anti-frigate. If CCP had say, chosen frigate as a T3 project, there would be much more to work with. There are distinct specialties each ship tends to have and their T2 variants offer much in the way of options for modes or subsystems. The problem in balancing T3Ds is the lack of a reference point, leaving a very vague, grey area for them to play in, while still needing to be balanced against each other. Not that it can't be done, but the work needed to get there is drastically more. Hopefully they will touch on all the destroyers agan in a secondary balance pass soon. Vagabond....Cruiser that flies like a Frigate- the actual in-game model for the Vagabond is barely bigger than a destroyer hull even though it is a cruiser. T3Ds are a smaller version that have a probe launcher and mode switching.- HACs and other T2/Pirate ships are still better at dealing with bigger targets. CCP just needs to fix the isk/skill investment to match at this point. They are too easy to buy and fly for what they are, but they do have enough parallels in game to give them a place on the theoretical food chain of EVE ships- right between T2 Dessies and T2 Cruisers. yes, the vagabond, who's sole specialization is speed, has a single attribute on the level of some frigates. While not having any other benefit that frigates have. Other stats are more comparable to cruisers and arguably lower in some circumstances compared to its HAC cousins.
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.02 23:53:58 -
[642] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen.
Holy Pessimism Batman!
It's not a game of tag....just because some of those frigs you list can catch a Confessor doesn't mean it will be a good idea.
With the 10mn AB fits the T3Ds were silly good- after the nerf these ships still have a lot going for them:
Svipul: Dual Prop (proposed for after I train up the minnie T3D skill)
200mm AutoCannon II x4 Rocket Launcher II Small Diminishing Power Systems Drain
Limited 1mn MWD 1mn AfterBurner II Warp Scrambler II Stasis Webifier II
Small Ancillary Armor Rep Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II x2
Small Polycarbonite Engine Housing II x2 Small Projectile Metastasis Adjuster I
Stat Highlights: (All5, no implants/boosters/OH)
436DPS w/ Hail/Rage ammo- Speed 324m/s (540 prop) AB 734m/s (1224m/s prop) MWD 1843m/s (3072 prop)
Note: this one is a PYFA fit, I don't have the skills to quite fly it in game yet....but apparently this fit could do just over 3000m/s, and then flip over to doing 700 or 1200m/s on AB in scram/web range. (Again, skimpy tank...and this one doesn't have the cap booster- ship is cap stable while not running the armor repper tho)
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 03:16:18 -
[643] - Quote
Jet Silf wrote:elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. Holy Pessimism Batman! It's not a game of tag....just because some of those frigs you list can catch a Confessor doesn't mean it will be a good idea. With the 10mn AB fits the T3Ds were silly good- after the nerf these ships still have a lot going for them: Svipul: Dual Prop (proposed for after I train up the minnie T3D skill)
200mm AutoCannon II x4 Rocket Launcher II Small Diminishing Power Systems Drain Limited 1mn MWD 1mn AfterBurner II Warp Scrambler II Stasis Webifier II Small Ancillary Armor Rep Damage Control II Gyrostabilizer II x2 Small Polycarbonite Engine Housing II x2 Small Projectile Metastasis Adjuster I Stat Highlights: (All5, no implants/boosters/OH) 436DPS w/ Hail/Rage ammo- Speed 324m/s (540 prop) AB 734m/s (1224m/s prop) MWD 1843m/s (3072 prop) Note: this one is a PYFA fit, I don't have the skills to quite fly it in game yet....but apparently this fit could do just over 3000m/s, and then flip over to doing 700 or 1200m/s on AB in scram/web range. (Again, skimpy tank...and this one doesn't have the cap booster- ship is cap stable while not running the armor repper tho)
Hmm yea I kinda know you're right about the fact that they probably won't be able to kill them solo, but these ships usually are flown as hero tacklers while they call in their pals to finish you off and if these things can catch you while you're using links+prop mode+mwd then once they scram you, you're as good as dead. The scram immunity + agility while hitting 3.5 km/s cold was the reason I fell in love with these ships and then CCP does this to them as soon as I just finished maxing them both out. And this sudden nerf has got me petrified at the thought of training for the Gallente/Caldari T3D's Because I'm beginning to believe that these T3D's are nothing more than test dummies for CCP's ultimate goal which is the complete rebalancing of the T3C's, so inevitably these T3D's are gonna be hit with another balance pass and another and another until they reach their goals. Once their goals are reached that's when the T3C's would be changed accordingly. In the meantime I'm gonna terrorize small plexes with these boys while I have the chance. |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
296
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 17:15:41 -
[644] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen.
Dunno about that really. Post nerf I am able to put the heavier guns on, granting me an extra 15km optimal (now up to about 80+km), and an extra 40dps with aurora. I have more agility than pre-nerf, and the only thing I've lost is some tracking (due to bigger guns).
I'm not having any trouble at all blapping t1 frigs, even those that are forgoing using any hislots in an effort to bulk up tank and em resists.
And I've already tried going up against garmurs too. I can out-shoot their point, and if they are not already aligned to something it might be too late for them to warp off.
So far I've had trouble with two ships, Jaguars and Wolves. That 90% base EM resist.... |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
656
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 18:36:12 -
[645] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:Dunno about that really. Post nerf I am able to put the heavier guns on, granting me an extra 15km optimal (now up to about 80+km), and an extra 40dps with aurora. I have more agility than pre-nerf, and the only thing I've lost is some tracking (due to bigger guns).
I'm not having any trouble at all blapping t1 frigs, even those that are forgoing using any hislots in an effort to bulk up tank and em resists.
And I've already tried going up against garmurs too. I can out-shoot their point, and if they are not already aligned to something it might be too late for them to warp off.
So far I've had trouble with two ships, Jaguars and Wolves. That 90% base EM resist....
To elaborate, I didn't have a 10mn afterburner on but a 1mn mwd and that linked Garmur had a tracking disruptor on - ouch.
And the 10mn afterburner fit has not brought me any luck either, I seem to magically attract the worst module in EVE - neuts. For the love of your GODS, remove them.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Jet Silf
One within we are
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 19:33:26 -
[646] - Quote
It seems like there's a hidden MWD bonus for Svipul somewhere....I have my Svipul and Confessor fit very similarly- and while the Confessor has slightly higher base velocity, but for whatever reason the Svipul is faster w/ MWD on. (1800m/s and 3000m/s)
Anybody else seeing this? |
Jet Silf
One within we are
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.03 20:13:56 -
[647] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote: And this sudden nerf has got me petrified at the thought of training for the Gallente/Caldari T3D's Because I'm beginning to believe that these T3D's are nothing more than test dummies for CCP's ultimate goal which is the complete rebalancing of the T3C's, so inevitably these T3D's are gonna be hit with another balance pass and another and another until they reach their goals. Once their goals are reached that's when the T3C's would be changed accordingly. In the meantime I'm gonna terrorize small plexes with these boys while I have the chance.
T3 Cruisers have the same issues with oversized AB fits, and is very likely what they want to "look into" for those. (They may have found a pretty elegant solution for it the way they just handled the T3Ds.)
T3Ds will see another "nerf", but I think it's going to be about risk/investment instead of about power- I don't think they can adjust the power much further down when you look at the more uber frigates and dessies like Daredevil, Garmur or Sabre and other T2 stuff like AFs and inties....instead I think they will bring the ISK/skill requirements up to better match the T3Ds abilities. (And to help maybe make them a rarer sight in places like FW, where low cost-mostly frigate PvP has always been the norm....there's plenty of other ships that could be out there terrorizing FW complexes, but they all cost 3 times as much isk and similarly more skill investment.)
Speaking of the other two T3Ds.....I wish they would hurry up and come out with those already. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 02:15:22 -
[648] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. Dunno about that really. Post nerf I am able to put the heavier guns on, granting me an extra 15km optimal (now up to about 80+km), and an extra 40dps with aurora. I have more agility than pre-nerf, and the only thing I've lost is some tracking (due to bigger guns). I'm not having any trouble at all blapping t1 frigs, even those that are forgoing using any hislots in an effort to bulk up tank and em resists. And I've already tried going up against garmurs too. I can out-shoot their point, and if they are not already aligned to something it might be too late for them to warp off. So far I've had trouble with two ships, Jaguars and Wolves. That 90% base EM resist....
I guess I'm still worried about using Aurora because of that -75% tracking speed reduction. So basically you're saying that you can track a frig moving at 3km/s + without any issues? Do you use tracking rigs? |
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
296
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 19:10:50 -
[649] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:SFM Hobb3s wrote:elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. Dunno about that really. Post nerf I am able to put the heavier guns on, granting me an extra 15km optimal (now up to about 80+km), and an extra 40dps with aurora. I have more agility than pre-nerf, and the only thing I've lost is some tracking (due to bigger guns). I'm not having any trouble at all blapping t1 frigs, even those that are forgoing using any hislots in an effort to bulk up tank and em resists. And I've already tried going up against garmurs too. I can out-shoot their point, and if they are not already aligned to something it might be too late for them to warp off. So far I've had trouble with two ships, Jaguars and Wolves. That 90% base EM resist.... I guess I'm still worried about using Aurora because of that -75% tracking speed reduction. So basically you're saying that you can track a frig moving at 3km/s + without any issues? Do you use tracking rigs?
I've got all those related gunnery skills to 5, and am not using any tracking rigs or tracking implants. I've actually mixed it up a fair bit between aurora and the faction red crystal (infrared? can't remember off hand). TBH I'm getting more damage/volley with aurora. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
659
|
Posted - 2015.05.04 19:35:18 -
[650] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:I've got all those related gunnery skills to 5, and am not using any tracking rigs or tracking implants. I've actually mixed it up a fair bit between aurora and the faction red crystal (infrared? can't remember off hand). TBH I'm getting more damage/volley with aurora.
Aurora does the same damage as standard tech 1 crystals (the yellow ones) with more range and more capacitor consumption. It's the same with lead and spike railgun ammo.
That's why all of my beam fits have standard in the hold
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 10:22:58 -
[651] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:SFM Hobb3s wrote:elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. Dunno about that really. Post nerf I am able to put the heavier guns on, granting me an extra 15km optimal (now up to about 80+km), and an extra 40dps with aurora. I have more agility than pre-nerf, and the only thing I've lost is some tracking (due to bigger guns). I'm not having any trouble at all blapping t1 frigs, even those that are forgoing using any hislots in an effort to bulk up tank and em resists. And I've already tried going up against garmurs too. I can out-shoot their point, and if they are not already aligned to something it might be too late for them to warp off. So far I've had trouble with two ships, Jaguars and Wolves. That 90% base EM resist.... I guess I'm still worried about using Aurora because of that -75% tracking speed reduction. So basically you're saying that you can track a frig moving at 3km/s + without any issues? Do you use tracking rigs? I've got all those related gunnery skills to 5, and am not using any tracking rigs or tracking implants. I've actually mixed it up a fair bit between aurora and the faction red crystal (infrared? can't remember off hand). TBH I'm getting more damage/volley with aurora.
My gunnery support skills are all maxed as well. I'm seeing 216 cold dps with aurora out to 49/52 km in prop mode. This looks promising, the only ships that can engage over that range is the Garmur ( 60km's while moving at 6-7km/s). With the 1 MN MWD in Prop mode+links, I'm seeing speeds at 2.9km/s, with the 1MN AB it's not even funny (1.2km/s in Prop+links). I wish CCP just left the base speed intact. I sure hope in the next balance pass they give back the confessor's base speed, this ship is just too slow as is. Every fight you engage is a committed fight now, so you gotta bulk up that tank to dual/triple rep+ dual nos if you want to survive.
|
Solj RichPopolous
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
125
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 16:21:08 -
[652] - Quote
Dropped to dual lights on my confessor. dropped the aux nano pump for small t2 poly carbon. Aligns a tad bit faster than before. Still have my 10mn AB. 3700ms with the links. I will miss the extra 70 dps i had but its a small price to pay for the ship to actually still be viable in my arsenal. When a ship cant effectively oversize prop there is only 1 solution, right click --> Trash item. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3279
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 17:33:52 -
[653] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/dfQg7wz.png
svipul largely unaffected, confessor no longer on the list. Basically what we predicted.
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
520
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 18:52:54 -
[654] - Quote
Because Svipul remains a broken T3D conceptually - Stays in Propulsion Mode all day long.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 21:26:29 -
[655] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/dfQg7wz.png
svipul largely unaffected, confessor no longer on the list. Basically what we predicted.
I keep seeing the Sabre on top ship list for small scale/solo pvp, and it looks to be better than the Confessor. Darn it, I should've just train for that ship instead of the T3D's mostly because it has one powerful feature that the T3D's don't have.......NERF IMMUNITY.
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3280
|
Posted - 2015.05.05 23:24:01 -
[656] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/dfQg7wz.png
svipul largely unaffected, confessor no longer on the list. Basically what we predicted. I keep seeing the Sabre on top ship list for small scale/solo pvp, and it looks to be better than the Confessor. Darn it, I should've just train for that ship instead of the T3D's mostly because it has one powerful feature that the T3D's don't have.......NERF IMMUNITY.
are you confusing interdictors with an interceptors? In any case. the reason why the sabre is on top of the list is because its extremely easy to get on a km for an interdictor (due to how bubbles work etc).
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
525
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 00:00:15 -
[657] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/dfQg7wz.png
svipul largely unaffected, confessor no longer on the list. Basically what we predicted. I keep seeing the Sabre on top ship list for small scale/solo pvp, and it looks to be better than the Confessor. Darn it, I should've just train for that ship instead of the T3D's mostly because it has one powerful feature that the T3D's don't have.......NERF IMMUNITY. are you confusing interdictors with an interceptors? In any case. the reason why the sabre is on top of the list is because its extremely easy to get on a km for an interdictor (due to how bubbles work etc).
Exactly that. Whenever someone tries to warp out of your bubble, you count as a party in the engagement.
Bubbles don't give aggression timers, tho, so you can double bubble the target from inbound and outbound - a very, very severe oversight by CCP.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 00:01:17 -
[658] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/dfQg7wz.png
svipul largely unaffected, confessor no longer on the list. Basically what we predicted. I keep seeing the Sabre on top ship list for small scale/solo pvp, and it looks to be better than the Confessor. Darn it, I should've just train for that ship instead of the T3D's mostly because it has one powerful feature that the T3D's don't have.......NERF IMMUNITY. are you confusing interdictors with an interceptors? In any case. the reason why the sabre is on top of the list is because its extremely easy to get on a km for an interdictor (due to how bubbles work etc).
I see, the interdiction sphere launchers is a mechanic that I'm not at all familiar with and It seems like it has to be use with a small gang to be effective unlike soloing. I'm a noob at pvp so before I start using the Confessors/Svipul for FW I'm gonna get bashed around with the thrashers/coercers to get that PS up.
|
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 15:55:28 -
[659] - Quote
Bienator II wrote:http://i.imgur.com/dfQg7wz.png
svipul largely unaffected, confessor no longer on the list. Basically what we predicted.
Agreed. It appears that CCP tried to nerf both ships in a similar fashion which is a huge mistake because they are so very different. Hopefully they've come to understand this and don't make the same mistake when balancing the other two T3 prior to their release. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
536
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 17:56:18 -
[660] - Quote
What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless to ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦)
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 19:16:35 -
[661] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦)
CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1072
|
Posted - 2015.05.06 20:05:05 -
[662] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul.
funny because the svipul has an actual wasted bonus |
Jedi VanDiemen
Hidden Aggression
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 09:49:37 -
[663] - Quote
[Update EVE] [Jump Clone to NPC Null] [Activate Svipul]
"WTF!" 4 of the 6 AC's fit now useless. DPS now 112, hot. #FacePalm
It's going to be a tough ride limping home.
#NERFEDinNULL
|
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
240
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 13:45:43 -
[664] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. CCP's insistence on counting the cap bonus on guns as the same 'cost' or 'power' as other bonuses just shows how out of touch they tend to be in regards to amarr. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 14:46:38 -
[665] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. CCP's insistence on counting the cap bonus on guns as the same 'cost' or 'power' as other bonuses just shows how out of touch they tend to be in regards to amarr.
It's p bad, only saving grace for Amarr is the Scorch Ammo, and even that is 82% EM, 18% Thermal by damage vs. 58% EM and 42% Thermal for Multifrequency.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
240
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:02:37 -
[666] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. CCP's insistence on counting the cap bonus on guns as the same 'cost' or 'power' as other bonuses just shows how out of touch they tend to be in regards to amarr. It's p bad, only saving grace for Amarr is the Scorch Ammo, and even that is 82% EM, 18% Thermal by damage vs. 58% EM and 42% Thermal for Multifrequency. All ammunition needs some kind of revamp, to be honest. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
540
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 16:32:36 -
[667] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. CCP's insistence on counting the cap bonus on guns as the same 'cost' or 'power' as other bonuses just shows how out of touch they tend to be in regards to amarr. It's p bad, only saving grace for Amarr is the Scorch Ammo, and even that is 82% EM, 18% Thermal by damage vs. 58% EM and 42% Thermal for Multifrequency. All ammunition needs some kind of revamp, to be honest.
Kinetic ammo for Amarr! (a+ç -á-¦ -ƒ+ä-£ -í-¦)a+ç
Even if it's just trace amounts, like Explosive & Kinetic parts are for Minmatar's EMP. Heck, from a Lore perspective even Explosive type would do - shiet overheating and exploding, doing Kinetic & Explosive damage. pâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ë
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Ashlar Vellum
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
178
|
Posted - 2015.05.07 18:34:31 -
[668] - Quote
Keep your peasant kinetic ammo to yourself, thank you very much. |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
342
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 00:23:35 -
[669] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen.
LOL what are you smoking?
none of those ships will ever break the tank of a well fit confessor. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2380
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 01:52:57 -
[670] - Quote
Phaade wrote:elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. LOL what are you smoking? none of those ships will ever break the tank of a well fit confessor. I particularly remember 1 confessor in particular tanking a squad of harpies and tackle. |
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 04:52:18 -
[671] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Phaade wrote:elitatwo wrote:Jet Silf wrote:...Well, there may be ships that can go faster than 2600m/s, but only so many of them... Garmur, Navy Slicer, all ceptors, Condor, Atron, Executioner, some minmatar ones... They will all kill that Confessor in 20 seconds - the end. I still cannot see how the Confessor was so unstoppable that this overnerf need to happen. LOL what are you smoking? none of those ships will ever break the tank of a well fit confessor. I particularly remember 1 confessor in particular tanking a squad of harpies and tackle.
Well I fit my Confessor with dual Small Repairer II's when I was 10MN AB fitted and it had no problem tanking C2's, never tested it in PVP due to caution about the nerf effects. But now that you mentioned it, unless dual or triple webbed and neuted it'd probably could tank 4 or 5 frigs in a brawl and still come out on top. The main weakness on the Confessor is that it has no built in range bonus like the Svipul so it has to engage in neut range and unlike the Svipul it is completely cap dependent which makes it vulnerable to neuts. So now with it's greatest weapon diminish (disengagement ability) there's only a select few ships that the Confessor can engage in pvp with favorably. But for pve I stlll think it's a great ship.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
948
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 07:02:05 -
[672] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul.
Being able to use the highest damage crystals for a longer time period is a significant bonus. If you cannot see that, I don't really know what else to say.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 08:57:02 -
[673] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. Being able to use the highest damage crystals for a longer time period is a significant bonus. If you cannot see that, I don't really know what else to say.
If you are referring to Scorch ammo then hopefully you realize it only deals mostly EM damage. Multi Navy does last a very long time and deals good EM/Therm damage but at a -50% optimal range reduction which puts it at? .....Right you guess it, in neut/web range and due to Amarr ships been heavy capacitor users makes them terrible brawlers. Of course I'm referring to the small and mid size lasers (large lasers are a different matter). |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness
199
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 09:57:17 -
[674] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. Being able to use the highest damage crystals for a longer time period is a significant bonus. If you cannot see that, I don't really know what else to say. If you are referring to Scorch ammo then hopefully you realize it only deals mostly EM damage. Multi Navy does last a very long time and deals good EM/Therm damage but at a -50% optimal range reduction which puts it at? .....Right you guess it, in neut/web range and due to Amarr ships been heavy capacitor users makes them terrible brawlers. Of course I'm referring to the small and mid size lasers (large lasers are a different matter).
if only there was a kind of small laser specifically designed for fighting outside of scram range... hm. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
663
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 10:25:00 -
[675] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:If you are referring to Scorch ammo then hopefully you realize it only deals mostly EM damage. Multi Navy does last a very long time and deals good EM/Therm damage but at a -50% optimal range reduction which puts it at? .....Right you guess it, in neut/web range and due to Amarr ships been heavy capacitor users makes them terrible brawlers. Of course I'm referring to the small and mid size lasers (large lasers are a different matter).
No, silly. Have you ever tried small beams? Aurora tears you a new one at up to 70km range, no joke in sharpshooter mode.
Speaking of range bonusses, I said I tried a Confessor with an mwd on, not the 10mn afterburner fit and I was engaging a Garmur that was flying 6100m/s and spammed missiles from > 60km away.
You know, the Confessor doesn't go any faster with an 1mn mwd than 2138m/s with the singature of a battlecruiser but what do I know, right?
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
242
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 11:12:43 -
[676] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. Being able to use the highest damage crystals for a longer time period is a significant bonus. If you cannot see that, I don't really know what else to say. whoa. What if the svipul had this bonus! 'Can use emp for longer than it normally could' mmmm mmmm goooood |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 11:33:15 -
[677] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:If you are referring to Scorch ammo then hopefully you realize it only deals mostly EM damage. Multi Navy does last a very long time and deals good EM/Therm damage but at a -50% optimal range reduction which puts it at? .....Right you guess it, in neut/web range and due to Amarr ships been heavy capacitor users makes them terrible brawlers. Of course I'm referring to the small and mid size lasers (large lasers are a different matter). No, silly. Have you ever tried small beams? Aurora tears you a new one at up to 70km range, no joke in sharpshooter mode. Speaking of range bonusses, I said I tried a Confessor with an mwd on, not the 10mn afterburner fit and I was engaging a Garmur that was flying 6100m/s and spammed missiles from > 60km away. You know, the Confessor doesn't go any faster with an 1mn mwd than 2138m/s with the singature of a battlecruiser but what do I know, right?
Last I checked my range with Small Beams using Aurora was 49/52 km in prop mode. How do you get it to hit out to 70 km? In any case I will begin testing the usefulness of Aurora very soon with the small focused beam II's and since it's gonna be a asteroid either way I might as well fit it with the 1MN AB to lower that Sig.
|
Stitch Kaneland
Trust Doesn't Rust Triumvirate.
219
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 12:13:45 -
[678] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:elitatwo wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:If you are referring to Scorch ammo then hopefully you realize it only deals mostly EM damage. Multi Navy does last a very long time and deals good EM/Therm damage but at a -50% optimal range reduction which puts it at? .....Right you guess it, in neut/web range and due to Amarr ships been heavy capacitor users makes them terrible brawlers. Of course I'm referring to the small and mid size lasers (large lasers are a different matter). No, silly. Have you ever tried small beams? Aurora tears you a new one at up to 70km range, no joke in sharpshooter mode. Speaking of range bonusses, I said I tried a Confessor with an mwd on, not the 10mn afterburner fit and I was engaging a Garmur that was flying 6100m/s and spammed missiles from > 60km away. You know, the Confessor doesn't go any faster with an 1mn mwd than 2138m/s with the singature of a battlecruiser but what do I know, right? Last I checked my range with Small Beams using Aurora was 49/52 km in prop mode. How do you get it to hit out to 70 km? In any case I will begin testing the usefulness of Aurora very soon with the small focused beam II's and since it's gonna be a asteroid either way I might as well fit it with the 1MN AB to lower that Sig.
Locus rigs, TE (although unlikely) or frentix booster.
Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role
|
SFM Hobb3s
Wrecking Shots Black Legion.
296
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 12:57:30 -
[679] - Quote
If you go for the heavier t2 guns you can have an optimal of 85km+ using the right rigs, and a couple tc's. |
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
343
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 18:46:48 -
[680] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. CCP's insistence on counting the cap bonus on guns as the same 'cost' or 'power' as other bonuses just shows how out of touch they tend to be in regards to amarr.
Couldnt agree more. It is a disgustingly bad bonus. |
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2015.05.08 18:52:14 -
[681] - Quote
SFM Hobb3s wrote:If you go for the heavier t2 guns you can have an optimal of 85km+ using the right rigs, and a couple tc's.
Ahh right, I wasn't thinking. A sniping fit Confessor has no use for a web. Changing the web for a TC II (optimal range script)
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
949
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 08:04:16 -
[682] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. Being able to use the highest damage crystals for a longer time period is a significant bonus. If you cannot see that, I don't really know what else to say. whoa. What if the svipul had this bonus! 'Can use emp for longer than it normally could' mmmm mmmm goooood
So, you are suggesting that projectile weapons should use capacitor to fire? Or that hybrid weapons should use more capacitor than they do now?
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 11:05:55 -
[683] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:What second bonus does the Confessor get for its T3D Skill, with Svipul having the Proj Optimal Range?
You guessed it.
10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost
/Amarr
I understand that Optimal is useless in the case of ACs, but at the same time is great for Arties, not being forced to switch between Prop/Sharpshooter almost on CD in some cases in order to merely to project damage.
I don't know, just give Svipul a small innate Tracking bonus, with a decent, not equal, Fall-Off bonus in Sharpshooter mode - Make them conceptually the same.
I await eagerly eagerly what you come up with for the next 2 T3Ds. ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) ( -í~ -£-û -í-¦) CCP seems to be completely oblivious to the handicap that 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost is to all Amarr Ships as a whole and like you said in another post "they should add it as a double bonus along with the weapon damage bonus" so that Amarr ships can get a more useful bonus in place like Optimal Range bonus. In all likelihood when the other 2 T3D's come out, the Confessor is gonna be at the bottom of the pile in that class of ships due to the Amarr handicap skill. I'm all for Amarr but CCP is forcing me to become a Heretic and migrating to the Barbarians. So for now I'm gonna abandon the Confessor and switch over to the Svipul. Being able to use the highest damage crystals for a longer time period is a significant bonus. If you cannot see that, I don't really know what else to say. whoa. What if the svipul had this bonus! 'Can use emp for longer than it normally could' mmmm mmmm goooood So, you are suggesting that projectile weapons should use capacitor to fire? Or that hybrid weapons should use more capacitor than they do now?
Of course not, I like projectiles just fine the way the are now. I'm suggesting that they combine the -10% Energy activation cost bonus with the weapon damage bonus and make the skill a double bonus as first suggested by Iroquoiss Pliskin. That way they can fill in another more useful bonus like 10% optimal range bonus which is desperately needed for the Confessor and Absolution.
|
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
663
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 13:03:04 -
[684] - Quote
Daniela Doran wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:So, you are suggesting that projectile weapons should use capacitor to fire? Or that hybrid weapons should use more capacitor than they do now?
Of course not, I like projectiles just fine the way the are now. I'm suggesting that they combine the -10% Energy activation cost bonus with the weapon damage bonus and make the skill a double bonus as first suggested by Iroquoiss Pliskin. That way they can fill in another more useful bonus like 10% optimal range bonus which is desperately needed for the Confessor and Absolution.
That is why the tactical destroyers have modes. Please take a look what the sharpshooter mode does.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
10
|
Posted - 2015.05.09 20:16:45 -
[685] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:So, you are suggesting that projectile weapons should use capacitor to fire? Or that hybrid weapons should use more capacitor than they do now?
Of course not, I like projectiles just fine the way the are now. I'm suggesting that they combine the -10% Energy activation cost bonus with the weapon damage bonus and make the skill a double bonus as first suggested by Iroquoiss Pliskin. That way they can fill in another more useful bonus like 10% optimal range bonus which is desperately needed for the Confessor and Absolution. That is why the tactical destroyers have modes. Please take a look what the sharpshooter mode does.
I'm fully aware of the 66.6% optimal range bonus the Confessor gets in Sharpshooter mode Elita, that was just an example. The point is that the -10% energy turret activation skill is a wasted skill that should be replace with a more useful skill that aligns with the skill bonuses that the other races get. An Example would be like this
Amarr Tactical Destroyer bonuses (per skill level): 10% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage and 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret activation cost 7.5% bonus to Small Energy Turret tracking speed 5% reduction in module heat damage amount taken
Misc bonus: +50% Small Energy Turret Damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements GÇó Additional bonuses are available while one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be switched no more than once every 10 seconds.
GÇó Defense Mode 33.3% bonus to all armor resistances while Defense Mode is enabled 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is enabled
GÇó Propulsion Mode 66.6% bonus to maximum velocity while Propulsion Mode is enabled 33.3% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is enabled
GÇó Sharpshooter Mode 66.6% bonus to Small Energy Turret optimal range while Sharpshooter Mode is enabled 100% bonus to sensor strength, targeting range and scan resolution while Sharpshooter Mode is enabled
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: [one page] |