EVE Search - Tier 2 Battlecruiser discussion

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Revelations Testing and Development

Tier 2 Battlecruiser discussion

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Nalshiga Dshoayo	Posted - 2006.11.26 03:02:00 - [1081] I personally give a crap about the drake. I dont see any reason why a week day old noob should fly one of the best ships available. and you dont need 14 days to fly the drake. you need a week. tops. if you dont specialize. I dont care if the drake has 7 launchers or 5. I dont care if the drake sucks or not. I dont whine about tech 1 stuff. why? because I learned that if I am unhappy with tech 1, I invest time to get tech 2 equipment. And now I am ****ed. I just dont like the fact that I spent so much time training for something any noob can get and can get much cheaper. I dont think they will ask 240 millions for the drake, now wont they?
Viictoria	Posted - 2006.11.26 03:13:00 - [1082] Originally by: Nalshiga Dshoayo I personally give a crap about the drake. I dont see any reason why a week day old noob should fly one of the best ships available. and you dont need 14 days to fly the drake. you need a week. tops. if you dont specialize. I dont care if the drake has 7 launchers or 5. I dont care if the drake sucks or not. I dont whine about tech 1 stuff. why? because I learned that if I am unhappy with tech 1, I invest time to get tech 2 equipment. And now I am ****ed. I just dont like the fact that I spent so much time training for something any noob can get and can get much cheaper. I dont think they will ask 240 millions for the drake, now wont they? Dev confirmed the changes to the Nighthawk were going in but were not ready yet, or something. This was a few days ago, in a post in Ships and Modules I believe. I'll see if I can find it...
Nalshiga Dshoayo	Posted - 2006.11.26 03:47:00 - [1083] Originally by: Viictoria Edited by: Viictoria on 26/11/2006 03:32:44 Originally by: Nalshiga Dshoayo I personally give a crap about the drake. I dont see any reason why a week day old noob should fly one of the best ships available. and you dont need 14 days to fly the drake. you need a week. tops. if you dont specialize. I dont care if the drake has 7 launchers or 5. I dont care if the drake sucks or not. I dont whine about tech 1 stuff. why? because I learned that if I am unhappy with tech 1, I invest time to get tech 2 equipment. And now I am ***ed. I just dont like the fact that I spent so much time training for something any noob can get and can get much cheaper. I dont think they will ask 240 millions for the drake, now wont they? Dev confirmed the changes to the Nighthawk were going in but were not ready yet, or something. This was a few days ago, in a post in Ships and Modules I believe. I'll see if I can find it... Edit: Can't find it ... will update later if I do. A few have claimed the RoF has been improved on SiSi though, just not the description* the thread's name is: "A bit more changes" in ships and modules.... yes, I just checked. RoF is much higher as it should be... about the 20% which I should get with command ships IV.... I sure hope it really will be in the final version. the posting was from 10.19.2006... more than enough time to change your mind... but IF the nighthawk gets the RoF bonus, it is better than a 7th missile slot... but I still dont get why so much on the Drake screams Tech 2 and not Tier 2...
Atar Perpetua Umbra Brotherhood Of Steel	Posted - 2006.11.26 04:42:00 - [1084] I hate to say it, but the tank on these caldari ships is to the point of silly, I can get 18000 shield with a 400 recharge and 70%+ on all resits totally passive tank, including passive hardeners with a full rack of heavy missiles! Yeah....
Viictoria	Posted - 2006.11.26 04:52:00 - [1085] Originally by: Atar I hate to say it, but the tank on these caldari ships is to the point of silly, I can get 18000 shield with a 400 recharge and 70%+ on all resits totally passive tank, including passive hardeners with a full rack of heavy missiles! Yeah.... 45/hp per second is insane? News to me. And heavy missiles eh? Run for the hills!
Rusting	Posted - 2006.11.26 06:42:00 - [1086] In reguards to the Drake... With CCP's aim being to increase PVP encounters and stop the 10s battles that occur I think they have nailed it on the head with the Drake with exception to the 7th missile hardpoint. The resist bonus makes it a decent tank and the RoF bonus makes it a damage dealer for sure. The only thing off about this ship is that it has too many missile hardpoints. It leaves plenty of room for tanking with the 6 mids. and with 6 M hardpoints it has equaled out DPS. Plus with it's grid in the dirt like it is you're gonna need mad skills to properly equip one where it wont totally suck balls. I doubt you'll see PVP n00bs flying it. TBH with the boosts Kali is giving to the BCs I'm surprised more people aren't crying about the shield pump that the ferox is gonna get those suckers are gonna be a pain to bring down especially with shield extenders becoming better. -Rusting
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.11.26 09:11:00 - [1087] Originally by: Atar If the drake has 7 launchers, then I'm not going to stand for the hurricane with 6! I can fit 6 425s (6 720s), with 2 t2 gyros, and 5 orge IIs on a myrmidon with a tank, but can't fit 7 on a hurricane, that's absurd. Give it 7 turrets, no lauchers and no extra PG! Drake with 7 launchers is still bull****. Only ROF bonus put Drake on the similar level as other BC tier2. --------------------------------- Hint 1: Train for Mega, not for Rokh Hint 2: Abaddon is uber fleet BS. R.I.P. <Torpedo Raven> R.I.P. <Eagle> R.I.P. <ECM> R.I.P. <Drake>
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.11.26 09:13:00 - [1088] Originally by: Atar I hate to say it, but the tank on these caldari ships is to the point of silly, I can get 18000 shield with a 400 recharge and 70%+ on all resits totally passive tank, including passive hardeners with a full rack of heavy missiles! This ship is good only for PvE. --------------------------------- Hint 1: Train for Mega, not for Rokh Hint 2: Abaddon is uber fleet BS. R.I.P. <Torpedo Raven> R.I.P. <Eagle> R.I.P. <ECM> R.I.P. <Drake>
Amy Wang	Posted - 2006.11.26 12:13:00 - [1089] Time to unnerf the Hurricane then, huh?
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.11.26 13:00:00 - [1090] I can't believe they really have the gall to give the Drake back its 7th launcher and NOT the hurricane its 7th turret. Thats like holding up a big sign saying 'We offically hate Minmatar'. What's next, Drake gets back its RoF bonus and Hurricane gets back its 50 PG to balance that? --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler

Nalshiga Dshoayo	Posted - 2006.11.26 13:41:00 - [1091] Originally by: Atar I hate to say it, but the tank on these caldari ships is to the point of silly, I can get 18000 shield with a 400 recharge and 70%+ on all resits totally passive tank, including passive hardeners with a full rack of heavy missiles! Yeah.... you are perfectly right: you can fit an incredible tank on some caldari ships; BUT then you cant kill anything bigger than a frig. damage output on caldari command ships is rediculously LOW. what use is it to be able to tank against a BS when you cannot even kill a well fit BC with it? not including the fact that you indeed CAN shoot down missiles but NOT bullets/hybrid charges/laser beams. with DEFENDER missiles (which DO WORK GREATLY by the way), anyone can survive the best fit caldari missile boat without breaking sweat. that most people are too stupid to do that doesnt justify all the trashtalk about the supposed "caldari-nberness". in PvP caldari have a serious drawback because of this among other reasons. what good is the best PvE build when you are unable to deal enough damage in PvP? I am not really unhappy about Caldari, though. and I am not displeased about the missile situation. I do NOT think that caldari needs a buff or anything like that. I think it all works out pretty well atm. but the command ship situation is ****ing me off. the training time is NOTHING compared to the expensive slug you get.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.26 15:39:00 - [1092] Originally by: Nalshiga Dshoayo with DEFENDER missiles (which DO WORK GREATLY by the way) Test them in real PvP once. The defender missle use of NPCs does NOT reflect their effeciency in PvP. Also, they are no real counter because their fitting is not free. For every defender launcher you fit you loose 1 turret, nos or (damage) misile slot of your own to counter a missile slot of someone attacking you with missiles.
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2006.11.26 15:44:00 - [1093] You always must choose between ofence and defence.. Drake is now very strong ship, but not overpowered, not overnerfed. Adventage of NH above Drake is greater CPU witch allows fit launcher rigs easily (witch is bit difficult on drake). BTW I agree with 7th turret on Hurry BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.26 15:59:00 - [1094] Originally by: Aki Yamato You always must choose between ofence and defence.. You mean like a missle spammer can fit a full rack of weapons, a full tank and 3 damagemods? And the problem is, again, that you are loosing one damage/nos slot - which is useful vs everything (if it is in range, that is) in exchange for a defender (which is ONLY useful vs missiles, and even there lack quite a lot in real pvp; and nvmd that not every ship even has missleslots). And, as said, defenders do not work very well. Even if you have 8 defender launchers on a ship you will usually only be able to kill 1 missle of a salvo because all always go vs the nearest missile.
Nalshiga Dshoayo	Posted - 2006.11.26 16:13:00 - [1095] Originally by: Aki Yamato You always must choose between ofence and defence.. Drake is now very strong ship, but not overpowered, not overnerfed. Adventage of NH above Drake is greater CPU witch allows fit launcher rigs easily (witch is bit difficult on drake). BTW I agree with 7th turret on Hurry I have no problems fitting the drake with 7 tech II launchers. and that 30 more cpu dont make up for the 140(!) more powergrid and 1 more rig slot.
Rusting	Posted - 2006.11.26 16:14:00 - [1096] After thinking about it last night and seriously reconsidering the current status of the Drake(I'm told the bonuses are Resist and Kin damage right?), I believe the best move for the Drake would be to remove the Resist bonus add RoF and switch out the Kin damage for something we haven't seen before ie Cap bonus Shield recharge bonus something like that. With 6 mid slots there's plenty of room to fit an active tank or a passive one and still have 2 slots for EW. The resists bonus makes the Drake an Uber Ferox and that's it. And if these new BCs are supposed to be truly gank i think this is the way to do it. Drake 7 launchers 5% RoF bonus instead of 5% Resists and a secondary bonus of some sort still keep 6 mids
Nalshiga Dshoayo	Posted - 2006.11.26 16:16:00 - [1097] Originally by: Aki Yamato You always must choose between ofence and defence.. that tells me you missed the point or you simply dont get the problem discussed here. point is: you CANNOT choose between offense and defense, because strong offense is simply not an option on the NH. it is NOT possible. it IS however possible on other command ships which have similar tanking abilities. (keep the 710 powergrid of the NH in mind)
Aki Yamato	Posted - 2006.11.26 16:48:00 - [1098] Originally by: Nalshiga Dshoayo Originally by: Aki Yamato You always must choose between ofence and defence.. Drake is now very strong ship, but not overpowered, not overnerfed. Adventage of NH above Drake is greater CPU witch allows fit launcher rigs easily (witch is bit difficult on drake). BTW I agree with 7th turret on Hurry I have no problems fitting the drake with 7 tech II launchers. and that 30 more cpu dont make up for the 140(!) more powergrid and 1 more rig slot. You saw a New NH ? You are compering ald and broken ship (with 90% firepower of cerberus). So lets wait for new NH and then we can compare .... BIG GUN BIG FUTURE
Atar Perpetua Umbra Brotherhood Of Steel	Posted - 2006.11.26 16:50:00 - [1099] Originally by: Leandro Salazar I can't believe they really have the gall to give the Drake back its 7th launcher and NOT the hurricane its 7th turret. Thats like holding up a big sign saying 'We offically hate Minmatar'. What's next, Drake gets back its RoF bonus and Hurricane gets back its 50 PG to balance that? To True! I just cannot understand how we are saying give a 7th turret back and TAKE AWAY all launchers how that will ever unbalance the hurricane is beyond me, we are asking to take away damage, becasue now we can have 6 turrets and 2 launchers. The idea here isn't more damage it's one weapon type, I have 9mil in gunnery I don't want to or should need to train up missiles too, carry around 2 types of ammo (4 damage type for missiles) For god sake give us a one weapon ship. This isn't whining this is common sense!
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.11.26 21:23:00 - [1100] Heck if there is a hidden rule with CCP that Minmatar ships must never be great, take away all missile slots and the 8th high on top of it. But please give us the 7th turret. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler

Kagura Nikon	Posted - 2006.11.27 09:05:00 - [1101] I think we must accept CCP does not want to any minmatar ship to be able to win 1v1 against any other ship of same class. So give us at least a way to use our ships! Don't want to give us our weapons? So give us 15 more ms on speed. Than we ccan run away from the much more powerfull BC from other races....
Akiman	Posted - 2006.11.27 12:38:00 - [1102] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Heck if there is a hidden rule with CCP that Minmatar ships must never be great, take away all missile slots and the 8th high on top of it. But please give us the 7th turret. yeah why not u give the 7th missile slot to drake anyway...why not?...WHY NOT?!?
Ysolde Xen Minmatar Liberal Trading Co Electus Matari	Posted - 2006.11.27 13:27:00 - [1103] Well I'm guessing it's all in code freeze now bar a last couple of small bugfixes. A shame that the Hurricane lost it's original artillery-capable concept to become an armour-tanking variant of the Cyclone. WTB Artillery ship that isn't a Tempest. ----- It's not a crap ship, you're just flying it all wrong.
Draycar Hazaran eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.27 13:40:00 - [1104] Erm....you can always fit a Thrasher with 280s and grief shuttles all day Might As well Train Another Race
Nalshiga Dshoayo	Posted - 2006.11.27 14:45:00 - [1105] Edited by: Nalshiga Dshoayo on 27/11/2006 14:49:00 Originally by: Aki Yamato Originally by: Nalshiga Dshoayo Originally by: Aki Yamato You always must choose between ofence and defence.. Drake is now very strong ship, but not overpowered, not overnerfed. Adventage of NH above Drake is greater CPU witch allows fit launcher rigs easily (witch is bit difficult on drake). BTW I agree with 7th turret on Hurry I have no problems fitting the drake with 7 tech II launchers. and that 30 more cpu dont make up for the 140(!) more powergrid and 1 more rig slot. You saw a New NH ? You are compering ald and broken ship (with 90% firepower of cerberus). So lets wait for new NH and then we can compare .... YES OF COURSE I AM TALKING ABOUT THE "NEW" one. which is SAME as old one with a RoF bonus. puts it 8% above drake in damage output. I am not a person like you obviously are, who talks about stuff he/she does not have a clue about. you just have to log on to singularity to fly one. (if you have the skills - which you dont have, otherwise you would know what a piece of crap that expensive slug really is.)
Azuse	Posted - 2006.11.27 15:33:00 - [1106] Edited by: Azuse on 27/11/2006 15:35:51 The public deployment of kail with the current build tomorrow really makes you question the decision given the balancing issues. The bc are either overpowered or underpowered, k the drake doesnt do nighthawk dammge (but its lost its real ablilitys vs. frigs) and the myrn is chronically underpowered, its easy to see why you dont want a bc to carry 5 heavys, itll be the same as the ishtar with more tank (but it doesnt matter that the brutix has been out dammaging and out tanking the demios for a year, a decent dronebay is unthinkable in a ship dependant on drones. Had anyone been playing close attention to the test server they would have notticed most of the dead myrns died after loosing their drones and had similar dammage to most vexors). Same with the bs, the rokh is a superb sniper at 250/300km, youll also find it fantastic at 12km with blasters and full tank. Compair this with the hyperion, again its a decent sniper, better than the thron if you fit right (oh the irony) it losses 25m drone space (so only 4 heavys vs. thorns 5) it also gain an extra turret, which we all love because it also has the throns grid and fitting 7 turret on that is almost impossible without an rcu i.e compramising tank so to compensate you take away 2 lows making it harder to fit, genius. So its got a rep bonus, great so we fit 2 reps and have 4 slots to tank, plus our rcus, and the iceing on the cake of course is that 8 guns leaves no room for nos (and a blaster, no matter how deluded the piolt is, wont run on boosters alone if its using hardeners and theres not much options with those lows). p.s. the thorns still outdammages it, and with these rigs plus 2 additional lows it also out tanks it now. So in summary weve got now ships tha dont know what therye ment to be, cost 50 mil more (80 if the insurace is accurate) and do less dammage across all the races, exept caldari which are now the ranged race with the best blasters.
GRIM REAPERjib	Posted - 2006.11.27 19:09:00 - [1107] OMFG its harbinger NOT harbringer, that being said. the myrm is crap. im an experienced drone user and just to make it clear, u need more drone space. drones arent that good you all, + it needs time to get to its target and are pretty vulnerable too.
Kaden Seer Gallente	Posted - 2006.11.27 19:29:00 - [1108] I vote for Hurricane's 7th turret, otherwise it's unfair to Minnie.
haq aan	Posted - 2006.11.27 21:13:00 - [1109] Originally by: Kaden Seer I vote for Hurricane's 7th turret, otherwise it's unfair to Minnie. We minnies get used to be suck. Lets see what was the last changes : +25 m3 drone bay , +1 turret to Myrmidon (less than 1 week left for revelations) +1 launcher to Drake (1 day left for revelations) I dnt be suprised if i see 8th launcher on Drake , or 250 m3 drone bay + hybrid dmg bonus on Myrmidon while just 5 mins left for deployment.
2SecondsTilMidnight	Posted - 2006.11.27 22:31:00 - [1110] Edited by: 2SecondsTilMidnight on 27/11/2006 22:35:23 Edited by: 2SecondsTilMidnight on 27/11/2006 22:32:26 Do you guys have like 0 missle skills or something? With -1 turret from before, you can fill that in with a missle launcher. Dps wont be as high but it wouldn't be terribly low as if you had 6 turrets 0 launchers. Edit: I am for a 7th turret though, I just don't think it is as crappy as most people make it out to be. Edit #2: And incase some of you argue that the drake could've used a turret in place of the lost launcher, good luck fitting a medium sized turret with drake's pg.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 38 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.