Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |

Aglais
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
527
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 00:50:23 -
[271] - Quote
Right. So. Let's talk opportunity costs, given that tactical destroyers are a ship class based around choice. What is it that you give up, like, really give up, when you choose a certain configuration?
Propulsion Mode
Arguably, this mode has the lowest opportunity cost (ie. you give up the least when you're in it). You are "fast" (hahahaha watch almost anything either kite you or shut off your MWD (because you can't fit a 10mn AB due to grid constraints and have the ship function otherwise)). The sole reason is that it makes you roughly as agile as the other two T3 destroyers feel outside of their propulsion mode. So you can align to a celestial and run away as soon as anything that could kill you is on grid, which let's be honest, is most things, despite your "tank". Which you have less of in propulsion mode anyways. Leaving this mode is probably suicide. Who am I kidding, flying this ship over a Svipul is suicide.
Defense Mode
There's less of a reason to use this configuration. Why? Well, for one thing, you now turn like a battlecruiser, and are roughly the same speed as one too. But if you've kitted out the Jackdaw with the only fittings that really make sense at first glance, your signature radius has exploded, and the reduction bonus doesn't really bring it back in line because again- the thing's slow. And takes roughly ten seconds to align, with good skills. But at least you've got those shield resistances boosted, right? Well, since you're slow, something can just pin you down and call in more of their friends to kill you. All it does is extend the time in which it takes before you see the Jackdaw explode.
Sharpshooter Mode
Don't use it. The opportunity cost of switching into sharpshooter mode is high enough that it might as well not even be part of the ship. You lose the "speed boost" and increased agility, giving you battlecruiser handling. You also do not have the shield resistance bonus nor the signature radius bonus of defense mode. So the Jackdaw in sharpshooter mode is slow, made of paper in comparison to things that can catch it (which is what matters), and gets a paltry missile range bonus that doesn't really matter in the long run because the benefit of having it is small compared to the cost of even considering utilizing it.
So what is the problem with this ship?
It honestly seems to me like "flavour" has usurped "sense" in terms of the design of this ship. In an attempt to be "Caldari" it was given all of the stereotypical (and BAD) traits of Caldari ships in past that have made them either less effective or flat out unviable for PvP, relegating them to nothing but shameful PvE ships that nobody would fly over anything else if they have a gram of sense (you know, like before ship Tiericide, when there was absolutely not point to fly a Kestrel over a Rifter even if you liked missiles; you were shafted. Train minmatar, scrublord.)
It is very clear however, that in attempting to promote the Jackdaw's "flavour", stats have been assigned that conflict with the role of tactical destroyers. They're quick adaptable ships, if the Confessor and Jackdaw are anything to consider, with a variety of fitting options. The Jackdaw is railroaded by awful stats into being a shield brawler, but is given so little speed that anything it could kill can just kite it instead, or dance away from the engagement altogether if they didn't feel like flopping their turrets all over the "brick tank" this ship claims to offer. The "choice" you are offered with the Jackdaw's current stat layout and bonuses is either you are in speed mode, or you are dead. The only difference between defense and sharpshooter mode is how quickly you die.
So how can this travesty be repaired? 1. Why is it so slow? Place it's speed somewhere NEAR the Confessor and Svipul. Either between them or just under the Confessor, I don't care. That speed has to go up. 1519m/s outside of propulsion mode. 2019m/s in it. (inb4 "scrub get pirate implants and boosts like a real PvPer"). Molasses.
2. A destroyer handling like a battlecruiser is unacceptable. If you want to go with "well it has less speed and agility by default than the others" then do so- but make it a reasonable amount less. This is not a reasonable amount, if you can compare it's align time to "a slow cruiser". As with speed, make it outside of propulsion mode less agile than the Svipul and Confessor. But not to the point where you can describe it as "a slow cruiser"! That is ludicrous!
3. Increase the damage bonus to rockets. In my opinion the Jackdaw's close range DPS is piddly- I'm aware of the whole "well you can't have it all" thing, but the Jackdaw has nothing in it's current iteration. Furthermore, the Jackdaw has five hardpoints, whereas the others do not. While still having six high slots. If it is going to trade off utility in that way, it must have something in place to act as a benefit, a reason why you'd choose to make that tradeoff in the first place.
4. That awful lack of power grid, and the alleged baked in shield extender. This is a Hobson's Choice. With this, you either fit a 1mn (soon to be 5mn) MWD, or you go without a prop mod, and you still travel at literally two thirds the speed of the other T3 destroyers (in propulsion mode- its half outside of it)- and in fact, are going at a pace such that a great deal of cruisers, who are more heavily armed and roughly just as tanky as you, can catch your Jackdaw. I'm completely fine with losing tank on this ship if it means it'll be able to mitigate damage through speed even just a little bit better than the others (while perhaps still having just a bit more tank by default to make up for it's lesser velocity). Right now, you don't have that.
Also, getting above-average benefits from frigate prop mods isn't enough if other T3 destroyers get full benefits from attempting oversize fits. The Jackdaw's benefits are not great enough. |

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
537
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 04:06:16 -
[272] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen
This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results. Edit: Oh yes you did. Honestly, those cruisers that are faster tend to have about half the HP and maybe 30% more DPS if that. These are fights that can go both ways but it seems to me the jackdaw is good as it is, it has power without overwhelming everything one class below and one class above the way svipuls still do. Hulls are not meant to be overpowered. Edit:also noticed your jackdaw fit is still missing, indicating it did not blow up yet :D
My Jackdaw did die to a gangbang but last night it managed to solo another 2 jackdaws, another svipul and an RLML cerberus.
The cerb pilot had fit active tank and a 100mn AB. In trying to run away he just capped himself out and then had the gall to whine that he didn't instapop me. Honestly I don't see how a cerb could lose to a jackdaw but in this case it did.
FWIW until my jackdaw blows up in a 1v1 the fit shall die with this mirror of Sisi.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
621
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 06:32:32 -
[273] - Quote
Cry me a river, Need for Speed ain't gonna happen.
If anything, Confessor/Svipul velocity bonus in Prop mode will get cut from 66.6% to 50%, which still makes them faster than the Jackdaw.
Then take a look at Tech 1 cruiser speeds.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
537
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 07:32:15 -
[274] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cry me a river, Need for Speed ain't gonna happen.
If anything, Confessor/Svipul velocity bonus in Prop mode will get cut from 66.6% to 50%, which still makes them faster than the Jackdaw.
Then take a look at Tech 1 cruiser speeds.
Who the hell are you even talking to?
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
621
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 07:38:45 -
[275] - Quote
To the God Almighty and the peasants below. 
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
673
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 10:23:31 -
[276] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Cry me a river, Need for Speed ain't gonna happen.
If anything, Confessor/Svipul velocity bonus in Prop mode will get cut from 66.6% to 50%, which still makes them faster than the Jackdaw.
Then take a look at Tech 1 cruiser speeds.
No. It doesn't have anything to do with need for speed but need for mobility. I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two.
Then give it the explosion velocity bonus of the Flycatch in sharpshooter mode and bake some of the agility into the hull and lower the agility bonus into the currenty value of the propulsion mode to stay the same in propulsion mode.
Divide the missile speed bonus in 2x 25%, as in 25% goes into the role bonus and the other 25% go into the sharpshooter mode.
Put a 50% recharge time into the defence mode so goes down from 600 to 300 seconds in defence mode.
That should make a good tactical destroyer.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
537
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 10:27:57 -
[277] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:To the God Almighty and the peasants below. 
An empty can rattles the most.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1043
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 11:17:45 -
[278] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:[...] mobility [...] Jack(daw) [...]
Those words, same paragraph. You did see the jackdaw's rolemodel? |

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
630
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 11:34:08 -
[279] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:To the God Almighty and the peasants below.  An empty can rattles the most.
You mean the T3D can?
Ten MN afterburner did make a good sound in that can.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
631
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 11:45:24 -
[280] - Quote
elitatwo wrote: No. It doesn't have anything to do with need for speed but need for mobility.
Mobility = not speed inherently then? All the people rattling, asking for more speed, are not asking for moar Need for Speed, no?
Logic, woman! 
Quote:I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two.
Why? Everything fits as is, even 10MN AB.
Oh, you want triple MSE? HAHAHA.
HAHAHAHA. 
HAHA.
Quote:1) bake some of the agility into the hull and lower the agility bonus into the currenty value of the propulsion mode to stay the same in propulsion mode.
2) ]Divide the missile speed bonus in 2x 25%, as in 25% goes into the role bonus and the other 25% go into the sharpshooter mode.
1) And further reduce the concept.
2) And further reduce the T3D concept; the missile velocity bonus is 66.6%.
Quote:Put a 50% recharge time into the defence mode so goes down from 600 to 300 seconds in defence mode.
What the recharge time bonus would replace, then? The signature reduction bonus, or would you like a third one in there, darling? 
Some fits and metrics would be helpful in trying to determine whether that is balanced.
We await eagerly.
Quote:That should make a good tactical destroyer.
Yeah, just delete everything non-T3D below T1 cruisers from the game.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
|

elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
673
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 13:13:05 -
[281] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:elitatwo wrote: No. It doesn't have anything to do with need for speed but need for mobility.
Mobility = not speed inherently then? All the people rattling, asking for more speed, are not asking for moar Need for Speed, no? Logic, woman!  Quote:I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two. Why? Everything fits as is, even 10MN AB. Oh, you want triple MSE? HAHAHA. HAHAHAHA.  HAHA.
I don't understand. How would you fit three medium extenders and a 10mn afterburner on the same hull? Magic?
I said mobility, as in turn around speed. Right now the Jack has the turn around speed of a Crow. This is fine but the maximum velocity that comes with it is too low. So it would feel great on the Jack to have some of that agility in the other modes and the current maximum agility in propulsion mode. My Rokh can make a 180-¦ turn quicker than the Jack can and has the same singature radius (532m).
While you believe it is awesome to per-nerf all Caldari ships and better make them auto-explode when they undock, some of us may want to fly with them first and not die upon undocking.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
634
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 13:41:45 -
[282] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Mobility = not speed inherently then? All the people rattling, asking for more speed, are not asking for moar Need for Speed, no? Logic, woman!  Quote:I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two. Why? Everything fits as is, even 10MN AB. Oh, you want triple MSE? HAHAHA. HAHAHAHA.  HAHA. I don't understand. How would you fit three medium extenders and a 10mn afterburner on the same hull?
Who said anything about 10MN with 3 MSEs? 
MACP II and an Ancillary Current Router II rig seals the deal. The percentage increase, then, from Field Extender rigs is simply horrendous on top of the base shield HP hull bonus.
Quote:I said mobility, as in turn around speed. Right now the Jack has the turn around speed of a Crow. This is fine but the maximum velocity that comes with it is too low.
That's great, lets fix the T3Ds, not spread speed space cancer. 
Quote:So it would feel great on the Jack to have some of that agility in the other modes and the current maximum agility in propulsion mode. My Rokh can make a 180-¦ turn quicker than the Jack can
Base 6.4 inertia modifier may be a little excessive, yes, but nothing needs to change apart from reducing the base stat by, say, 10%. 
Another option is to have the base inertia improved, then increase Propulsion Velocity bonus to 50% from 33.3% and Inertia from 66.6% to 50%.
Base hull speed may need to be reduced as a result.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 16:22:20 -
[283] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen
This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results.
Edit: Oh yes you did. Honestly, those cruisers that are faster tend to have about half the HP and maybe 30% more DPS if that. These are fights that can go both ways but it seems to me the jackdaw is good as it is, it has power without overwhelming everything one class below and one class above the way svipuls still do. Hulls are not meant to be overpowered. Edit:also noticed your jackdaw fit is still missing, indicating it did not blow up yet :D
OK so testing tonight was somewhat fruitful with caracal vs jackdaw.
In a fight that ended when we got dropped by a navy exequror
http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j293/MrBenis/jackdaw%20vs%20caracal_zpspt1mm3zc.png
I had him at like 15% structure and 20% shields at the end, with me dipping in to armour a bit here and there to bait him in to frying his guns. I was tanking him quite easily otherwise.
A few things I've noticed: he had 143 charges left. This is ridiculous. I really genuinely believe the MASB should consume larger charges as fuel because storing 200 or 300 of them for a fight is just CRAZY. I was able to fit a total of 17x 800s in my cargo hold. 17x 800 = 15600 cap = 15600/125gj per boost = 124 boosts vs his 200+?
I don't presume that my fit would survive against a cruiser but I'm fairly confident it could kill anything destroyer and under. Provided they aren't running dual MASB and have a cargo of 450m3 with t2 resists.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
636
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 16:25:51 -
[284] - Quote
A 27.3k damage taken against a RLML Caracal - totally useless ship, c/d?
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 16:44:02 -
[285] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen
This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results.
Edit: Oh yes you did. Honestly, those cruisers that are faster tend to have about half the HP and maybe 30% more DPS if that. These are fights that can go both ways but it seems to me the jackdaw is good as it is, it has power without overwhelming everything one class below and one class above the way svipuls still do. Hulls are not meant to be overpowered. Edit:also noticed your jackdaw fit is still missing, indicating it did not blow up yet :D OK so testing tonight was somewhat fruitful with caracal vs jackdaw. In a fight that ended when we got dropped by a navy exequror http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j293/MrBenis/jackdaw%20vs%20caracal_zpspt1mm3zc.png
I had him at like 15% structure and 20% shields at the end, with me dipping in to armour a bit here and there to bait him in to frying his guns. I was tanking him quite easily otherwise. A few things I've noticed: he had 143 charges left. This is ridiculous. I really genuinely believe the MASB should consume larger charges as fuel because storing 200 or 300 of them for a fight is just CRAZY. I was able to fit a total of 17x 800s in my cargo hold. 17x 800 = 15600 cap = 15600/125gj per boost = 124 boosts vs his 200+? I don't presume that my fit would survive against a cruiser but I'm fairly confident it could kill anything destroyer and under. Provided they aren't running dual MASB and have a cargo of 450m3 with t2 resists. scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
637
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 16:52:38 -
[286] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU
Two MASBs.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 17:11:14 -
[287] - Quote
**** svipuls with 10mn AB. full rack of arty and 10mn ok sure. I thought this **** was dealt with.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
673
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 17:48:35 -
[288] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:P. S. A Rokh may turn quicker on the spot at zero velocity, it does not align, accelerate, nor decelerate quicker: -in(0.25) * 105,300,000 * 0.136 inertia * 0.9 * 0.75 / 1,000,000 = 13.4 seconds. Jackdaw's mass-inertia ratio is 4.536e6 to 9.666e6 of the Rokh - the former is naturally 2.13 times more agile, and 6.38 times in Propulsion mode. This also applies while using MWDs, as the ratio of ship mass to module mass added is practically the same - 2.1 vs 2.106.  The time to reach 10% of respective top speed is 1.018 sec for the Rokh, and 0.47 for the Jackdaw.
Did it ever occur to you that I was comparing two very different hull sizes for a reason? I didn't run any calculations I was comparing experience on flying both ships.
If you fit a 1mn afterburner your 'unholy' maximum speed in that sooper propulsion mode does not propel anything, it is the base speed of a linked dramiel without propulsion mod.
When you change into the 'defence mode' on the Jack with that 1mn afterburner and someone put one regular web on you, your speed with afterburner is 113m/s. In that 'defence mode' that only thing you can defend against is a freighter.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|

Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
639
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 18:11:10 -
[289] - Quote
elitatwo wrote: If you fit a 1mn afterburner your 'unholy' maximum speed in that sooper propulsion mode does not propel anything, it is the base speed of a linked dramiel without propulsion mod.
Napkin math: 200 * 1.333 * (1 + (1.68 * (1,500,000 / (1,050,000 + 500,000))) = 700 m/s.
AB gonna afterburn. vOv
Quote:When you change into the 'defence mode' on the Jack with that 1mn afterburner and someone put one regular web on you, your speed with afterburner is 113m/s. In that 'defence mode' that only thing you can defend against is a freighter.
Okay. 
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|

Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 20:49:24 -
[290] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU
Two MASBs. Oh jeez whoops |
|

elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
673
|
Posted - 2015.05.17 21:11:51 -
[291] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Napkin math: 200 * 1.333 * (1 + (1.68 * (1,500,000 / (1,050,000 + 500,000))) = 700 m/s.
AB gonna afterburn. vOv
Please log on SiSi and do that, convo me and I show you how good that goes.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|

Iyacia Cyric'ai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
147
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 04:18:10 -
[292] - Quote
Agile, huge tank, relatively low sig, no brainer damage projection. Sounds like a fleet/doctrine ship to me (i.e. the new Drake). Terrible speed makes it useless for solo or small gang though since it can't catch or escape anything by itself, but hey not every ship needs to be a solopwnmobile. |

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 09:15:46 -
[293] - Quote
Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU
Two MASBs. Oh jeez whoops
Yes the salient point would be 230+ shield boosts on a ship with 70+ resists and a native HP bonus that can fit shield boost implants and boosters. I had an RLML caracal specifically fit to kill this thing and it still turned in to a meat-grinder. This is including using my superior cap pool and double his peak dps and the same sustained DPS. Yea yea yea I get that a 40mil cruiser should probably have problems killing a 50-60mil destroyer thats jacked up on roids but then I got to wonder how we accept that frigates will consistantly kill battleships and battlecruisers who by all accounts should roll around in the corpses of frigates like a kodiak in a pile of weasels.
Yeah I just don't know about that one. Making MASB consume at least cap 100s or something to make them scale more appropriately with regular boosters is just *a* solution that could be put to the table for consideration as I don't want to outright nerf the jackdaw but solve a larger problem with these ASBs in general. Could it be argued that a golem really needs 1200m3 for cap charges if it decides to go XL-ASB and XLSB in combo using 800's and 400's in sync? Maybe it could I guess as a golem suffers different problems than a jackdaw but since I'm getting off track I'll stop there.
Something isn't right when the scalpel you take to a tumour is ineffective at cutting the skin. A cerb might have done the job but then we're talking about a 200mil HAC used against a 50mil T3D and that's definitely a problem when that degree of escalation is what's required and even then I'd argue we can't be sure thanks to other factors including needing RLML just to apply any damage in the first case.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1208
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 09:38:29 -
[294] - Quote
I'd venture your weapon choice was the real issue. He can time his reloads with your own and he can approximately burst tank your burst.
You'd have done a LOT better with a regular weapon system.
ASB ships die to leak during reloads - with a weapon system also paired to a long reload that means either you need absolutely overwhelming DPS (you wont have it) or you're going to nearly stalemate.
A vexor would pull the wings off this, for example.
HOWEVER I agree with the overall sentiment that there are too many ships out there with no "natural" predators. |

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 11:16:44 -
[295] - Quote
I am not credulous enough to believe that a dedicated frigate/destroyer hunter should be unable to kill a frigate/destroyer with a weapon designed for fighting frigates/destroyers on a frigate/destroyer killing platform because said frigate/destroyer can "approximately tank my burst".
That's called broken. There needs to be a natural order to things and this is not it. A ship one size catagory up than you using the appropriate weapon should be able to MURDER you. Permatanking my caracal is a complete joke and when I killed that cerb was even worse.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1044
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 11:29:51 -
[296] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU
Two MASBs. Oh jeez whoops Yes the salient point would be 230+ shield boosts on a ship with 70+ resists and a native HP bonus that can fit shield boost implants and boosters. I had an RLML caracal specifically fit to kill this thing and it still turned in to a meat-grinder. This is including using my superior cap pool and double his peak dps and the same sustained DPS. Yea yea yea I get that a 40mil cruiser should probably have problems killing a 50-60mil destroyer thats jacked up on roids but then I got to wonder how we accept that frigates will consistantly kill battleships and battlecruisers who by all accounts should roll around in the corpses of frigates like a kodiak in a pile of weasels. Yeah I just don't know about that one. Making MASB consume at least cap 100s or something to make them scale more appropriately with regular boosters is just *a* solution that could be put to the table for consideration as I don't want to outright nerf the jackdaw but solve a larger problem with these ASBs in general. Could it be argued that a golem really needs 1200m3 for cap charges if it decides to go XL-ASB and XLSB in combo using 800's and 400's in sync? Maybe it could I guess as a golem suffers different problems than a jackdaw but since I'm getting off track I'll stop there. Something isn't right when the scalpel you take to a tumour is ineffective at cutting the skin. A cerb might have done the job but then we're talking about a 200mil HAC used against a 50mil T3D and that's definitely a problem when that degree of escalation is what's required and even then I'd argue we can't be sure thanks to other factors including needing RLML just to apply any damage in the first case. [edit] and maybe that's where it needs to go to stop utterly ridiculous fits like triple XL-ASB fits being so accessible and easy is to make them consume cap 800's instead. It's the XL booster, the largest of it's kind and it is supplementing its running cost with cap charges instead of impacting on the ships own capacitor. So making it consume a cap charge that is a lot larger than the cap cost of a regular booster instead will balance this out. It will not nerf the boosting power of the ship using them but it will hurt their sustainability. Cap 800's are very large and I've seen bait ships with expanded cargo holds to house more charges. So make the XL-ASB consume 800's and allowed to load 9 at time or whatever the question is not a matter of boosting power it's of being able to use a strictly burst tanking module and keep this running longer than cap-dependant systems. Down to the MASB, a t2 MSB consumes 60gj per charge, less 2% per level of shield compensation. 54gj per shot. This means that it is literally more cap effective to run the MASB over the MSB at base stats. Even at level 5s. So the MASB provides almost 50% more boosting power over an MSB for functionally less cost and lower fitting costs. Now I can handle the lower fitting costs but I can't handle the idea that a module which uses expendable charges to compensate for not using the ships own power source not only bolts on easier but is cheaper to run too. LASB vs LSB - we see the pattern going the other way, with LASB being slightly overcosted but in single digit percentages. T2 LSB uses 160 less 10% for 144 gj per shot while the LASB uses 150's and is cheaper to fit. XLASB and XLSB - same cap cost, t2 LSB has higher fittings. Ancillary shield boosters I just don't understand. They've always been considered a problem and they've either been too good for what they are or have been treated as garbage modules not worth fitting. It's just crazy. Did at any time anyone consider balancing these things through their activation costs instead of their boosting stats? Balancing this way does create an absolute ceiling at where they'll operate because links don't scale as well on them and using lows and rigs to make more cargo space or using friends to drop off charges is a game that's very risky as well due to how it could be intercepted.
You literally got no idea what you're talking about. Also, your jackdaw fit is underwhelming. |

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 12:50:34 -
[297] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote: You literally got no idea what you're talking about. Also, your jackdaw fit is underwhelming.
Which is why people celebrate in the gaming community how balanced EVE pvp is and how incredible all the ships are.
I was being facetious btw.
I didn't really mean anything I just said. Because it was lying.
What jackdaw fit? The one I haven't posted anywhere yet?
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1208
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 12:54:19 -
[298] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:I am not credulous enough to believe that a dedicated frigate/destroyer hunter should be unable to kill a frigate/destroyer with a weapon designed for fighting frigates/destroyers on a frigate/destroyer killing platform because said frigate/destroyer can "approximately tank my burst".
That's called broken. There needs to be a natural order to things and this is not it. A ship one size catagory up than you using the appropriate weapon should be able to MURDER you. Permatanking my caracal is a complete joke and when I killed that cerb was even worse.
I'm partly in agreement. Burst systems create nasty outlier conditions, rlml seem fated to toil if the enemy doesn't die in a single clip. |

Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
538
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 13:04:21 -
[299] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:I am not credulous enough to believe that a dedicated frigate/destroyer hunter should be unable to kill a frigate/destroyer with a weapon designed for fighting frigates/destroyers on a frigate/destroyer killing platform because said frigate/destroyer can "approximately tank my burst".
That's called broken. There needs to be a natural order to things and this is not it. A ship one size catagory up than you using the appropriate weapon should be able to MURDER you. Permatanking my caracal is a complete joke and when I killed that cerb was even worse. I'm partly in agreement. Burst systems create nasty outlier conditions, rlml seem fated to toil if the enemy doesn't die in a single clip.
and what can be done about it? I struggle to think of anything that's not just a gimmick or a hamfisted attack on 'a given playstyle'.
Imagine getting a missile rig that reduces reload speed by 10%? It might be all it takes in these situations to break the back of barely holding on active tanks. I need to stress again that I had him in to very deep structure and stood a fair chance of killing him but as you can see he still dealt 41k damage to me compared to my own 34k to him.
Is the jackdaw supposed to be the anti-missile user ship or something? Isn't that what every speedtanking ship since the dawn of time has been?
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|

elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
674
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 13:28:59 -
[300] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:...Is the jackdaw supposed to be the anti-missile user ship or something? Isn't that what every speedtanking ship since the dawn of time has been?
That is the one million isk question at this point. If we would get an answer to that I am curious to what that might be. At the current state the Jack is a one-trick pony with one more or less viable fit that is hardcoded into the hull.
Do something else and you get toasted.
Did you find a way to take less damage with the low speed and 532m signature radius that comes with it? You should even try heavy missiles against a Jack, it's slow and 'big' enough for them.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |