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) |
per
Terpene Conglomerate
54
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 22:18:18 -
[361] - Quote
how about explosion velocity?
its destroyer its caldari missile boat it should hurt small ships a lot since its t3 currently you cant do almost nothing to small linked kiting ships with your missiles, hell corax will be better than this
50+ hp per level is really, i dont know , like nothing? ninja edit: pls no ecm bonus, noone likes ecm, its broken, dont screw another ship with it |
MukkBarovian
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
41
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 22:52:33 -
[362] - Quote
Something other than +50HP a level.
Anything that resembles a real bonus.
Even if it isn't any good, as long as it appears to be a real bonus.
Nerf something and give it a bonus to get just above the nerfed stats. Give it a situational bonus like lock range or ewar strength. Just a real bonus. |
Punching Meg Zoidberg
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:01:01 -
[363] - Quote
Here's a wildcard for you. 10% Reduction in Shield Booster Capacitor Need per level. (Ancillary Shield Boosters don't receive this bonus) |
Zafrena Tyrleon
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:03:55 -
[364] - Quote
Altrue wrote:How to fix the Jackdaw:
- The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor.
- You should change the layout to 6/5/3,
- Give it 4 launchers instead of 5,
- Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?)
- Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit
- Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus)
- Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66%
- Fix its god damned inertia
- Increase its mass because otherwise it would be OP on 10mn
- Reduce its sig radius to 60
Why:Can be answered with one simple question: Why do people fly destroyers? - Because they want to have fun with something fast.
A destroyer cannot reasonnably have more tank or more theoretical DPS than a cruiser, the only thing destroyers have over cruisers are: Application, Sig Radius, Speed. The Jackdaw has NONE of these. Therefore, since you won't give it cruiser-level dps or tank (despite battlecruiser-level speed and cruiser-level agility), you must either face the choice of having it useless or change it into something fast. How to make sure the jackdaw is not OP?First off, its important to remind people that the fun part about T3 destroyers is that they are... destroyers. By very definition, they cannot become something like the Ishtars that are the easy choice for PvE AND PvP, because the jackdaws - as destroyers- cannot reasonably threaten anything bigger than T1 cruisers. - Take away light missile bonuses from the hull bonuses, put them into sharpshooter mode. Hull bonuses are for rockets only, sharpshooter missile bonuses (apart from the flight speed/time) are for light missiles only.
This is a pretty good list of things that need to happen.
Changing slots to 6/5/3 and dropping launchers to 4 keeps it in line with the others. Loss of damage? Maybe, but you have that extra low slot for a BCS.
Change that 5% ROF to 10% damage, just like the Svipul and Confessor. Then scrap your shield bonus (remember we're stripping a mid slot too), bake more shields into the hull, and add in 10% missile explosion velocity per level.
So, 4 launchers after bonuses brings it up to 9 total, but it can apply damage quite well. Swap around the 33/66 spread on Propulsion mode to make it similar to the other T3Ds, or it really won't see much use.
I understand the idea behind not making the T3Ds carbon copies of each other, and to be sure, there is something desirable about that. But that isn't the pattern established with the Svipul and Confessor, and the current iteration of the Jackdaw doesn't measure up at all. If this were to go live as is, the role of the Jackdaw would be to use the ship's incredible agility to turn and run when the opponent shows up in a different T3D, because it's just not much of a contest at the moment. |
Specia1 K
State War Academy Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:16:54 -
[365] - Quote
+More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please.
Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those"
|
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
2684
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:24:24 -
[366] - Quote
Even T1 frigs don't use the small shield extender, and you think adding one to a T3D is a good idea?
To be clear: I'm not saying the ship did or didn't need a nerf - I'm just saying that a small shield extender's worth of hp should be rolled into it's base stats and that as a bonus, it is completely un-inspired and dull.
If you don't want to give it a dps/tank bonus, consider giving it a utility bonus like any of the following:
10% ECM strength per level (utillity fits - the caldari have an ewar battleship, why not an ewar destroyer?) 10% bonus to sensor strength per level (so an ECCM) 5% reduction in shield booster cap usage - to encourage active fits that don't use ancillary boosters 5% reduction in MWD cap usage |
per
Terpene Conglomerate
54
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:24:53 -
[367] - Quote
Specia1 K wrote:+More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those"
fast missiles doesnt mean they will do some serious dmg to small and fast targets even if your missiles can catch them, explosion radius and explosion velocity is the most important thing if you wanna do some dmg to them |
Garrett Howe
Spectres
5
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:29:45 -
[368] - Quote
If the Jackdaw is going to be the slowest and have the least DPS of the T3 destroyers, it should at least be the tankiest. Keep the tactical destroyer bonuses similar to the other T3s (10% bonus to rocket/LML damage, 5% bonus to ROF). Then, change the 33.3% bonus on shield resistances to 66.6% bonus and reduce the velocity bonus in sharpshooter mode to 33.3%. If that is too OP, at least change the signature bonus to a 66.6% reduction, then buff the base sensor strength a bit so you could be near unprobeable in defensive mode alone. |
Pierre Fonulique
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:33:14 -
[369] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari.
I'd really prefer the ECCM bonus, or an ECM bonus. I feel like the T3 destroyers should demonstrate a cross section of what that race's frigates do without hitting all of the highs, and it would be good to se ewar represented without getting the full bonus that a EAF gets. |
Kaldfir Gongukaslan
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:45:25 -
[370] - Quote
Alright, so 5% per level is too much, and a flat-bonus is inconsistent with other bonuses (and 50hp seems underpowered).
Is there a reason nobody has suggested the obvious thing, which is to just reduce the 5% to 2-4%? I haven't run the numbers or anything, but that seems to be the obvious way to tone-down a bonus that is too strong. |
|
Makoto Priano
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
7027
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 23:50:28 -
[371] - Quote
Alternatively, what about a fitting bonus? 5% per level reduction to shield upgrade PG and CPU useage?
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
|
Xavier Azabu
Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
15
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 01:06:48 -
[372] - Quote
Hi Fozzie. Trust me, that 250hp shield bonus needs to go. Just give the ship about 150-200 more shield ehp.
For the replacement bonus, why not a grab bag for versatility? I'd consider these two for a unique ship. You could use ECM on the thing but not giving it a bonus to strength makes for cool fitting decisions due to the lack of lows. (most would do a DCU and then something else)
- 10% bonus to ECM Optimal Range per level
- 10% bonus to Missile Launcher Reload Time per level
Players could use rig slots to increase velocity. Then you have a sniping light missile ecm boat with quick draw timing and a decent tank.
This guy's post is key -
Altrue wrote:Let's look at this objectively shall we?
Comparison Caracal RML vs Jackdaw Light missiles
...
Conclusion: For TRIPLE the price, you get a ship that's WORSE in most cases, or that has negligible bonuses, especially for (again) triple the price. The only real difference lies in the signature radius, but given how SLOW the ship is, and given that the jackdaw would still be over 350sig, I really don't see how this could significantly improve its survivability.
TL;DR: I won't bother and rather pick a caracal or, if I really want to go pimp and small, a flycatcher.
As for others who call for an explosion or velocity bonus... you're just going to have the Jackdaw completely replace the almost never used Corax and the Garmur if that happens. |
Heinrich Rotwang
Zentralrat deutscher Fliesentischbesitzer e.V.
66
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 01:15:25 -
[373] - Quote
An example of a way more useful bonus would be a 10 percent reduction per level to the volume of Fedos in the cargohold. |
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems
141
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 01:19:43 -
[374] - Quote
Zafrena Tyrleon wrote:Altrue wrote:How to fix the Jackdaw:
- The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor.
- You should change the layout to 6/5/3,
- Give it 4 launchers instead of 5,
- Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?)
- Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit
- Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus)
- Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66%
- Fix its god damned inertia
- Increase its mass because otherwise it would be OP on 10mn
- Reduce its sig radius to 60
Why:Can be answered with one simple question: Why do people fly destroyers? - Because they want to have fun with something fast.
A destroyer cannot reasonnably have more tank or more theoretical DPS than a cruiser, the only thing destroyers have over cruisers are: Application, Sig Radius, Speed. The Jackdaw has NONE of these. Therefore, since you won't give it cruiser-level dps or tank (despite battlecruiser-level speed and cruiser-level agility), you must either face the choice of having it useless or change it into something fast. How to make sure the jackdaw is not OP?First off, its important to remind people that the fun part about T3 destroyers is that they are... destroyers. By very definition, they cannot become something like the Ishtars that are the easy choice for PvE AND PvP, because the jackdaws - as destroyers- cannot reasonably threaten anything bigger than T1 cruisers. - Take away light missile bonuses from the hull bonuses, put them into sharpshooter mode. Hull bonuses are for rockets only, sharpshooter missile bonuses (apart from the flight speed/time) are for light missiles only.
This is a pretty good list of things that need to happen. Changing slots to 6/5/3 and dropping launchers to 4 keeps it in line with the others. Loss of damage? Maybe, but you have that extra low slot for a BCS. Change that 5% ROF to 10% damage, just like the Svipul and Confessor. Then scrap your shield bonus (remember we're stripping a mid slot too), bake more shields into the hull, and add in 10% missile explosion velocity per level. So, 4 launchers after bonuses brings it up to 9 total, but it can apply damage quite well. Swap around the 33/66 spread on Propulsion mode to make it similar to the other T3Ds, or it really won't see much use. I understand the idea behind not making the T3Ds carbon copies of each other, and to be sure, there is something desirable about that. But that isn't the pattern established with the Svipul and Confessor, and the current iteration of the Jackdaw doesn't measure up at all. If this were to go live as is, the role of the Jackdaw would be to use the ship's incredible agility to turn and run when the opponent shows up in a different T3D, because it's just not much of a contest at the moment.
I can't upvote for some reason. So this gets a quote because its about 90% of what I would like to see.
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
65
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 01:43:11 -
[375] - Quote
I haven't been tracking this thread, but just wanted to say, the 50HP per level bonus just seems wrong and out of place in the game. I'm not commenting on the power or weakness of the bonus, just that it isn't consistent with the rest of the game. |
Agata Black
Minami no Kantai
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 01:45:02 -
[376] - Quote
If everything else fails you can always reduce the base shield HP of the ship enough so that with the old % bonus to shield ammount at max level it has the ehp you want it to have right now. Or would that leave some odd end susceptible to exploit?
Should make for a really nice reason to train the caldari tactical destroyer skill to V. Bit of a **** move, though.
* Keep the 5% shield ehp bonus * Change base shield hp to 880 * Has same shield hp at lvl V CTD as current build (1100) |
Nikolai Agnon
dirt 'n' glitter
16
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 02:25:28 -
[377] - Quote
Confessor: + Damage (10%/level) + Reduction in activation cost (10%/level) (matches the Coercer 10%-per-level)
Svipul: + Damage (10%/level) + Range (10%/level) (at level 5, matches the Thrasher passive 50%)
Jackdaw: + ROF (5%/level) + ...tank? (50 flat/level)
The Confessor is already hard on cap, so that's really important. Great utility bonus.
The Svipul needs the range in order to compete with pretty much every other Minmatar gunboat frigate. It makes sense.
The Jackdaw's utility bonus should be for the weapon, not the tank. The Corax's passive 50% bonus is to missile velocity, which is already being applied via the sharpshooter mode. However, it's still missing any kind of actual precision bonus. Can we get a +10% missile explosion velocity bonus per level? This will put the Jackdaw's damage application bonus on par with its T1 counterpart. Otherwise, a T1 Corax would be more effective at shooting anything fast enough to catch a T3 destroyer. |
Gorn Arming
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
395
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:05:20 -
[378] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Give it a 2s/level reduction in missile launcher reload time.
Instant reloads would be fun without seriously altering the ship's power level, and fit with the "flexible" gimmick for T3s. In most cases you'd see an opponent and select a damage type a few seconds ahead of time, but a reload time reduction would still be helpful when things change mid-fight. |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
541
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:25:30 -
[379] - Quote
Altrue wrote:Soldarius wrote: I have no doubt what-so-ever that sub-2-second align times can be had.
I have no doubt about how useless this is in any combat situation, and no doubt that I'd gadly trade it for speed instead The agility really is a poisonned gift, given the lack of speed and the really bad agility in other modes.
It is useful for ships that get kited so they can slingshot. That's essentially the hurricane-vs-spitfire equation.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
541
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:42:03 -
[380] - Quote
Punching Meg Zoidberg wrote:Here's a wildcard for you. 10% Reduction in Shield Booster Capacitor Need per level. (Ancillary Shield Boosters don't receive this bonus)
ASBs need a nerf as opposed to regular boosters needing a buff. At the module level. Not at the suspiciously specific ship level.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
541
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:43:32 -
[381] - Quote
Specia1 K wrote:+More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those"
I've made a significant number of posts in the past about why high-speed missile combat doesn't work and this would result in so much damage bleed you'd still lose.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
w1ndstrike
Strange Energy The Bastion
31
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 04:03:44 -
[382] - Quote
Nikolai Agnon wrote:Confessor: + Damage (10%/level) + Reduction in activation cost (10%/level) (matches the Coercer 10%-per-level)
Svipul: + Damage (10%/level) + Range (10%/level) (at level 5, matches the Thrasher passive 50%)
Jackdaw: + ROF (5%/level) + ...tank? (50 flat/level)
The Confessor is already hard on cap, so that's really important. Great utility bonus.
The Svipul needs the range in order to compete with pretty much every other Minmatar gunboat frigate. It makes sense.
The Jackdaw's utility bonus should be for the weapon, not the tank. The Corax's passive 50% bonus is to missile velocity, which is already being applied via the sharpshooter mode. However, it's still missing any kind of actual precision bonus. Can we get a +10% missile explosion velocity bonus per level? This will put the Jackdaw's damage application bonus on par with its T1 counterpart. Otherwise, a T1 Corax would be more effective at shooting anything fast enough to catch a T3 destroyer.
pretty much this, drop the tank bonus and add an application bonus |
Solarus Explorer
The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate
6
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 04:05:09 -
[383] - Quote
The way i see it, the Jackdaw sacrifices speed and raw dps compared to its t3d brethren, and leaves itself open to be kited. To survive in this situation, it should have a really good tank, else it just becomes 'kiter-food'.
Might I suggest a weaker version of the resist bonus for the hull bonus of the ship.....
+3% to Shield Resists per level |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
2072
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 04:21:45 -
[384] - Quote
The Jackdaw we want to see wrote:
Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 7.5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher damage per level +5% reduction in shield recharge time per level 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements
Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode: 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active
Slot layout: 5 H, 6 M, 3 L, 5 launchers 3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration Fittings: 57 PWG, 270 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1225 / 600 / 600 Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 55 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 72.5 / 43.75 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 700 / 300s / 2.333 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 170 / 6.6 / 1,000,000 / 4.5 / 9.15s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 275 / 7 Sensor strength: 15 Gravimetric Signature radius: 70 Cargo capacity: 450
There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people...
CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
|
Specia1 K
State War Academy Caldari State
61
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 05:44:15 -
[385] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Specia1 K wrote:+More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those" I've made a significant number of posts in the past about why high-speed missile combat doesn't work and this would result in so much damage bleed you'd still lose.
Oh ya I know greater missile velocity doesn't equal more damage . Was just a comment to say I don't care as much about being kited for flying something slower, if I had more ability to inflict damage. The hecate will be a beast, so just plugging for moar now
Missile bonuses please... |
Fourteen Maken
The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted.
160
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 06:12:39 -
[386] - Quote
Give it a bonus to webifier strength to make up for the lower speed in scram range without making it viable for light missile kiting. |
Fourteen Maken
The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted.
161
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 06:20:28 -
[387] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
-25 scan resolution
[/list]
Also did you mean +25 scan res? |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
544
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 06:57:49 -
[388] - Quote
Not one normally to participate in an echo chamber but CCP changing the speed of the Jackdaw is appreciated while the interia and mass changes make using (oversized) prop mods even more penalising (my interpretation) in terms of acceleration.
I don't think the jackdaw should be 6/5/3 or anything but what it is because that would be homogenising the races and you'll just ***** about it should that happen.
I think that the jackdaw does respectable dps as it is, my (as yet unkilled fit) does 250dps with light missiles and can still burn and tank quite well. A rocket variant of the fit does some 340dps which makes it nearly catalyst levels of beastly. I don't think at this time that modifying the jackdaws damage output is a good move.
The changes to the tank of the jackdaw surprises me slightly but at the same time it kind of doesn't. I never considered a 5%/level hp buff as being overly strong compared to active tank fits which can stay alive for much longer. Buffer only protects against alpha, local reps protects against high dps. I never built myself an MSE jackdaw so my commentary here can only be somewhat limited.
Increasing damage application is also something I don't think the jackdaw needs or deserves. As one gentleman long ago pointed out most shield ships tend to fit upwards of 50% more tank than armour fits at the expense of any application mods/rigs and that this was the area which required attention. While I only partially agreed with him at the time now I see more of his side of the debate and tend to fit my missile ships with at least one rigor rig in order to press home that damage mechanic advantage missiles have over turrets.
I think that the real issues we're facing with the jackdaw is that we're still using modules which haven't undergone a comprehensive rebalancing yet, whereas small projectiles at least have - and things like hulltanking benefits armour tanking ships more than it does shield tanks. This is limiting for shield ships as they're already starved for slots and particularly for missile users who have trouble with application and/or range. Our ships have less flexibility in fitting. Some outlier gimmick ships like buffer-armour ravens exist but battleships are in a league of their own and comparing them to smaller ships is kind of a disservice to everyone involved.
So at the moment instead of everyone flipping the **** out and hurling abuse at Fozzie&co give the changes a chance to get tested by the player base, observe the new fitting meta and then provide feedback. Everything in EvE has a butterfly effect - we know this - fits fit to fight a fit get counter-fits fit to fight that fit and then the original fit is modified to fight against the fit fit to fight its fit.
I'm calling for moderation here people. I'm calling for rationality to prevail and give the jackdaw the testing it NEEDS before criticism is leveled. The jackdaw has already seen one interim balance pass which leaves it more balanced right now than the svipul and confessor were on release.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
2240
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 09:02:52 -
[389] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders)
Makes no sense...
50hp/level bonus?
OK, sure maybe on............well nothing!
I think Iceland is getting to you, have a shot of Maple Syrup and come back and fix this next level of stupid...
(seriously, what kinda buff is that?)
Hello, world!
|
Azami Nevinyrall
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
2240
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 09:13:36 -
[390] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Giving the Jackdaw an ECCM bonus would make it inconsistent with the rest of the T3.
Look at the other ships in the T3 line and follow suit when it comes to bonuses.
Hello, world!
|
|
|
|
|
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 |