| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
Confederation of Independent Corporations
   |
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:11:00 -
[31]
Man overnerfing must be fotm with CCP... Jav torps, Null, Drake, Hurricane... Whats next, Rokh?
The only thing good about this is that the Zixxa-Troll is prolly in a permanent frothing fit now 
---------
ZOMG my sig was concordokkened!
Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
|
keepiru
Supernova Security Systems
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:14:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: One Percent
Because you can tank like a maniac?
Yes, and we all know that supertanked ships with no speed mod, webber and scrambler are really, really useful, right?
right?
we're not talking of daft sisi duels or npcing m8, we're talking of actual combat.
----------------
Kali ships worth flying left: Harbinger, Rokh. Only 2 left tux, you can make it! |
Dixon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:24:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Dixon
I'd settle for a RoF bonus but remove the resist bonus for a flight time bonus so the ship can actually use HAMs.
Wait, you want a range bonus on the missile equivalent of blasters? What part of that seems sensible?
HAMs are meant to be close range weapons, so a range bonus wou;ld most deffinatly not tbe the direction to go.
The part where caldari ships need medslots to tank. Without a range bonus the maximum range is 15km (with full missile range-skills, that's rare). Now if that ship would have a max range of 15 km it would struggle to kill anything not slower than itself and that is a lot. Missile boats are slow and need range - that's why they _all_ have range bonuses.
- - - - - -
I have no strong feelings one way or the other... |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:28:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Dixon
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Dixon
I'd settle for a RoF bonus but remove the resist bonus for a flight time bonus so the ship can actually use HAMs.
Wait, you want a range bonus on the missile equivalent of blasters? What part of that seems sensible?
HAMs are meant to be close range weapons, so a range bonus wou;ld most deffinatly not tbe the direction to go.
The part where caldari ships need medslots to tank. Without a range bonus the maximum range is 15km (with full missile range-skills, that's rare). Now if that ship would have a max range of 15 km it would struggle to kill anything not slower than itself and that is a lot. Missile boats are slow and need range - that's why they _all_ have range bonuses.
Yah, but this isn't just another missile. This is the missile equivalent of ACs, Blasters and Pulses.
Now, in a blaster ship (ignoring T2 ammo) max range is unlikely to be more than 15km, even with large guns. It is, in fact, uite a bit less. HAMS are designed for those ships that want to go fast ship / close range set ups, not just to be another (more powerful) missile. If you can't fit the Drake for speed (all you need is 1x mid slot for MWD / AB, and some spare lows for nanos / overdruves (heh)/ inertials, and Caldari ships have lows going spare without an armour tank) then fit a long range launcher instead.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Faricar
Caldari
Knightmares Inc
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:31:00 -
[35]
CHANGE THE KEN DMG BONUS TO ROF BONUS TUX!
|
Darkrogue
Standard Operations Building Services
Maelstrom Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:32:00 -
[36]
I think they are doing the right thing Nerfing the Drake a bit.
But from all of us players. STOP DOUBLE NERFING single nerf, such as remove luancher hardpoint. Then test, maybe nerf a bit more if needed.
Okay thanks. Put back on ROF.
|
Dixon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:34:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Dixon
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Dixon
I'd settle for a RoF bonus but remove the resist bonus for a flight time bonus so the ship can actually use HAMs.
Wait, you want a range bonus on the missile equivalent of blasters? What part of that seems sensible?
HAMs are meant to be close range weapons, so a range bonus wou;ld most deffinatly not tbe the direction to go.
The part where caldari ships need medslots to tank. Without a range bonus the maximum range is 15km (with full missile range-skills, that's rare). Now if that ship would have a max range of 15 km it would struggle to kill anything not slower than itself and that is a lot. Missile boats are slow and need range - that's why they _all_ have range bonuses.
Yah, but this isn't just another missile. This is the missile equivalent of ACs, Blasters and Pulses.
Now, in a blaster ship (ignoring T2 ammo) max range is unlikely to be more than 15km, even with large guns. It is, in fact, uite a bit less. HAMS are designed for those ships that want to go fast ship / close range set ups, not just to be another (more powerful) missile. If you can't fit the Drake for speed (all you need is 1x mid slot for MWD / AB, and some spare lows for nanos / overdruves (heh)/ inertials, and Caldari ships have lows going spare without an armour tank) then fit a long range launcher instead.
Blasterships are lighter and more agile than Caldari missile-bricks, in fact missile ships are usually the slowest/heaviest in their class. This means that all the other BC and cruisers will outrun it easily if they also equip AB/MWD.. that is a major weakness that I'd rather be without.
- - - - - -
I have no strong feelings one way or the other... |
Captain Raynor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:38:00 -
[38]
If they put the rate of fire bonus back the Drake is still usable and probably a pretty decent ship.
Raven has rate of fire, why can't the Drake? Why doesn't the Caracal for that matter.
Kinetic missile damage bonus is bad stuff, bonus to 1 damage type is just lame, sorry. Missile DPS is basically pre-nerfed like projectiles and without some kind of rate of fire bonus missile ships just suck, look at the Nighthawk pre Kali boost.. why make the same mistake twice?
If CCP keeps the Drake screwed like this they will just have to boost it later, it wasn't exactly an overpowered ship to begin with other than the extender cheese setup so okay -1 launcher thats fine, screw it with kinetic dmg bonus? Lame.
Quote:
Daniel Jackson > a harbinger cant be a raven cause its not caldari
Daniel Jackson > and its not a missle ship
Jim Raynor > thank you for that expert analysis DJ
|
Patch Esquire
Di-Tron Light Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:42:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Dixon
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Dixon
Originally by: Patch86
Originally by: Dixon
I'd settle for a RoF bonus but remove the resist bonus for a flight time bonus so the ship can actually use HAMs.
Wait, you want a range bonus on the missile equivalent of blasters? What part of that seems sensible?
HAMs are meant to be close range weapons, so a range bonus wou;ld most deffinatly not tbe the direction to go.
The part where caldari ships need medslots to tank. Without a range bonus the maximum range is 15km (with full missile range-skills, that's rare). Now if that ship would have a max range of 15 km it would struggle to kill anything not slower than itself and that is a lot. Missile boats are slow and need range - that's why they _all_ have range bonuses.
Yah, but this isn't just another missile. This is the missile equivalent of ACs, Blasters and Pulses.
Now, in a blaster ship (ignoring T2 ammo) max range is unlikely to be more than 15km, even with large guns. It is, in fact, uite a bit less. HAMS are designed for those ships that want to go fast ship / close range set ups, not just to be another (more powerful) missile. If you can't fit the Drake for speed (all you need is 1x mid slot for MWD / AB, and some spare lows for nanos / overdruves (heh)/ inertials, and Caldari ships have lows going spare without an armour tank) then fit a long range launcher instead.
Blasterships are lighter and more agile than Caldari missile-bricks, in fact missile ships are usually the slowest/heaviest in their class. This means that all the other BC and cruisers will outrun it easily if they also equip AB/MWD.. that is a major weakness that I'd rather be without.
Admittedly the Drake is a little slower, but not cripplingly so- a wopping 5m/s slower thana Brutix (a venerable blaster boat if ever there was one) and only 800kkg heavier. With an intertial and and MWD it'll still be pretty quick- plenty quick enough to catch any ship without an MWD. True HAM ships still wont beat blaster ships toe-to-toe, but theres good reason for that (HAM arn't meant to eb the new I Win button, and blaster boats are a speciality). They'll still be ****ed useful though. They'll still be able to out speed anything without an MWD, and still be able to spit out the damage.
They are the close range option- if you don't feel a ship will work in close range, choose a long range weapon. Don't ask for a bonus to make the short-range weapon hit long-range.
-----------------------------------------------
If you're reading this, Patch86 was too lazy to select his main.
Again. |
IHaveTenFingers
Caldari
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Combined Planetary Union
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:42:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
i guess the HAC owners union got its way.
Mhe, tey deserve to get their way with the S***ty prices they have to pay for the things.
------------------------------------
My Opinions in no way reflect those of other members of ADVANCED Combat and Engineering.
|
|
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:43:00 -
[41]
ooopsie, that was me ^^^^^
-----------------------------------------------
|
Leandro Salazar
Aeon Industries
Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:45:00 -
[42]
Originally by: IHaveTenFingers
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
i guess the HAC owners union got its way.
Mhe, tey deserve to get their way with the S***ty prices they have to pay for the things.
More like the HAC BPO owners lobby got their way 
---------
ZOMG my sig was concordokkened!
Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
|
IHaveTenFingers
Caldari
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Combined Planetary Union
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:56:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Leandro Salazar
Originally by: IHaveTenFingers
Originally by: Viktor Fyretracker
i guess the HAC owners union got its way.
Mhe, tey deserve to get their way with the S***ty prices they have to pay for the things.
More like the HAC BPO owners lobby got their way
Hmm. ya know i find it very difficult to argue with that.
------------------------------------
My Opinions in no way reflect those of other members of ADVANCED Combat and Engineering.
|
Securion Wolfheart
Caldari
Semper Fidelis Industries
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:57:00 -
[44]
Why cant we Caldari have a ship we can use in pvp? What is so wrong with that? 
Drake could have been that ship, but nooo...
Back to mission-whoring then.
-----====-----
Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.
|
Xoduse
Beasts of Burden
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 18:57:00 -
[45]
Ok so the Amarr, Minnie, and Caldari BCs are all really good ships leaving Gallente the only one sub par due to its tiny drone bay. So instead of buffin the Myrm awith a little drone bay they bring down the uber nerf bat of doom on the other tier 2 BCs and bring them down to the myrms level?
What a freakin shame.
---------------------
|
Captain Raynor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:00:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Securion Wolfheart
Why cant we Caldari have a ship we can use in pvp? What is so wrong with that?
Drake could have been that ship, but nooo...
Back to mission-whoring then.
Only Raven can have a missile rate of fire bonus, it's the ship CCP decided that Caldari can PvP with, everything else must be rubbish I guess.
Rate of fire bonus is not imbalanced on missile ships.. when is CCP going to realize it's a way better bonus than kinetic missile damage, which by the way CCP if you are paying attention is pretty much one of the worst offensive bonuses in the game.
I'm sorry but "use kinetic missiles or have no bonus, period" is stupid..
Quote:
Daniel Jackson > a harbinger cant be a raven cause its not caldari
Daniel Jackson > and its not a missle ship
Jim Raynor > thank you for that expert analysis DJ
|
Varrakk
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:00:00 -
[47]
Thats just so screwed up, the Drake was brilliant. It would have dealt with the absurd Cerberus prices. Same with the Hurricane, it would have lowered demand for Vagabonds.
Get rid of that Kinetic damage bonus, make it a general or return the ROF bonus.
|
Imode
Band of Builders Inc.
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:01:00 -
[48]
Cool, so we got a 50mil Caracal then?
Nice.
____________________________
Sig removed, lacks Eve-related content - Cortes |
Asariasha
Caldari
Cataclysm Enterprises
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:03:00 -
[49]
I would like to thank all the whiners. Again some really
nice ships got nerfed to death :/
Maybe a split setup now for Drake and again we got another
useless Ferox omfg
|
Dixon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:04:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Patch Esquire
They are the close range option- if you don't feel a ship will work in close range, choose a long range weapon. Don't ask for a bonus to make the short-range weapon hit long-range.
22.5 km is hardly long range... and well I really don't care for the resist bonus. It will just make the drake an extremely annoying heavy-missile spammer with a BS-tank.
- - - - - -
I have no strong feelings one way or the other... |
|
|
MOS DEF
E X O D U S
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:08:00 -
[51]
You guys ask for ownageboats. If the hurricane and drake would'`ve stayed as they were they might as well have deleted the cyclone and ferox because they would be pointless.
It's not the goal of tier 2 BC to render the tier 1 one useless.
|
Nicocat
Caldari
New Age Solutions
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:11:00 -
[52]
First off, quit your whining about Jav torps. They were overpowered to hell and back. Use your real torps or your cruise missiles.
Secondly, I'd celebrate the death of the Drake, but at the same time, they killed the Hurricane. *cancels*
----------------------------
Please don't try to troll in your signature -Eldo([email protected])
I tried? |
Charrette
Nubs.
Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:11:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Charrette on 16/11/2006 19:10:58
The pre-nerf Drake was completely overpowering to any ship not a BS, and even then the Drake was dangerous if the BS was setup wrong.
Dropping a launcher was a good thing. But replacing the ROF bonus with that God-awful kinetic damage bonus makes absolutely no sense. Nearly every ship in the game is tanked to kinetic. i dont even bother fitting kinetic missiles on my caracal -- and i have caldari cruiser 5. (the exception to this is using rage ammo -- but how many people are willing to fly around in a 50mil isk caracal?)
My point is that it's a fairly useless bonus for anything but ratting.
|
Captain Raynor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:12:00 -
[54]
Originally by: MOS DEF
You guys ask for ownageboats. If the hurricane and drake would'`ve stayed as they were they might as well have deleted the cyclone and ferox because they would be pointless.
It's not the goal of tier 2 BC to render the tier 1 one useless.
ferox still sucks.......
Quote:
Daniel Jackson > a harbinger cant be a raven cause its not caldari
Daniel Jackson > and its not a missle ship
Jim Raynor > thank you for that expert analysis DJ
|
Dekein
No Quarter.
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:12:00 -
[55]
For kinetic missiles:
Caracal: 5 * 1.25 = 6.25 (5 for other missile types)
Ferox: 5 for all missile types
Cerberus: 5 * 1.25 * 1.33 = 8.31 (6.65 for other missile types)
NightHawk: 6 * 1.25 * 1.33 = 9.98 (7.98 for other missile types)
Old Drake: 7 * 1.33 = 9.31 for all missile types
New Drake: 6 * 1.25 = 7.5 (6 for other missile types)
So, to put them in order for kinetic damage.
Ferox(5)
Caracal(6.25)
Drake(7.5)
Cerberus(8.31)
Old Drake(9.31)
NightHawk(9.98)
Other damage types.
Ferox(5)
Caracal(5)
Drake(6)
Cerberus(6.65)
NightHawk(7.98)
Old Drake(9.31)
yeah I was looking forward to the old Drake as well, but it's damage was not in line with the other mid sized Caldari missile ships.
_____________________
|
Flamewave
Scorn.
Sani Khal'Vecna
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:13:00 -
[56]
I thought tier 2 battlecruisers were supposed to be gank before tank... Nerfing the damage output is kinda silly. It's the resistance bonus that should have changed if anything. :/
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:17:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Flamewave
I thought tier 2 battlecruisers were supposed to be gank before tank... Nerfing the damage output is kinda silly. It's the resistance bonus that should have changed if anything. :/
As I just said in the other post- tell that to the Myrmdon. Worse DPS than a Brutix and with a repper bonus.
Not sure Ganking was ever the name of the game for "all Tier 2 BCs".
-----------------------------------------------
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:24:00 -
[58]
Now, with BOTH sporting 5% shield resists and one of them hybrid range, the other kinetic missile bonus... aren't they basically pretty much just BOTH "tank and almost no gank" ?
If you want to change something, change the almost-too-overpowered 5% shield resist to 10% kinetic damage bonus and LEAVE the danged 5% RoF bonus in place.
With 5% RoF bonus and 10% missile kinetic damage bonus, THAT would be a gank platform that wouldn't tank as good as a Ferox (well, to be honest, it still would due to sheer size difference, but at least it wouldn't be BETTER).
And don't get me started on the slot setups and hitpoint amounts.
Even WITHOUT 5% shield resists, the Drake can tank better as a Ferox no matter how you put it (extra HP, extra midslot), and with them it outclasses the Ferox by lightyears in tanking.
Drake was SUPPOSED to be the "gank" version, Ferox the "tank" version, DANGNABBIT !!!
6 launchers (instead of 7), but keep RoF bonus, drop resists bonus... and add EITHER damage bonus or range bonus.
Seing how the range on those HAMs is pretty low, a 10% range per level bonus would be sweet.
Heck, even the idiotic 10% kinetic missile damage bonus (yes, right, on TOP of RoF bonus) would be nice.
By the way, who is the... umm... nice person... yeah... that we have to thank for the idea behind the change from 5% RoF to kinetic damage ?
You know, so I can... err... send them ISK as a thank you or something, yeah.
_____
-sig-
This is my only char. These are my skills
Always question everything, including yourself |
Captain Raynor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:27:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Dekein
For kinetic missiles:
Caracal: 5 * 1.25 = 6.25 (5 for other missile types)
Ferox: 5 for all missile types
Cerberus: 5 * 1.25 * 1.33 = 8.31 (6.65 for other missile types)
NightHawk: 6 * 1.25 * 1.33 = 9.98 (7.98 for other missile types)
Old Drake: 7 * 1.33 = 9.31 for all missile types
New Drake: 6 * 1.25 = 7.5 (6 for other missile types)
So, to put them in order for kinetic damage.
Ferox(5)
Caracal(6.25)
Drake(7.5)
Cerberus(8.31)
Old Drake(9.31)
NightHawk(9.98)
Other damage types.
Ferox(5)
Caracal(5)
Drake(6)
Cerberus(6.65)
NightHawk(7.98)
Old Drake(9.31)
yeah I was looking forward to the old Drake as well, but it's damage was not in line with the other mid sized Caldari missile ships.
You're comparing it with ships which are pretty underpowered.
First of all Ferox isn't even a missile ship so why is it on the list? Though of course with these changes the Ferox is almost as good as a Drake now, in fact with the changes if you aren't using kinetic missiles the Ferox is ALMOST as good as a Drake!!! Wow good job CCP.
Hell with the extra grid the Ferox has I bet it can even be a better missile ship than the Drake since it can fit more WTFPWN shield extenders, hooray!
Caracal is **** in a sea of vomit. T1 cruisers blow, Caracal blows, it has its uses but overall pretty weak ship, there's only like 3 cruisers in EVE worth anything so yeah that will tell you how awesome the Caracal is, this ship needed a ROF bonus forever but will prob never get one.
Nighthawk? The flat out worst Command Battlecruiser, when it gets the rate of fire bonus, it will be good.
Far as the Drake goes, look, dropping a launcher is not a bad thing.. all of the tier2 battlecruisers were doing too much DPS, so to nerf it a bit, thats cool.. BUT, kinetic missile dmg? When a Caldari ship gets that bonus instead of rate of fire its like getting a "LOL U SUCK" stamp put on it to let the playerbase know it's a peice of crap.
So I hope everyone enjoys flying them Ravens since it's the only ship the Caldari get worth training for if you wanna do day to day PvPing without looking to the T2 ships (where CCP actually gets a clue and puts ROF on some of the **** ships).
Quote:
Daniel Jackson > a harbinger cant be a raven cause its not caldari
Daniel Jackson > and its not a missle ship
Jim Raynor > thank you for that expert analysis DJ
|
Tearavygh Quillam
Caldari
mega mining corporation
Astral Wolves
|
Posted - 2006.11.16 19:35:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Dekein
For kinetic missiles:
Caracal: 5 * 1.25 = 6.25 (5 for other missile types)
Ferox: 5 for all missile types
Cerberus: 5 * 1.25 * 1.33 = 8.31 (6.65 for other missile types)
NightHawk: 6 * 1.25 * 1.33 = 9.98 (7.98 for other missile types)
Old Drake: 7 * 1.33 = 9.31 for all missile types
New Drake: 6 * 1.25 = 7.5 (6 for other missile types)
So, to put them in order for kinetic damage.
Ferox(5)
Caracal(6.25)
Drake(7.5)
Cerberus(8.31)
Old Drake(9.31)
NightHawk(9.98)
Other damage types.
Ferox(5)
Caracal(5)
Drake(6)
Cerberus(6.65)
NightHawk(7.98)
Old Drake(9.31)
yeah I was looking forward to the old Drake as well, but it's damage was not in line with the other mid sized Caldari missile ships.
It's a very good analysis and although i would have loved the "old drake" (which i tested on Sisi before and after the nerf), it was too good to be true (i hate to say it).
The actual Drake on sisi is a great ship (even solo ganker) with the right setup, rigs included. It's only that it's dps got nerfed realy bad...
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |