EVE Search - Ferox is a better missile boat than a Drake now let's look.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Revelations Testing and Development

Ferox is a better missile boat than a Drake now let's look.

» 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 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation The Corporation Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:37:00 - [31] Originally by: Captain Raynor How about some thermal only damage bonus for Gallente droneboat drones? Oh wait that deemed too "restricting" for the poor Domi-Ishtar pwnboats.. No... you haven't been reading properly. Or you might just be ignorant as to how drones work. Come back when your EM missiles do 29% less damage than your kinetic missiles - BEFORE skills. - EVE is sick.
Dixon Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:37:00 - [32] Edited by: Dixon on 18/11/2006 16:38:43 Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Dixon Edited by: Dixon on 18/11/2006 16:33:29 Originally by: Tuxford We can always remove some launcher slots from the ferox if that boosts the drake for you. Drake is fine. Kinetic damage is fine. Spouting ** like "kinetic damage sucks" is just bull** and you know it. Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. Just out of curiosity. Are you going to do the same to the Raven and Phoenix? EDIT: just to be clear, this isn't a whine. I personally think the kinetic bonus should be our default missile bonus. Phoenix already has kinetic missile damage bonus. Right you are, I forgot... BTW: /signed the thing where the ferox gets some turrets and loses some launchers - - - - - - I have no strong feelings one way or the other...
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:38:00 - [33] Tux if you would drop the resistance bonus and add a RoF bonus on top of the Kinetic bonus then we'd be cooking with gas. And it would be inline with the phoenix's bonus. Anyways the Ferox has the shield resistance bonus that is inline with the Rokh. How about it? Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Captain Raynor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:41:00 - [34] I don't see why the Drake even has a shield resistance bonus to be honest. Actually when you look at the Drakes stats they pretty much just copied the Ferox anyways, this ship should be more offense oriented and not so much on defense. I'd rather lose the shield resist and get missile velocity and rate of fire or something along those lines. Keep the shield resist bonuses for the Caldari railboats, those ships lack DPS and need it a lot more than a ship like the Drake, which (i thought) was supposed to be a damage dealer. We don't need another Ferox one Ferox is punishment enough. 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
Captain Raynor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:43:00 - [35] Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Captain Raynor How about some thermal only damage bonus for Gallente droneboat drones? Oh wait that deemed too "restricting" for the poor Domi-Ishtar pwnboats.. No... you haven't been reading properly. Or you might just be ignorant as to how drones work. Come back when your EM missiles do 29% less damage than your kinetic missiles - BEFORE skills. So what's it matter? Thermal damage bonus, thermal drones are technically the best, why not thermal only? Why is it okay for Caldari and not Gallente? I mean crap you can load up turrets on top of your Drones anyways, Dominix is a hardcore DPS dealer when fitted with guns when you add the drone damage in. I'm fully aware that EM drones are the worst and Thermal the best in terms of DPS, thanks for the memo though. 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

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:44:00 - [36] Originally by: Captain Raynor Originally by: Tuxford We can always remove some launcher slots from the ferox if that boosts the drake for you. Drake is fine. Kinetic damage is fine. Spouting ** like "kinetic damage sucks" is just bull and you know it. The Ferox should lose launcher slots and get another turret, this is supposed to be a railboat, right? Why the wacked out 5/5 loadout? Brutix is a better railboat than this POS. Kinetic damage only bonus does blow, I'm sorry but it does, maybe if missiles did 2 dmg types I'd say ok, but they don't. Use kinetic of get no bonuses! Awesome. Freakin' Typhoon gets a launcher ROF bonus but the Caldari missile battlecruiser can't? Yeah ok that makes perfect sense. I don't mind kinetic missile damage bonus as a secondary bonus offensive, coupled with ROF on offensive oriented ships, like the Phoenix. Freaking Typhoon does get a bonus to half its weapon system, admittedly its a good bonus but don't even try to compare a 5% rate of fire bonus on 4 launcher slots to a 5% kinetic damage on 6. Originally by:** Captain Raynor Quote: Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. Lasers do way more DPS than launchers, and Amarr ships tend to get more turrets than Caldari get launchers on top of that.. so yeah whatever at least lasers do 2 damage types and Caldari are pretty much restricted to using 1 damage type, lame -- whatever. YOU ARE NOT RESTRICTED TO USE 1 DAMAGE TYPE. Its simple as that you CAN use another. You get bonus to 1 but you CAN use any ******* damage type you want. I was gonna reply to the rest but tbh I'm way to busy to argue on the forums. _______________

Captain Raynor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:53:00 - [37] Tux, if you are busy that is cool. I'm not really down with arguing but look the point I'm trying to make is this. Drake was overpowered in terms of tank, not its missiles. The ROF bonus is better than the kinetic missile damage bonus, which is not popular for PvP by not just me but by just about everyone who flies Caldari ships in general. I do not think the Drake should have hit tranquility the way it was, yes it was too strong, I agree with removing one of the launchers but to change the bonuses was just too heavy handed when you could have simply taken 1 launcher off and changed the shield resist bonus to something else, like missile velocity bonus. The Drakes imbalance wasn't heavy assault missiles or it's offense what so ever, the imbalance is the shield resist bonus plus the fact people were fitting loads of extenders, getting really high resists and 25k shields making them incredibly hard to kill for a battlecruiser, that is what the complaint was, not the missiles. So yes you killed the Drake pretty much, it's now a tank oriented ship, we already got tons of those.. we wanted a ship more like the Raven and less like the Ferox, we wanted a small gang ship that could deal DPS, now we have a turtle-mobile, Caldari already have turtle-mobiles, now we have another one, great. I think the best thing to do would be to make the Drake a more offensive oriented battlecruiser, we already have the Ferox which is geared more to range and tanking so give us back our offensive ship, rate of fire + missile velocity, velocity isn't the bestest bonus ever but it would balance the ship out more since the ROF bonus is good. Shield Resist + Optimal for Railboats Rate of Fire + Missile Velocity for Missileboats Those should be the standard bonuses for Caldari, in my opinion.. 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
Matrix Aran Legio Immortalis	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:54:00 - [38] You see, when I say this stuff no one listens. A Dev steps up and says the same stuff, and still no one listens. For the most part kiddos, the ships in eve are fairly well balanced and setup. If you can't make them work you really are limited to thinking inside the box. And hey, guess what, Tux isn't forcing you to fly these ships. If you don't like them then stick to your ferox or your Raven. ----
Ed Gein Dark Blade Incorporated Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:57:00 - [39] Edited by: Ed Gein on 18/11/2006 16:58:01 *runs and hides I always base how good a damage type is by how often it is hardened against in pvp. For instance people always gave em such a bad rap because "omg em sucks agains armor!1!!!!!" but if you think about it, even hardened, shields only have a 55% em res and armor (in the past) rarely got em hardened so most ships just had the base em res which would be lower than the other three types being hardened. EAN2's sort of changed the game on that though. Same sort of deal with explosive on shields, but un-nerfing of invuln fields had the same effect that ean's 2. Why am I am rambling? In the past kinetic damage in pvp did sort of suck because if you were shield tanking, or armor tanking, kinetic would always be hardened giving it a higher average resistance going from fight to fight. All in all though, not sure its quite the big deal that used it to because of the rampant use of ean and invulns. -------------------------------------------------------------- What do you call the person that brings a gun to a knife fight? The Winner.
Commoner Caldari Emergent Chaos The Core Collective	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:58:00 - [40] Originally by: Matrix Aran You see, when I say this stuff no one listens. A Dev steps up and says the same stuff, and still no one listens. For the most part kiddos, the ships in eve are fairly well balanced and setup. If you can't make them work you really are limited to thinking inside the box. And hey, guess what, Tux isn't forcing you to fly these ships. If you don't like them then stick to your ferox or your Raven. By no means, i wont fly the drake, as i will do better in a scorpion which is only a tad more expensive than this one :) (And just a tad slower too). The point is, why waste database space with a ship which role already is fulfilled by another alot cheaper ship? The caracal seems much more flexible than this one.

2SecondsTilMidnight	Posted - 2006.11.18 16:58:00 - [41] What about jav HAMs? You still going to nerf those? I realize now that you guys are going to leave the drake in its current **ty state(don't give me **, drake was already the least damaging of the new BCs even with HAMs) So now I don't care about the Drake. Just nerf jav HAMs because otherwise people will scream NH nerf when this patch hits TQ.
Captain Raynor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:00:00 - [42] Originally by: Ed Gein runs and hides I always base how good a damage type is by how often it is hardened against in pvp. For instance people always gave em such a bad **because "omg em sucks agains armor!1!!!!!" but if you think about it, even hardened, shields only have a 55% em res and armor (in the past) rarely got em hardened so most ships just had the base em res which would be lower than the other three types being hardened. EAN2's sort of changed the game on that though. Same sort of deal with explosive on shields, but un-nerfing of invuln fields had the same effect that ean's 2. Why am I am rambling? In the past kinetic damage in pvp did sort of suck because if you were shield tanking, or armor tanking, kinetic would always be hardened giving it a higher average resistance going from fight to fight. All in all though, not sure its quite the big deal that used it to because of the rampant use of ean and invulns. Honestly I feel like EM is one of the best damage types to use in PvP, it depends though, against shield tanks generally thermal is the lowest.. usually followed by EM. Against armor tanks, EM is usually the lowest unless it's a pure EANM II setup, which I guess is popular nowadays but I've seen lots of people fit actives and a few EANM II over that thus making EM the lowest resist, albiet still rather high in the mid 70s. I guess explosive is still the king of PvP damages though because shield tankers generally ignore reinforcing it and it's the biggest hole in armor on t1 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
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation The Corporation Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:01:00 - [43] Originally by: Captain Raynor Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Captain Raynor How about some thermal only damage bonus for Gallente droneboat drones? Oh wait that deemed too "restricting" for the poor Domi-Ishtar pwnboats.. No... you haven't been reading properly. Or you might just be ignorant as to how drones work. Come back when your EM missiles do 29% less damage than your kinetic missiles - BEFORE skills. So what's it matter? Thermal damage bonus, thermal drones are technically the best, why not thermal only? Why is it okay for Caldari and not Gallente? I mean crap you can load up turrets on top of your Drones anyways, Dominix is a hardcore DPS dealer when fitted with guns when you add the drone damage in. I'm fully aware that EM drones are the worst and Thermal the best in terms of DPS, thanks for the memo though. So why are you being emo, then, Captain? Look, this is how it is. Thermal drone 100% damage ; EM drone 71% damage ; evenly scaled between that. Kinetic missile 100% damage ; All other missiles 80% damage. What's the problem, really? Drone damage ships tend to have just about the damage support from turrets as missile ships have from drones and turrets (not much, and it steals fitting, which is tight). It seems to me that those who are agitated over the missile damage bonus tend to use drones as prime example most of the time. But what the real situation is that missiles aren't at all "left behind" in the selectable damage department. They are, in fact, rather similar to how it works with just about every other weapon type in game - you want to do some other damage than your racial preference, you lose damage. Just like everyone else. - EVE is sick.
Captain Raynor Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:10:00 - [44] Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Captain Raynor Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Captain Raynor How about some thermal only damage bonus for Gallente droneboat drones? Oh wait that deemed too "restricting" for the poor Domi-Ishtar pwnboats.. No... you haven't been reading properly. Or you might just be ignorant as to how drones work. Come back when your EM missiles do 29% less damage than your kinetic missiles - BEFORE skills. So what's it matter? Thermal damage bonus, thermal drones are technically the best, why not thermal only? Why is it okay for Caldari and not Gallente? I mean crap you can load up turrets on top of your Drones anyways, Dominix is a hardcore DPS dealer when fitted with guns when you add the drone damage in. I'm fully aware that EM drones are the worst and Thermal the best in terms of DPS, thanks for the memo though. So why are you being emo, then, Captain? Look, this is how it is. Thermal drone 100% damage ; EM drone 71% damage ; evenly scaled between that. Kinetic missile 100% damage ; All other missiles 80% damage. What's the problem, really? Drone damage ships tend to have just about the damage support from turrets as missile ships have from drones and turrets (not much, and it steals fitting, which is tight). It seems to me that those who are agitated over the missile damage bonus tend to use drones as prime example most of the time. But what the real situation is that missiles aren't at all "left behind" in the selectable damage department. They are, in fact, rather similar to how it works with just about every other weapon type in game - you want to do some other damage than your racial preference, you lose damage. Just like everyone else. Erm, most Caldari ships don't even get drone bays these days dude especially t2 CCP don't even bother giving us enough room to fit a few light drones anymore and there's no realistic way to fit turrets on any Caldari ships, we don't have enough grid for turrets on our missile ships, if you wanna find a fitting that proves me wrong, go for it but it's usually hard enough to fit an undersized nosferatu on most caldari missile boats. 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
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:11:00 - [45] Originally by: Captain Raynor The Drakes imbalance wasn't heavy assault missiles or it's offense what so ever, the imbalance is the shield resist bonus plus the fact people were fitting loads of extenders, getting really high resists and 25k shields making them incredibly hard to kill for a battlecruiser, that is what the complaint was, not the missiles. To add to this: And that the BCs got an 100% HP boost (including shields), but only a 50% higher shield recharge. So the drake and ferox have not only the effective 33% HP (and resulting passive tank) boost due to the resistance bonus, but also another "free" 33% passive tank boost due to the higher regeneration. Resulting together in an 77% better passive tank than you would have on a BC without resistance bonus on TQ. ("Better" in terms of "max dps they can tank indefinately", not in max HP)
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:15:00 - [46] Originally by: Xori Ruscuv Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 16/11/2006 21:06:56 Maybe they are trying to shut up the "OMG FEROX IS USELESS!!!111LOL" people. If they make the Ferox have 7 turret slots like other BCs, that'd shut those people up too. And the caldari Railboat BC would actually gasp be useful! Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Tsar Maul	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:16:00 - [47] Now would probably be a bad idea to bring up Khanid Mark II...
Nyxus GALAXIAN Rule of Three	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:20:00 - [48] Originally by: Tuxford Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. We would love you long time for this. We are talking six-pack of vaseline and a spatula type love too. Of course it would be horrendously overpowering.........but think about it <winks> Quote: Possibility of changing the Raven ROF to a kin bonus I wish you would consider this. It's one of the reasons that all non-raven bs are so incredibly inferior to the Raven for NPC/missions. It would help balance things out both pvp and npc. At least the megas could attempt to tank specifically for Ravens. Something they can do for any other ship except the Raven. In any case I am glad to hear that you are going to leave the Drake as is. Caldari Folks: The Drake isn't huring for DPS after the changes. 2nd best DPS past 15km? Yes please. Racial damage is one of the balancing factors of Eve. All four races should be subject to it. Not just 3 out of the four. Nyxus Originally by: keepiru I cant imagine a stronger signal of how pants 3/4 of new BS are than the fact that Matari will be training Amarr BS and Amarrians will be training Large Projectile to use the same ship
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:23:00 - [49] Originally by: Tuxford We can always remove some launcher slots from the ferox if that boosts the drake for you. Drake is fine. Kinetic damage is fine. Spouting ** like "kinetic damage sucks" is just bull and you know it. Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. Tux, you once said Teir2 BCs would gank and not tank. So why did you remove the gank from the Drake, and not the tank? Kinetic damage doesn't suck, but the recent changes to the Drake do. Would it really be that bad to have the Drake be ROF and missile velocity? It'd fit the 'gank not tank' idea alot better than kinetic dmg only, and a resists bonus. Originally by:** kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
Scoundrelus Finite Horizon The Red Skull	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:23:00 - [50] Originally by: Tuxford Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. I truly do not think truer words have ever been spoken. By the way I fly Amarr and yes, I'd love to do some explosive damage. =============================================== And Scoundrelus walked the Forums once again, and all was turned to flame...

Isyel Minmatar Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:24:00 - [51] Edited by: Isyel on 18/11/2006 17:25:23 Originally by: Malthros Zenobia Originally by: Xori Ruscuv Edited by: Xori Ruscuv on 16/11/2006 21:06:56 Maybe they are trying to shut up the "OMG FEROX IS USELESS!!!111LOL" people. If they make the Ferox have 7 turret slots like other BCs, that'd shut those people up too. And the caldari Railboat BC would actually gasp be useful! What other BCs have 7 guns? They even nerfed the hurricane and gave it 6 now. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I be needin' some sig love. sigh
xOm3gAx Caldari Bre-X	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:25:00 - [52] Edited by: xOm3gAx on 18/11/2006 17:28:21 Edited by: xOm3gAx on 18/11/2006 17:27:21 Originally by: Tuxford We can always remove some launcher slots from the ferox if that boosts the drake for you. Drake is fine. Kinetic damage is fine. Spouting ** like "kinetic damage sucks" is just bull** and you know it. Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. Tux, i wanna make it clear im not whining at all first cus tbh im just glad we have more choices in ships. But the drake did recieve a double nerf and kinetic is the MOST tanked dmg type in eve as it is the primary dmg type for the vast majority of ammo types (stop me if im wrong) so with that being said could we have kept the ROF bonus to test balance before instigating the double nerf recieved. I do agree that the dmg bonus is nice though not quite as effective as it could be which i think anyone who participates in pvp combat knows. If you shield tank you generally have (when not using 3x+ invulns) 2x em 1x kinetic and usually a thermal passive. Armor is usually 2x kinetic 1x thermal 1x explosive with 1x em passive if really needed. In all reality (and i do know theres a really large variety of other possible setups but this is what i've seen the most god knows i've been in my share of fleet battles i was there at U-QVWD and when there were skirmishes before the actual fleet battle those were the general tanks seen based on loot dropped. U-QVWD if you dont remember was one of the last great fights the CA put out before our down fall.) So i'm just curious why can't we have ROF if we dont get 2 dmg types, we know time to target is still an issue and we also know that unless you get in close with missiles dps doesnt count for squat and you have to rely on burst dmg to break the targets tank. So with 1 dmg type ( and if u give a bonus to kinetic u do limit us to that ) you generally break us. Drop a mid and give ROF back and i think it will solve the problems with ppl complaining. You still get your double nerf and we get our ROF. If you read this thanks for your time if you respond then thank you even more. Also when tanking its not longer a 25% bonus to dmg assuming maxed skills as after tanking if a ship is tanked according to how at least i've generally seen them tanked then you gain a negative bonus to kinetic and actually do more dmg with other types such as thermal. Thanks again tux. Edit: also im all for you removing 2+ launchers from teh ferox =P If you do can we get 1 more turret and maybe a touch more pg though for fitting it =) -xOm ---------------------------------------- http://www.oldnumber7.com/forumpic.gif Please ensure your signature is 24,000 bytes or less - Udat
Malthros Zenobia Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:38:00 - [53] Originally by: Nyxus Caldari Folks: The Drake isn't huring for DPS after the changes. And all it takes is T2 ammo, and LASERS. Oh yes, lasers on a shield-tanker, I bet that's just tons of fun. And I see you show that graph using kinetic. Now drop it to something else, and look at that uber sub-300DPS gankage. Originally by: kieron The Carrier was never intended to be a solo OMGWTF mission-farming PWNmobile.
xOm3gAx Caldari Bre-X	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:39:00 - [54] Originally by: Isyel Originally by: xOm3gAx Edited by: xOm3gAx on 18/11/2006 17:28:21 Edited by: xOm3gAx on 18/11/2006 17:27:21 Originally by: Tuxford We can always remove some launcher slots from the ferox if that boosts the drake for you. Drake is fine. Kinetic damage is fine. Spouting ** like "kinetic damage sucks" is just bull** and you know it. Even so I bet Amarrians would love to be able to take a 25% damage drop and do explosive damage. The ship is fine and if you can't make it work its not the ship that sucks. Tux, i wanna make it clear im not whining at all first cus tbh im just glad we have more choices in ships. But the drake did recieve a double nerf and kinetic is the MOST tanked dmg type in eve as it is the primary dmg type for the vast majority of ammo types (stop me if im wrong) so with that being said could we have kept the ROF bonus to test balance before instigating the double nerf recieved. I do agree that the dmg bonus is nice though not quite as effective as it could be which i think anyone who participates in pvp combat knows. If you shield tank you generally have (when not using 3x+ invulns) 2x em 1x kinetic and usually a thermal passive. Armor is usually 2x kinetic 1x thermal 1x explosive with 1x em passive if really needed. In all reality (and i do know theres a really large variety of other possible setups but this is what i've seen the most god knows i've been in my share of fleet battles i was there at U-QVWD and when there were skirmishes before the actual fleet battle those were the general tanks seen based on loot dropped. U-QVWD if you dont remember was one of the last great fights the CA put out before our down fall.) So i'm just curious why can't we have ROF if we dont get 2 dmg types, we know time to target is still an issue and we also know that unless you get in close with missiles dps doesnt count for squat and you have to rely on burst dmg to break the targets tank. So with 1 dmg type ( and if u give a bonus to kinetic u do limit us to that ) you generally break us. Drop a mid and give ROF back and i think it will solve the problems with ppl complaining. You still get your double nerf and we get our ROF. If you read this thanks for your time if you respond then thank you even more. Also when tanking its not longer a 25% bonus to dmg assuming maxed skills as after tanking if a ship is tanked according to how at least i've generally seen them tanked then you gain a negative bonus to kinetic and actually do more dmg with other types such as thermal. Thanks again tux. Edit: also im all for you removing 2+ launchers from teh ferox =P If you do can we get 1 more turret and maybe a touch more pg though for fitting it =) -xOm Since when it is the most tanked? Thought Amarr are complaining all along that they suck because EANM + DCU tanks are so popular. Meaning Kinetic is among the lowest resists. Isyel, read it again its assuming active tanks and tanking specific dmg types just by the setup listing. You are right about the EANM + DCU tanks though they are over powered. So uh it still the most tanked dmg type =) Its used by more races as a primary dmg type and is tanked more as such by more actual pvp'rs who dont do blobbing and the like you know when running an active tank is pointless? Seriously though in skirmish warfare running an active tank when knowing thine nme comes into play as it often does ppl use active tanks and specificly tank the dmgs types they know them to do especially is the RPG environment that many corps are into. ---------------------------------------- http://www.oldnumber7.com/forumpic.gif Please ensure your signature is 24,000 bytes or less - Udat
Kaylana Syi Minmatar The Nest Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:45:00 - [55] Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 18/11/2006 17:48:04 Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 18/11/2006 17:46:52 Originally by: Matrix Aran You see, when I say this stuff no one listens. A Dev steps up and says the same stuff, and still no one listens. For the most part kiddos, the ships in eve are fairly well balanced and setup. If you can't make them work you really are limited to thinking inside the box. And hey, guess what, Tux isn't forcing you to fly these ships. If you don't like them then stick to your ferox or your Raven. You can't beat math. And you can't tell people with a straight face to go fly something else when the developers have decided to overnerf a ship that didn't deserve such harsh treatment. Its crap. It has 1 more launcher than a caracal... do you understand this? It has 1 more launcher than a caracal. That means it is a floating tankacal for 30 more million isk. Bleh! Some people have millions of SP invested into missiles and will never see damage scaling from cruiser to battlecruiser like turret users. It will be kestrel -> hawk -> caracal -> Nighthawk -> cerberus -> raven to actually see your skills at work. Where as a minmatar will be rifter -> jaguar -> wolf -> stabber -> rupture -> vagabond -> cyclone -> muninn -> claymore -> hurricane -> sliepnir -> tempest/maelstrom Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
2SecondsTilMidnight	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:48:00 - [56] Originally by: Malthros Zenobia Originally by: Nyxus Caldari Folks: The Drake isn't huring for DPS after the changes. And all it takes is T2 ammo, and LASERS. Oh yes, lasers on a shield-tanker, I bet that's just tons of fun. And I see you show that graph using kinetic. Now drop it to something else, and look at that uber sub-300DPS gankage. One thing most people seem to forget is that T2 missle launchers tend to cost around 10mil a piece. Most turret users are too use to their dirt cheap affordable T2 turrets(only like 1-3mil normally). The set up is fine for mission running. I wouldn't fit T2 missle launchers in pvp, thats 60mil more isk that isn't worth losing.
DarK STK Scientific	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:51:00 - [57] Module cost is not relevant to balance.
Aramendel Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:52:00 - [58] Originally by: Malthros Zenobia And I see you show that graph using kinetic. Now drop it to something else, and look at that uber sub-300DPS gankage. Because the other BCs can freely vary their damage types without loosing dps.
2SecondsTilMidnight	Posted - 2006.11.18 17:56:00 - [59] LMAO, ok. Cost doesn't matter eh? Thats the most rediculous thing I've heard yet. I demand all T2 ships be nerfed to T1 ships stats then. T2 ships are unbalanced then if the cost doesn't matter. Ignorant bastard.
Asariasha Caldari Cataclysm Enterprises Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.11.18 18:04:00 - [60] Well by now I simply have given up to discuss against some of those Anti-Caldari guys and now it seems even more ridiculous to try to make Tux giving the Drake at least a chance to compete in PvP by giving back the RoF bonus. Yes, Caldari boats are awesome in PvM due to the fact that you just can spam missiles. However, EvE online isn't only about PvM. Of course we could begin a missile discussion again, but I think this would only end up in flaming and nonsense ^^ The only reason why the Drake should get back it's RoF bonus is to compete in PvP. To be honest, most people testing the Drake and pwning around on SiSi made pure tank&gank fittings and due to the fact no one cares about his ships on SiSi, they fight until the end. So, everyone cried "it's to uber! nerf it!". The nerf came and again we Caldaris have a ship that will hardly be seen in PvP due to it's very limited capability to survive in combat. It's pretty easy, the one with the bigger dmg output will usually win. Now taking a look on Ferox and Drake: Now they are pretty much the same and many people answer on RoF request: "Hey, take the Raven!" So, why can the Raven compete in RvR? It's because of it's RoF bonus. So why not giving the Drake this by Caldarian players most wanted RoF bonus? It's pretty obvious. The non-caldarians would have to battle against an opponent that COULD be a danger to them, because a Drake with RoF bonus is able to answer back an attack at close range. Until the Drake was introduced, Caldari players had to stay on long ranged combat (except Cerberus maybe) meaning the opponent could always warp out if you hadn't a tackler by your side. I can only kindly ask you, Tuxford to run some further tests on Drake with RoF bonus by yourself and your DEV team considering you test with chracters with comparable skills and fittings that are common in Tranquility PvP. Greets Asa



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: 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.