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)
Beringe Caldari Raptus Regaliter	Posted - 2006.11.22 08:51:00 - [241] Originally by: Majin82 Captain Raynor Keep going man, you are correct on this one! "Captain" Raynor can be trusted to do just one thing: hold up the torch for his favorite ships. Caldari whining? He wrote the book. ------------------------------------------- "Sarcasm and irony are not to be used by the uninitiated." --Daitan Beringe, honorary director in charge of bottles--
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.22 09:02:00 - [242] Originally by: Malthros Zenobia The Drake makes no ** sense now. None of the new BCs really do. They were ment to be gank ships, and now they're just... meh. Can you point me to a written article that states such a thing... that the new BC's were ment to be gank ships? Thanks. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager** Blessed Souls
Romulan Dominiae	Posted - 2006.11.22 10:18:00 - [243] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Malthros Zenobia The Drake makes no ** sense now. None of the new BCs really do. They were ment to be gank ships, and now they're just... meh. Can you point me to a written article that states such a thing... that the new BC's were ment to be gank ships? Thanks. http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=361 Quote:** What other stuff have I been working on Well there is the Tier 2 battlecruisers. I don't really have any solid info on those yet. So far they're favoring damage over tankability which makes them extremely vulnerable to bigger ships due to their big signature radius and sluggish feel, but would make them quite devastating versus smaller ships, like cruisers. hurricane gets rof and damage bonus, and can also deal all types of damage. as can drones, myrmidon gets 10% damage bonus to all damage types. i think yesterday or the day before for a short period there was a drake with the rof bonus on sisi, why was ist switched back again? well at least now we have the 99% warfare mod link bonus which nobody needs with more than one bc in a gang.
Kryssa Fordring	Posted - 2006.11.22 10:48:00 - [244] 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. Originally by:** Tuxford 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. Just curious, why then does the Kestrel receive a bonus to all damage types: "Special Ability: 10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage and 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage per level" Couldn't we at least get something like that on the Drake?
Verone Veto.	Posted - 2006.11.22 10:56:00 - [245] Originally by: Hanns lol i never seen tux so ****ed Tbh i don't blame the dev team for being so annoyed, they're working flat out to get kali out and morons just keep coming on the forums whining and ranting and threatening to quit because the new ship that THEY wanted to be great isn't going to be a solo pwnmobile.
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:09:00 - [246] Originally by: Romulan Dominiae http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=361 Quote: What other stuff have I been working on Well there is the Tier 2 battlecruisers. I don't really have any solid info on those yet. So far they're favoring damage over tankability which makes them extremely vulnerable to bigger ships due to their big signature radius and sluggish feel, but would make them quite devastating versus smaller ships, like cruisers. It says... "so far". It didnt say "They will be". The blog was posted on 2006.08.01. Changes were to be expected. Radical changes too. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager Blessed Souls
Lorn Yeager Gallente Blessed Souls	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:11:00 - [247] Originally by: Verone Originally by: Hanns lol i never seen tux so **ed Tbh i don't blame the dev team for being so annoyed, they're working flat out to get kali out and morons just keep coming on the forums whining and ranting and threatening to quit because the new ship that THEY wanted to be great isn't going to be a solo pwnmobile. Completely agree with you. There are too many ego's here, chestbeating and roaring around. Begin sig: //-> Its Aloha time! Lorn Yeager** Blessed Souls
Xaildaine	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:18:00 - [248] Originally by: Verone Originally by: Hanns lol i never seen tux so ****ed Tbh i don't blame the dev team for being so annoyed, they're working flat out to get kali out and morons just keep coming on the forums whining and ranting and threatening to quit because the new ship that THEY wanted to be great isn't going to be a solo pwnmobile. Yeah a few sad people are crying over the drake.. fair enough imo as it was hit hardest by the nerf bat. The key point for me in all the noise on this forum is this The Ferox.. compared to ANY other BC in the game is utter rubbish in PvP... Sure alot of people use them in missions but only because it happend to have to many launcher points and a good tank. So what did we get with the new ship? The exact same thing with one more launcher point. It would have saved so much time if they had just added another launcher point to the Ferox and left the caldari with one BC. If the Drake is going live as it is ... which im sure is the case as Tux has thrown a hissy fit and now wouldnt admit he was wrong even if he was asked to. The ferox need a fix.. to make it more different from its new carbon copy .. the Drake.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:21:00 - [249] Originally by: Kryssa Fordring 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. Originally by:** Tuxford 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. Just curious, why then does the Kestrel receive a bonus to all damage types: "Special Ability: 10% bonus to Kinetic missile damage and 5% bonus to EM, Explosive, and Thermal missile damage per level" Couldn't we at least get something like that on the Drake? Kestrel used to have 5% kinetic damage, and 5% RoF. This made launchers fire too fast, and caused lag, so it was changed to 10% kin, and 5% everything else.
Lord WarATron Amarr Vanguard Frontiers Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:28:00 - [250] Lets ignore all chestbeating, name calling etc. Lets look at the facts. Currently, a Drake has no chance against a Curse, assuming both ships are fitted with HAM's and Shield tank, and a full complement of drones. Granted the Curse takes longer to train, and when it comes to fitouts, a Drake + t2 Fitout vs Curse + t2 Fitout, the price is pretty much the same, even though the curse is more agile, lower sig etc. So insted of calling for a nerf of "Tux's Genetals", lets put forward some sensible solutions. What people have missed is Cost/fitting vs effectivness. Having 7 launchers on a Drake insted of 6, increases the cost. Not only will it mean that their is an extra launcher needing to be bought, but also ammo. But the real benifit is fitting! You see, you could have 8 Launchers - but without fitting - you are gimped to hell!. What I say is bring back the old bonus's to the Drake But Lower the amount of CPU/Grid to make sure that these close range ships have a hard time fitting to become solopwnmobiles. Players wanting a tank may even have to go 5 or even 6 launchers due to fitting requirements. Let the players nerf themselves! --- Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour FREE

Verone Veto.	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:29:00 - [251] Originally by: Xaildaine Originally by: Verone Originally by: Hanns lol i never seen tux so ****ed Tbh i don't blame the dev team for being so annoyed, they're working flat out to get kali out and morons just keep coming on the forums whining and ranting and threatening to quit because the new ship that THEY wanted to be great isn't going to be a solo pwnmobile. Yeah a few sad people are crying over the drake.. fair enough imo as it was hit hardest by the nerf bat. The key point for me in all the noise on this forum is this The Ferox.. compared to ANY other BC in the game is utter rubbish in PvP... Sure alot of people use them in missions but only because it happend to have to many launcher points and a good tank. So what did we get with the new ship? The exact same thing with one more launcher point. It would have saved so much time if they had just added another launcher point to the Ferox and left the caldari with one BC. If the Drake is going live as it is ... which im sure is the case as Tux has thrown a hissy fit and now wouldnt admit he was wrong even if he was asked to. The ferox need a fix.. to make it more different from its new carbon copy .. the Drake. I'm not even going to get dragged into the childish whining and discussions about nerfing and boosting on this forum, to be honest. I'll do what any senisble adult will do, have a mess about with the ships on SiSi, and recognise they're still in the balancing stages and are being tweaked. I'll also realise that in Eve CCP play god. What happens to the ships is their descision when it boils down to making them ready to go live on TQ, not ours. CCP are the creators of Eve, ultimately, they decide which path it follows. A ship doesn't "need" this or "require" that just because a player, or any number of players feel it does. Personally, I'll retain my dignity and not whine like a spoiled child on the forums when a ship I've anticipated turns out not to be a solo pwnmobile. Most of us acutally want a CHALLENGE when we fight, not to press F1-F8 and say "lol pwnt". I'll retain my dignity and wait for the ships to hit Tranquility, and play with them then. Myself, and a thousand other players will do what every sucessful species on earth has done for the last few billion years, look at our environment, and adapt to suit it so we don't end up dead or obsolete.
Xaildaine	Posted - 2006.11.22 11:50:00 - [252] Originally by: Verone I'm not even going to get dragged into the childish whining and discussions about nerfing and boosting on this forum, to be honest. I'll do what any senisble adult will do, have a mess about with the ships on SiSi, and recognise they're still in the balancing stages and are being tweaked. I'll also realise that in Eve CCP play god. What happens to the ships is their descision when it boils down to making them ready to go live on TQ, not ours. CCP are the creators of Eve, ultimately, they decide which path it follows. A ship doesn't "need" this or "require" that just because a player, or any number of players feel it does. Personally, I'll retain my dignity and not whine like a spoiled child on the forums when a ship I've anticipated turns out not to be a solo pwnmobile. Most of us acutally want a CHALLENGE when we fight, not to press F1-F8 and say "lol pwnt". I'll retain my dignity and wait for the ships to hit Tranquility, and play with them then. Myself, and a thousand other players will do what every sucessful species on earth has done for the last few billion years, look at our environment, and adapt to suit it so we don't end up dead or obsolete. Agreed .. CCP will do as they please regardless of the forums.. As they should. I do hate to see them repeating themselves with "new" ships I was truely shocked at Tux.. i had to read his posts a few times to make sure i hadnt mis read them. So uncalled for imo. But hey.. we all have bad days at work and im sure he has them to. Is it fair what they did to the Drake? Of corse it is.. that ship was stupid prenerf. I like a challenge as much as the next guy But ther is a point that the callange becomes to great Like fitting the Ferox for PvP And Caldari needed a semi solo PvP boat this was said to be the drake. but as it happent its not. I would love to see the Ferox get a face lift to fill the role the Drake was expected to fill (PvP) as the Drake now takes teh Ferox's old place as a mission runner.
Lord WarATron Amarr Vanguard Frontiers Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.22 12:20:00 - [253] 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 Generally, most people do this for a 3 hardner tank on a T1 Ship - T2 resists screw all this depending on shiptype. 1. Shield Tankers use 1 t2 EM, 2 t2 Invurns -> This means that Highist resist is, in order - Exp, Em, Kin, Therm 2. Armour Tankers use 3 EANMII or 2 EANMII + DC -> This means highist resist is, in order - EM, Therm, Kin, Exp Now EM as a damage type is postion 1 for highist resist in the armour tanking league, and position 2 for the Shield tankers league. This is the source of Amarr whining, which is another issue, since most pvpers armour tank as midslots are too valuble. However, Kinetic fits in position 3 for both shield and armour tankers so its not that bad. In fact, Kinetic is the new thermal :) But that is not the point, as non-kinetic missiles are used quite often and deservere a bonus. But anyhow, just to advise - the setups you mention would get you shot down, be it a Drake or a Avatar :) --- Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour FREE
Romulan Dominiae	Posted - 2006.11.22 12:59:00 - [254] Originally by: Lorn Yeager Originally by: Romulan Dominiae http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=361 Quote: What other stuff have I been working on Well there is the Tier 2 battlecruisers. I don't really have any solid info on those yet. So far they're favoring damage over tankability which makes them extremely vulnerable to bigger ships due to their big signature radius and sluggish feel, but would make them quite devastating versus smaller ships, like cruisers. It says... "so far". It didnt say "They will be". The blog was posted on 2006.08.01. Changes were to be expected. Radical changes too. i dont know what your mother tounge is, but so far meaning in this context is like: 'until now ...' aside from i just filled a request for a written article, i havent followed the discussions on the forums a lot until recently, so i have no idea how many times it was discussed after the blog. but it looks everyone seems to know that the new BCs were promised to be more offiensive than defensive. even i, as a non regular forum reader and eve-site visitor know it.
Dray Caldari Finite Horizon The Red Skull	Posted - 2006.11.22 14:48:00 - [255] Imho the drake was nerfed because of freak extender setups that wont be used on tranq, except for a few perverts The ship bonus change was way to much, drop a launcher or change the resist bonus, in effect you've changed the drake into a one legged man and asked him to enter an @rse kicking competition and get you a result.
Yamaeda	Posted - 2006.11.22 16:03:00 - [256] Even with the loss of a (launcher)turret, a Drake is +50% damage compared to a Ferox, probably more due to more BCU ability. What i dont understand, though, is why the +shield resist is there. A Battle Cruiser is a cruiser on steroids, and the T1 BC's are typically the biggest cruiser with an extra turret. The 2nd largest cruiser is typically more of a damage dealer, which the T2 BC is supposed to be. Giving caldari 2 BC's with shield resists gives them a rail tanker and a missile tanker, and that dont make sense. Maller -> Prophecy Omen -> Drake Moa -> Ferox Caracal -> Drake? The current setup seems to be working, but that +resistance must be changed, either copy the bonus of caracal, as this is the big brother, or of the kestrel, as it's the frigate version. Change bonuses to: +5% kinetic missile, +10% missile velocity (my pref) OR +10% kinetic missile, +5% to exp, em, the-missile /Y ---------- It's great being Amarr, ain't it?
Spiltblood	Posted - 2006.11.23 00:32:00 - [257] 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. PLEASE remove the launchers from the ferox and add one more rail. I mean seriously, it's refered to as a rail ship and yet only uses 5 rails. I'll be happy to lose all launcehr slots in favor of one more rail slot...plus just enough power to use it of course :)
WeirdNoise	Posted - 2006.11.23 02:06:00 - [258] Originally by: Nikolai Nuvolari Anyway, my final verdict on this thread is exactly what I've been saying for months: BRING BACK TomB! He was evil and ruthless, but highly effective, and very fair. Tuxford just seems to work on a mixture of incompetence and sloppiness. /signed ! Isnt it Tuxford too who made the MKII frigs and nerfed the minmatar speed bonus? OMG... how I agree with you. This was among the things which disgusted me most and had me take a long break. WTF is going on with Eve if they put that guy on that most critical job of revamping ships or even developing new ones? Sorry to be blunt, he has always seemed incompetent to me. Yeah TomB is a great guy and was great for the job.
Flabida jaba	Posted - 2006.11.23 02:16:00 - [259] The Drake is fine Its is a better Missle platform than the Ferox ...Fact! by how much can be debated untill the sun burns out in the sky I have a feeling that when the stats were released for the pre-nerf drake Tux already Knew that the Nerf hammer was gona hit the Drake hard and long, and was probibly already dreading the resulting cacophony he knew was gona erupt on the forums when it did get Bombed.... poor fella being as its his job to stand infront of the rabid onslaught of forum whine on behalf of CCP. All we can do now is......whine untill they buff Ferox!!!!!! and yes im serious on that one
Mordrake MetaForge	Posted - 2006.11.23 02:31:00 - [260] 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. Oh yes PLEASE!!! that would be so great!! Then we could have not a single even remotely usefull Missile Battle Cruiser! SWEETNESS! "Arte et Marte"

Xaildaine	Posted - 2006.11.23 02:45:00 - [261] Originally by: Mordrake 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. Oh yes PLEASE!!! that would be so great!! Then we could have not a single even remotely usefull Missile Battle Cruiser! SWEETNESS! lay off tux man.. the poor guy has had enough crap thrown at him. The saddest thing is that the Ferox actualy dose need a few Launcher points removed and another turret point added. I know he was joking but the removing of Launher points is somthing we have been asking for the Ferox for a while.. in exchange for an extra turret and the grid to fit it.
Disco Flint Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.23 13:12:00 - [262] The Drake was nerfed to be brought in line with the Ferox... oh man that's gold. Seriously, for the fittings that made the Drake uber there are solutions that don't nerf the ship to a Ferox MkII: Reduce missile flight time for Heavy Missiles to 50%, for Heavy Assault Missiles to 66% (10km theoretical max range). Replace Javelin HAMs with something useful, yet not overpowered (e.g. T2 HAMs doing 2 damage types, flying faster at reduced flight time, whatever) INTRODUCE STACKING PENALTY FOR SHIELD EXTENDERS That's what all the fuzz was about, isn't it? These insane unbeatable 4/5 extender setups who noone with half a brain would use on TQ. There, bam, instafix to all things that make the Drake overpowered, yet leaving the ship useful and desirable.
Saturous MetaForge	Posted - 2006.11.29 10:47:00 - [263] I hate to say it but after reading the most of 10 pages with this topic, the nerf needed doing. I switched to specialising in Missile Operation instead of the Gunnery path after reading in another forum about how Gunnery users require a lot more skill points than someone using missiles. It is rather noticable that I have been doing a lot more damage with missiles than I did with lasers, which shocks me even more since I had more Turret skills then Missile skills. Caldari users are what I would call the 'in range no miss' race. As long as the ammo flies, the target dies. The only noticable downfall with this is obviously the fact that Missiles require ammo not charges. A few people also mentioned about using different Damage types. Indeed if you don't follow the bonuses given to the Drake you will lack the damage, but some damage is better than no damage. The hammer of the nerf does indeed work like a pendulum. When some people complain and action is taken, it may swing too far and go over the top. That is up to the developers to make the decision seeing as we pay them to do their job which they are doing... There is a real issue here with the new Battlecruiser and yes, people will say "OH i'm going to go PVP now... where did I park that Raven?" I guess the Raven is specialised for PVP as this is why it is favoured. No Powergrid to tank or fire. This again; a Caldari advantage. Turrets require powergrid remember. This is their disadvantage. They also require the best range. Before this nerf you couldn't really label a true 'problem' with the Caldari ways. You could shoot long distances, require no cap, tank without cap, dish out extreme damage. Do know I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong. We all play the game differently.


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.