| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter
Absolute Zero.
961
   |
Posted - 2015.07.27 13:15:47 -
[1] - Quote
Alright, I'll be brief. In my humble, but strong opinion, all of the following changes to this ship have to be implemented because reasons:
- Add additional "role bonuses":
14,2857 % bonus to large projectile turret damage
14,2857 % increased powergrid and CPU usage for large projectile turrets
- Remove 1 high power slot
- Remove 1 turret hardpoint
- Remove that 7th hardpoint on ship's model.
Anybody sees any flaws here? Thoughts? 
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
3637
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 13:32:34 -
[2] - Quote
The grid/CPU change is kind of awkward. Wouldn't it be better to reduce the base amount instead? |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
Get Off My Lawn
1407
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 13:38:15 -
[3] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:The grid/CPU change is kind of awkward. Wouldn't it be better to reduce the base amount instead?
No, we do not all know this needs to happen. I think the Machariel is just fine as it is, but if CCP chose to follow your aesthetic or cosmetic concerns, adjusting the base powergrid/CPU is the better option.
Additionally, there are very popular and effective Machariel setups which do not fit a single turret. Removing a high slot will really make some people howl.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter
Absolute Zero.
961
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 13:45:19 -
[4] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:The grid/CPU change is kind of awkward. Wouldn't it be better to reduce the base amount instead?
Would you reduce it with AC or arty gun? What caliber of one? I hoped to minimize repercussions of such a change regardless of fit. However, I did not account for fits that aren't exactly "standard".
FT Diomedes wrote:Additionally, there are very popular and effective Machariel setups which do not fit a single turret. Removing a high slot will really make some people howl.
Fair enough.
Granted, the best course of action would be moving that one turret somewhere else so that gameplay is not affected at all, but it wasn't done for years, so...
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Lan Wang
V I R I I
Ineluctable.
1225
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 15:48:16 -
[5] - Quote
whats wrong with machariels again? 
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Eternal Pretorian Alliance
123
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 15:53:06 -
[6] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Danika Princip wrote:The grid/CPU change is kind of awkward. Wouldn't it be better to reduce the base amount instead? No, we do not all know this needs to happen. I think the Machariel is just fine as it is
Agreed. The machariel is one of the few ships that should absolutely not be touched in any way whatsoever. Leave it alone. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1225
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 17:02:21 -
[7] - Quote
Lan Wang wrote:whats wrong with machariels again?
4 turrets to the left, 3 to the right. Machariel issues redux. And 6 or 7 smartbombs, what's the difference. |
Barrogh Habalu
Forever Winter
Absolute Zero.
962
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 17:25:08 -
[8] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:4 turrets to the left, 3 to the right. Machariel issues redux. And 6 or 7 smartbombs, what's the difference.
Well, to be absolutely honest, it's difference big enough when you consider that we I've started entire thing for purely cosmetic reasons.
It just slipped my mind that moderately agile ships with good warp speeds and capable of carrying enough smartbombs is a big thing right now.
TBH if somebody else was to come up with this idea, I'd be first to shoot it.
But I really wouldn't mind CCP art team addressing this "little OCD thing".
Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
|
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
2878
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 18:16:37 -
[9] - Quote
Looks good to me, can we make them hugely more expensive too? Don't want peasants in my exclusive pirate battleship club. |
Kenrailae
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
454
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 21:30:04 -
[10] - Quote
I support these changes, and would like to see the Vindicator receive a similar buff.
+1
The Law is a point of View
|
FireFrenzy
SUPREME MATHEMATICS
A Band Apart.
541
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 21:37:55 -
[11] - Quote
Or add a nice and centralized turret hard point somewhere behind where the hulls merge... (and ofcourse one for the tractorbeam/neut)
but yes, i would really dearly love this to happen |
Hauler Monkey
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 21:41:11 -
[12] - Quote
As someone whose face twitches slightly when seeing that gun layout, I support this. |
Lan Wang
V I R I I
Ineluctable.
1234
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 22:31:24 -
[13] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote:I support these changes, and would like to see the Vindicator receive a similar buff.
+1
a buff in what? my vindi puts out over 1500 dps with 200k ehp!
EVEALON Creative - Logo Design & Branding | Digital Design
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |