EVE Search - Amarr T1 Iterration Please!

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Amarr T1 Iterration Please!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 16	Posted - 2015.08.06 17:43:51 - [1] - Quote As many of you are aware, the Amarr T2 lineup is very healthy right now, with the whole Kanid line being pretty good at what they do, as well as the Pilgrim and Redeemer. Zealots aren't seen much, but when they are, they do quite well. Sentinel and malediction being the best in class (in my opinion). However, the T1 lineup is in dire need. in comparison to their counterparts in other racial lineups, they are quite lacking. Suffering from the Amarr "non-bonus" of cap use reduction ( outside max "capless" roles like executioner tackle). In addition to a generally weak lineup, the T1 ships on the Amarr line do not transition to their T2 counterparts very well. Gallente and Caldari Ship lines transition almost perfectly from T1 to T2 of the same ship... Thorax becomes Diemos, Drake becomes Nighthawk, Tristan becomes Ishkur, merlin becomes Harpy, Megathron becomes Kronos... etc The Amarr lineup has some serious transition issues Though. Half of all T2 amarr are Khanid missile ships with literally 0 missile bonused T1 ships, and only 3 ships on the whole T1 line that can use a "set" of them at all! With no ships on the T1 line to get newbs to train missile skills at all, and most secondary being put into drones, for the few drone ships that exist, leaves the transition to T2 for amarr ships very heavily gimped. With the hard brawl T1 laser boats not having T2 counterparts. I suggest a rebalance and re-work of the T1 Amarr lineup to better reflect the transition to T2. This will consolidate and create uniformity between the SP valued by older T2 and newer Amarr players. And at least allow newbros to fly some laser, some drone, and some missile ships before deciding where to dump their T2 training into. Here is a list of balance issues and suggestions along the Amarr lineup: Tormentor : Not much wrong with the Tormentor, except with 1 real bonus for its role (combat tacke), its in an "ok" place, only because its brother the Punisher is even worse. Only a small tweak to the Amarr "non-bonus" is needed. 10% to cap use and 5 % to damage should be changed to... 5% reduced cycle time and cap use of energy turrets per level. and since it gets a new, second bonus... 5% to tracking of energy turrets. (5% to cycle time is a stronger dps bonus, so a low 5% to tracking is all thats needed) Punisher : widely considered the worst ship in the game (meant for combat). This ship should be the basis of player progression through to the malediction and vengeance. It also desperately needs a 3rd mid. -3 turret hardpoints +4 launcher hardpoints +1 midslot (the loss of the utility high allows the flat gain of a mid) -16 PG +30 CPU 5% to damage of energy weapons changed to 5% to damage of missiles "No combat ship in Eve should have less than 3 mids. Period." Crusader/Retribution/Claw: + 1 mid and - 1 high for all of them. No combat ship in Eve should have less than 3 mids. Period. Dragoon : The dragoon suffers from the same Issue as the Arbitrator, in that the fitting is not good enough to allow more than one neut, but the highslots are split into half missiles and half turrets. Forcing undersized (or none at all) neuts, or a strange combination of 3 damage types (2 unbonused). There is no conceivable reason that players should not be allowed to fit all missiles, or all turrets in the highs like prophecy/geddon. +2 turret hardpoints +2 launcher hardpoints +1 mid - 1 low Amarr -1 mid +1 low "flavor", on smaller than cruiser, its just bad for balance) +20 CPU (with the option to fit more in the mids and launchers as well as a neut/nos, the dragoon will need much more cpu fitting while needing less PG.) - 2 PG Maller : Considered the "punisher of the cruisers", the Maller simply has no place. Anywhere, other than 1600 plate bait. Why not make it the same Sacrilege missile transition as the Punisher. - 5 turret hardpoints +5 Launcher hardpoints +100 CPU -350 PG 5% to damage of energy turrets changed to... 5% to rate of fire of launchers Omen : Very little wrong with the Omen, just needs to fix the non-bonus issue. 10% to cap use and 5% to rate of fire changed to... 5% reduction in cycle time and cap use of energy weapons giving it space for... 5% to tracking of energy weapons Arbitrator: The arbitrator suffers from a massive lack of powergrid. The stunted cousin of the Curse/Pilgrim, it has forced 3 weapon type layout, or (not enough to fit neuts so lol get bent). + 1 turret hardpoints + 1 launcher hardpoints (allowing 3 of your choice and 1 neut etc. baby brother to its T2 brother) + 120 PG. ( a ship with a hard lean to neuts needs grid ) -5 CPU (TD E-war does not take that much CPU typically compared to ECM or Points, This will provide an Amarr flavor fitting choke ) Prophecy: There is very little wrong with the prophecy, considering a correct number of high/mid/low slots and hardpoints. The only problem lies with its drone bandwidth. 75mb compared to the myrmidons 100mb. This forces the prophecy into LESS THAN Vexor DPS. +25 drone bandwidth. (this brings it up to 1 hardpoint less damage than the myrm, with a utility high and more drone bay.) Armageddon : Again, very little wrong with the Geddon, it is very choked for CPU and has to much grid for most fits, with plenty of lows and rigs to make torp and pulse fits work, even rapid heavies with some fitting concessions require cpu lows or 2 in the rigs to fit the basics. + 50 CPU -500 PG ( bring the CPU in line with the dominix, while having more grid for neuts, plates, as per Amarr style. ) Thoughts? Should i just sulk back to my hanger full of vengeances and cry?
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 785	Posted - 2015.08.06 18:37:29 - [2] - Quote While I agree that the Maller could do a tad more damage and the Armageddon maybe +10 cpu, you want to have them three bonuses and get away with it? hmm... mmm... no! Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Gigan Amilupar Viziam Amarr Empire 292	Posted - 2015.08.06 18:44:25 - [3] - Quote Honestly the dragoon doesn't need a buff. I've flown it several times and it is extremely powerful in a solo/small-gang situation. One neut? How are you fitting it, I run 3 neuts and 3 autocannons with drones for the majority of my DPS. It works perfectly. If you want an amarr dessie with the highs full of guns, you should just fly a coercer instead.
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 16	Posted - 2015.08.06 18:52:12 - [4] - Quote elitatwo wrote: While I agree that the Maller could do a tad more damage and the Armageddon maybe +10 cpu, you want to have them three bonuses and get away with it? hmm... mmm... no! There are already 11 Tech 1 ships with 3 bonus's to different ship/module stats. The cap use bonus in conjunction with rate of fire is only to allow the use of the higher performing damage bonus without making the cap use that Lasers experience worse.
Phoenix Jones Isogen 5 1537	Posted - 2015.08.06 18:52:29 - [5] - Quote It's just three ships that need help, maller, punisher, arbitrator. The rest.. Are ok. Now I'd love a little more utility out of the prophecy (like 100 bandwidth :-P), but it'd be getting close to the myrmidon. Yaay!!!!
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2085	Posted - 2015.08.06 18:57:54 - [6] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: elitatwo wrote: While I agree that the Maller could do a tad more damage and the Armageddon maybe +10 cpu, you want to have them three bonuses and get away with it? hmm... mmm... no! There are already 11 Tech 1 ships with 3 bonus's to different ship/module stats. The cap use bonus in conjunction with rate of fire is only to allow the use of the higher performing damage bonus without making the cap use that Lasers experience worse. 11? Really?
Rivr Luzade Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 1754	Posted - 2015.08.06 19:02:19 - [7] - Quote Caldari have the exact same situation with the Merlin (hybrid only) compare to Hawk (missile only) and Harpy (hybrid only). I do not see how that is a problem with the Amarr line-up. Gallente are not comparable at all as they only have Hybrids as High slot weapons and nothing else. The Dragoon is a Drone-Neut boat, not a gun/turret boat. Besides, what is "undersized" for you? There are no smaller than Small Neut/NOS in the game as far as I know and the Dragoon is meant to use Smalls. The very same goes for the Arbitrator. It does not need guns or launchers, it's a focused Neut-Drone boat. Pushing guns (except for civ guns to trigger drones maybe) on there is just a waste. More grid, however, could be interesting to actually allow medium neuts to be fitted in addition to tank. The Maller is a tanky Laser Brawler with a lot of DPS for the tank. No other cruiser has that tank level with the DPS. What more can people probably want? The Tormentor apparently is an amazing brawler as it stands, shredding a wide range of other T1 and even T2 frigates with ease. The Prophecy may have less DPS than a Vexor, but it has more tank and a lot of utility (Neut-Smartbomb-Drone-DPS). The Armageddon's CPU is fine, I would argue. It actually limits you on how many drone modules you can fit and requires trade-offs. I have a nice little Geddon fitting that goes well above 1k DPS. The only trade-offs I need to make with it are a Meta 4 web and LAAR instead of T2 LAR. More CPU would remove that logical fitting room cap for drone boats and I do not view this as beneficial. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 16	Posted - 2015.08.06 19:06:45 - [8] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: 11? Really? Dragoon algos Arbitrator prophecy Myrmidon Armageddon all have the double damage and hitpoint bonus to drones vexor has double damage and hitpoints as well as mining yield for whatever reason... Dominix has the double hitpoint and damage bonus as well as an optimal and tracking double bonus. Blackbird has an optimal and falloff bonus to jams Celestis has an optimal and falloff bonus to damps Scorpion has an optimal and falloff bonus as well as a blatant 3rd bonus to burst range.
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 16	Posted - 2015.08.06 19:10:35 - [9] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: Caldari have the exact same situation with the Merlin (hybrid only) compare to Hawk (missile only) and Harpy (hybrid only). I do not see how that is a problem with the Amarr line-up. Gallente are not comparable at all as they only have Hybrids as High slot weapons and nothing else. The Dragoon is a Drone-Neut boat, not a gun/turret boat. Besides, what is "undersized" for you? There are no smaller than Small Neut/NOS in the game as far as I know and the Dragoon is meant to use Smalls. Did you just say that the T1 frigs for Caldari do not have a missile frigate? "undersize" was in reference to the Arbitrator, which cannot fit an MWD, Cap booster without having to choose between a plate or cruiser neuts.
Rivr Luzade Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 1754	Posted - 2015.08.06 19:25:13 - [10] - Quote I said the Merlin, the equivalent of the Punisher, is a Hybrid turning into a Missile and Hybrid T2 version. The Laser Punisher turns into a Laser and Missile T2 version. If at all, the Merlin would need to change to Missiles as Missiles are the primary weapon of Caldari. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2089	Posted - 2015.08.06 19:39:10 - [11] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: 11? Really? Dragoon algos Arbitrator prophecy Myrmidon Armageddon all have the double damage and hitpoint bonus to drones vexor has double damage and hitpoints as well as mining yield for whatever reason... Dominix has the double hitpoint and damage bonus as well as an optimal and tracking double bonus. Blackbird has an optimal and falloff bonus to jams Celestis has an optimal and falloff bonus to damps Scorpion has an optimal and falloff bonus as well as a blatant 3rd bonus to burst range. The drone bonus is always damage and HP. It's not as much of a double bonus as much as it's necessary to function or drone would just get killed. You do realise a cap reduction bonus is a damage bonus in most case since it allow you to keep firing when you would of been capped out or forced to use lower cap consumption crystals if it didn't get a reduction right?
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 375	Posted - 2015.08.06 20:13:36 - [12] - Quote I can see some tweaking for the ships could be fun here and there. However, what I don't agree with you on is 5% bonus to RoF and Tracking speed... That sounds too overpowered for a t1 frigate, in my opinion
Abby Silverwind Demonic Retribution The Initiative. 9	Posted - 2015.08.06 20:52:50 - [13] - Quote The only changes I can agree with I'm the OP here are the punisher which desperately needs setting apart from the tormenter and executioner and a tad more grid on the arbitrator. Other than that all Amarr ships are fantastic Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; Your rod and your staff, they comfort me.
Abby Silverwind Demonic Retribution The Initiative. 9	Posted - 2015.08.06 20:55:15 - [14] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: I said the Merlin, the equivalent of the Punisher, is a Hybrid turning into a Missile and Hybrid T2 version. The Laser Punisher turns into a Laser and Missile T2 version. If at all, the Merlin would need to change to Missiles as Missiles are the primary weapon of Caldari. Also a primary weapon system of Amarr please see arbitrator, prophecy and geddon Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; Your rod and your staff, they comfort me.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2345	Posted - 2015.08.06 23:12:46 - [15] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: You do realise a cap reduction bonus is a damage bonus in most case since it allow you to keep firing when you would of been capped out or forced to use lower cap consumption crystals if it didn't get a reduction right? Except it's not, The Cap bonus is a legacy bonus back to when lasers were OP and the only balance on them was high cap useage. So Amarr ships had to spend one of their two bonuses on cap useage, while other ships got 2 bonuses to their weapon systems to create balance. Lasers are no longer OP as a weapon system, so Small & Medium lasers badly need the treatment large lasers got of removing the cap bonus off almost all the ships, and lowering the overall cap useage of the weapon systems. Then Amarr will be in a happier state of affairs.
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 17	Posted - 2015.08.07 08:16:56 - [16] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: You do realise a cap reduction bonus is a damage bonus in most case since it allow you to keep firing when you would of been capped out or forced to use lower cap consumption crystals if it didn't get a reduction right? You do realize the drone hit point bonus is a damage bonus in most case since it allow you to keep your drones attacking when they would otherwise be dead or force to return to bay if they didn't get a hit point bonus right? You do realize that a tanking bonus is a damage bonus in most case since it allow you to stay on grid and keep shooting when you would otherwise be dead or forced to warp away if you didn't get a rep increase right?
Rivr Luzade Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 1761	Posted - 2015.08.07 08:36:34 - [17] - Quote Abby Silverwind wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: I said the Merlin, the equivalent of the Punisher, is a Hybrid turning into a Missile and Hybrid T2 version. The Laser Punisher turns into a Laser and Missile T2 version. If at all, the Merlin would need to change to Missiles as Missiles are the primary weapon of Caldari. Also a primary weapon system of Amarr please see arbitrator, prophecy and geddon Excuse me? Arbitrator, Prophecy and Armageddon primary weapons are Drones. Missiles are the exclusive domain of Khanid ships. That missiles are the only viable choice for the Geddon due to the bonuses to cap warfare does not make them primary weapons, especially not since none of these ships have bonuses to missiles. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Colt Blackhawk Viper-Squad pwn-O-graphy 311	Posted - 2015.08.07 09:19:22 - [18] - Quote Meh... Punisher is a pain in da a.... Your "no combar ship should have less than 3 mid slots" is wrong" It should be "no combat ship should have less than 3 mid slots and super short range weapons" Coercer is fine with 2 meds because it can have range weapons. Puni otheriwse lacks any range control plus the weaponry is **** for it. Give the punisher rockets instead of lasers and it may be fine with 2 meds. Tormentor really doesn-¦t need anything new and you may not know it but it is a beast atm. Already managed to kill (no links no implants) Hookbill and Tristan solo (2vs1) in a single Torm. Exectutioner is crappy, agree. [09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f** amarr flag and s* on their smoking wrecks.
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter Absolute Zero. 997	Posted - 2015.08.07 10:57:12 - [19] - Quote I would like to mention that "non bonus" is technically isn't an issue. You can easily think of a ship that will be amazing for its class without any bonuses whatsoever, just give it good stats and slot layout. Unique niches and distinctiveness are main reasons behind bonuses rather than abstract "power" of a ship. So really, if you think that Omen should get tracking bonus, then it should probably be justified by more practically meaningful arguments than technicalities, especially if you claim that the ship is pretty much fine in the same sentence. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Tyranis Marcus Bloody Heathens 1445	Posted - 2015.08.07 12:51:36 - [20] - Quote Abby Silverwind wrote: The only changes I can agree with I'm the OP here are the punisher which desperately needs setting apart from the tormenter and executioner and a tad more grid on the arbitrator. Other than that all Amarr ships are fantastic Wasn't it the Tormentor that used to be a missile boat? I never did really understand the logic behind changing that. Do not run. We are your friends.
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter Absolute Zero. 1000	Posted - 2015.08.07 13:05:07 - [21] - Quote Tyranis Marcus wrote: Wasn't it the Tormentor that used to be a missile boat? I never did really understand the logic behind changing that. I think Inquisitor was one. Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1233	Posted - 2015.08.07 13:31:35 - [22] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: You do realise a cap reduction bonus is a damage bonus in most case since it allow you to keep firing when you would of been capped out or forced to use lower cap consumption crystals if it didn't get a reduction right? Except it's not, The Cap bonus is a legacy bonus back to when lasers were OP and the only balance on them was high cap useage. So Amarr ships had to spend one of their two bonuses on cap useage, while other ships got 2 bonuses to their weapon systems to create balance. Lasers are no longer OP as a weapon system, so Small & Medium lasers badly need the treatment large lasers got of removing the cap bonus off almost all the ships, and lowering the overall cap useage of the weapon systems. Then Amarr will be in a happier state of affairs. But then people still wouldn't be happy and say But why do we only have one hullbonus now, gib another 10% damage bonus/lvl so it doesn't kill capacitor again, totally disregarding lasers got some 30%+ additional damage over projectiles at the same range.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1984	Posted - 2015.08.07 13:37:51 - [23] - Quote My thoughts: Tormentor: I don't fly them so I can't speak to their viability, but I can say no to your changes simply because you'd be giving a T1 ship two-and-a-half turret-based bonuses. If it's broken, fine, but propose something that doesn't so clearly violate T1 patterns. Punisher: I have a hard time believing that the tankiest T1 frigate in the game is "widely considered the worst (combat) ship in the game", but again I haven't flown one for years so I can't comment on that. What I will say is "no" to your changes because T1 racial ships typically only have bonuses to two weapon types and Amarr ships already have bonuses to lases and drones. Yes, there are T1 Amarr missile boats, but they are typically drone boats first and have no missile bonuses. "No combat ship in Eve should have less than 3 mids. Period." Please justify this instead of simply stating it as fact. Also, don't underestimate the power of a T2 frigate having 4 highs and 4 lows; what they lack in versatility they can often make up for in brute power. (Having said that, I think that all Assault Frigates could be made a bit easier to fit, but that's another topic entirely.) Dragoon: I can understand where you're coming from regarding the hardpoints; it would be nice to be able to fit even a mostly full rack of weapons on one. But the Dragoon is primarily a drone/cap warfare platform, not a turret/missile platform. The hardpoints seem like an afterthought because they are a tertiary weapon system. I could see maybe doing 4/4 hardpoints, but certainly not 5/5. Maller: See my thoughts on the Punisher. I'd also like to point out that a ship's ability to apply damage is directly influenced by it's durability. A more durable ship doing lower DPS can often do more damage than a higher DPS ship by benefit of applying their lower DPS longer. Amarr ships are excellent at long-term DPS, as opposed to, say, Gallente ships, which specialize in burst DPS. Omen: See my thoughts on the Tormentor. Arbitrator: I could see maybe giving the Arbitrator a touch more grid, but, unlike the Dragoon, the Arbitrator is primarily an EWar ship, not a combat ship, so it most certainly does not need additional hardpoints. Prophecy: Gallente and Amarr have a long-standing philosophical difference when it comes to drones. Gallente ships have larger bandwidth at the expense of smaller drone bays and Amarr ships have larger drone bays at the expense of bandwidth (except for the Ishtar but don't get me started on that). This enables Gallente drone ships to do more DPS in the short run, but Amarr drone ships can stay on the field longer, which keeps in line with my earlier comment for the Maller. I think this difference adds a lot of variety, even if it does tend to favor Gallente for raw DPS. Again, I can't support this. 'Geddon: I am an avid 'Geddon user and fully believe that it's fitting stats are fine as-is. Yes, it can be really tight CPU-wise when fitting torps (and I do actually do that from time to time for shooting at Minmatar POSes), but this fitting difficulty helps offset the fact that you're flying a battleship that can fit a decent tank yet still spew out 1000+ DPS that is fully damage-type selectable. Almost all of my fits that use neuts and/or lasers are just as tight on powergrid as they are on CPU, so I see that is being relatively balanced. I couldn't help but notice that the pilot you're posting with is only a little over a year old. I would like to point out that a lot of what your asking for can be achieved by getting all of your fitting and support skills to IV or ideally V. Yes, newbros certainly can and do fly T1 ships to good effect with poor skills, but if you want the kind of performance you're talking about (for the most part), all you need to do is better your fitting and support skills. Relatively Notorious By Association My Many Misadventures Inaugural C&P Thunderdome Champion
Rivr Luzade Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 1763	Posted - 2015.08.07 14:05:49 - [24] - Quote With regards to the Punisher being considered bad. I cannot avoid the impression that people want to have every ship being able to function as a solo ship. I find this disturbing. Has someone thought about it being a fleet oriented ship that relies on proper tackle and support to deal the damage. It could probably need some work, but I would like to see it pushed more into that direction than yet another ship suitable for solo. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1234	Posted - 2015.08.07 14:25:11 - [25] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: With regards to the Punisher being considered bad. I cannot avoid the impression that people want to have every ship being able to function as a solo ship. I find this disturbing. Has someone thought about it being a fleet oriented ship that relies on proper tackle and support to deal the damage. It could probably need some work, but I would like to see it pushed more into that direction than yet another ship suitable for solo. That would mean optimal bonus to get beams out to competitive ranges. Personally, four beams without damage bonus and a 10%/lvl to range is something I'd put newbros into. Though then it suddenly would also be a somewhat cool T1 slicer on valium.
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 17	Posted - 2015.08.07 14:42:51 - [26] - Quote Colt Blackhawk wrote: Coercer is fine with 2 meds because it can have range weapons. Tormentor really doesn-¦t need anything new and you may not know it but it is a beast atm. Already managed to kill (no links no implants) Hookbill and Tristan solo (2vs1) in a single Torm. Exectutioner is crappy, agree. The Coercer is fine because it is not meant to brawl, or to tackle ships. Destroyers are meant to deal damage at range to frigates. Which does not "NEED" 3 mids. Any ship that needs to tackle in order to perform its role needs 3 mids. And yes, the tormentor is pretty good. I'll admit. But the problem is that it shares both its hull bonus's with the executioner. There are no other T1 ships that share the same pair of bonus's on a hull. (role bonus aside). the 2 drones also helps it out immensely.
Brown Pathfinder Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2015.08.07 14:55:30 - [27] - Quote Phoenix Jones wrote: It's just three ships that need help, maller, punisher, arbitrator. The rest.. Are ok. Now I'd love a little more utility out of the prophecy (like 100 bandwidth :-P), but it'd be getting close to the myrmidon. +1
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 17	Posted - 2015.08.07 15:01:14 - [28] - Quote Bronson Hughes wrote: Punisher: I have a hard time believing that the tankiest T1 frigate in the game is "widely considered the worst (combat) ship in the game", T1 racial ships typically only have bonuses to two weapon types and Amarr ships already have bonuses to lases and drones. "No combat ship in Eve should have less than 3 mids. Period." Please justify this instead of simply stating it as fact. Arbitrator: I could see maybe giving the Arbitrator a touch more grid, but, unlike the Dragoon, the Arbitrator is primarily an EWar ship, not a combat ship, so it most certainly does not need additional hardpoints. These are very good points actually. As i said, the tormentor change would just be to differentiate it from the executioner a bit more... but this post was more about the Punisher, Maller, and the fitting options on the Dragoon Arbitrator Geddon. As for the T1 amarr line not having missile ships... *Thats the point.* The T2 line is HALF missile ships! All the other races are consistent with the T1 line being a full preview of the T2 lineup. Amarr needs this changed badly so Amarr pilots who transition to T2 can fly the ships that they want rather than being gimped to half the lineup until they train for a couple more months. The midslot issue is actually in reference to ships intended to brawl tackle. sniper oriented ships don't need more mids. I will clarify in the OP. The maller would retain the tank bonus, it would just transition to a missile platform to mirror the Sacrilege and the Punisher/Vengeance transition. The arbitrator is the T1 Curse/Pilgrim with poor highslot options. Meaning it is heavily implied that Neuts are to be fit if you expect enemies to get close. While it doesn't have a bonus to them, most people i talk to agree that that role is "implied" at best, and "can work" at worst. Meaning that substantially more grid is needed. It has the same grid as a 3 highslot, shield tanked blackbird.... That just doesn't work. As well, the other fitting comments are just observations about hard fits and chokes i've seen on pretty conservative fits that seem like they shouldn't be a problem. Nobody is talking triple prop, dual rep torp geddons... i would like to fit a single prop, rapid heavies 2 neuts and not have to pick 2 of cap booster/plate/repper. T2 of course. I don't consider that strenuous.
Bronson Hughes The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration 1985	Posted - 2015.08.07 15:50:13 - [29] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: As for the T1 amarr line not having missile ships... *Thats the point.* The T2 line is HALF missile ships! All the other races are consistent with the T1 line being a full preview of the T2 lineup. Amarr needs this changed badly so Amarr pilots who transition to T2 can fly the ships that they want rather than being gimped to half the lineup until they train for a couple more months. Saying that half of the T2 Amarr combat ships are missile-centric is a bit of a stretch. And I see where you're coming from, but I would only say that your point is an issue if T1 Amarr ships had zero missile hardpoitns. As it stands now, their T1 drone boats can use missiles to very good effect, so it's not as if Amarr pilots have zero exposure to them, they're just not forced on them like lasers are. Kasia en Tilavine wrote: The midslot issue is actually in reference to ships intended to brawl tackle. sniper oriented ships don't need more mids. I will clarify in the OP. I understand, but you still haven't proven your point beyond an assertion. Yes, brawling with two mids can be tricky, but with four highs and four lows, you are usually doing gobs of DPS, have a solid tank, have a neut fit, or, sometimes, all three at once. Flexibility is nice, but so is raw power. If you want a third mid, fly one of the other ships available that has one. (Incidentally, if there were no 3-mid options available, I'd agree with you. But there are, so I can't.) Kasia en Tilavine wrote: The arbitrator is the T1 Curse/Pilgrim with poor highslot options. This is precisely what the Arbitrator is, and precisely what it's supposed to be. Compare all of the T1 EWar cruisers and compare them to their recon counterparts. You'll notice that the T1 ships specialize in one thing, whereas the T2 counterparts specialize in two (except for the Caldari recons, which effectively get double ECM bonuses). Why should the Arbitrator alone be granted a special fitting allowance so it can use both racial EWar styles? Kasia en Tilavine wrote: As well, the other fitting comments are just observations about hard fits and chokes i've seen on pretty conservative fits that seem like they shouldn't be a problem. Nobody is talking triple prop, dual rep torp geddons... i would like to fit a single prop, rapid heavies 2 neuts and not have to pick 2 of cap booster/plate/repper. T2 of course. I don't consider that strenuous. I can with my skills, assuming I don't needlessly go T2 when Meta 4 is better (i.e. neuts, plates, tackle, etc.). Thanks for proving my point nicely. Relatively Notorious By Association My Many Misadventures Inaugural C&P Thunderdome Champion
Gleb Koskov Hedion University Amarr Empire 15	Posted - 2015.08.07 21:13:22 - [30] - Quote T1 ships (for the newer players) should have both application bonuses, more speed, less sig. T2 should have more damage bonuses, sluggish, tanky; and by the point you're flying T2 you should have a corp thats helping you apply damage, these shouldn't be solo ships.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.