EVE Search - Devs - Why do you HATE the Basilisk?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Devs - Why do you HATE the Basilisk?

» 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)
lylaal	Posted - 2007.01.08 14:23:00 - [1] It will NEVER win any prizes for beauty but you have nerfed it big time as well ...WHY 1) It has no drone bay for any shield/armour healing drones (as a support ship should have) 2) The powergrid is seriously small for the function 3) The t2 components are not available for it to do its job (no t2 Large Shield Transporters) 4) Surely a bonus to re-locking the friendly ship after de-cloaking would be in order These are just off the top of my head ... I know other Basilisk users will add to this .... So will ya fix it pls ...willya, willya?
Jurgen Cartis	Posted - 2007.01.08 23:41:00 - [2] As a pilot who presently flys an Osprey for logistics (but intends to get a Basilisk eventually) I'd also like to see the ship get a dronebay (the Osprey has one but the Basilisk doesn't, odd), and to have the high-end modules for logistics seeded. Also, why is it that the basic named T1 and T2 shield transporters are more efficient on a shields transferred per cap basis than the Gistii ones? As it is, since I send as much shield to as my cap can keep running, there is no reason for me to equip the Gistii transfers, just the best named T1 or T2 transfers. And speaking of faction transfers, why are there no faction large capacitor transfer arrays (not that a basilisk has the grid to fit any module of that size. . .). And a bonus to all logistics craft to targeting gangmates would be nice.
Zarch AlDain The Establishment Establishment	Posted - 2007.01.09 12:00:00 - [3] There aren't even named large shield transporters... Zarch AlDain
Kirov VIII	Posted - 2007.01.09 22:04:00 - [4] For info a very good skilled pilot can make miracles with this ship ... And now with rigs, it's again better ... You can try the guardian, it's worse ... No, it's really a good ship but you need to up skills at 5 and put somes goods items on this ship :)
Reggie Stoneloader eXceed Inc.	Posted - 2007.01.10 01:09:00 - [5] Edited by: Reggie Stoneloader on 10/01/2007 01:05:55 I thought the Basilisk was generally considered to be the best logistics ship, able to transfer the equivalent of two XL boosters at incredible ranges indefinitely. Has something changed?
lylaal	Posted - 2007.01.11 12:25:00 - [6] Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader I thought the Basilisk was generally considered to be the best logistics ship, able to transfer the equivalent of two XL boosters at incredible ranges indefinitely. Has something changed? Reg - previously this ship would have an adequate capability to support. With the changes in the latest patch, it now fails miserably. Let me explain why If I wanted to support one Caldari battleship or battlecruiser, then I would purchase a Osprey put on four medium shield transporters (of which I could use two continuously) put in some drones for shield or armour repair, get the battleship to put in an energy vampire and that will do 95% of requirement. However, if I wanted to support my squad of 4 Caldari battleship's and my one Gallante battlecruiser - then a t2 support ship should be the ship of choice. But here is where it all goes horribly wrong. I do have the distance (60km shield transfer range) but that in itself is not enough. Firstly, I can't carry drones for shield or armour repair. Secondly, although I can put in three large shield transporters that can run continuously with my skills - there are no named or t2 large shield transporters on the market which would allow me to do 4. By the way, this type of setup would require a capacitor of around 3500 and even with rigs and maxed skills, this is nigh impossible to attain. Thirdly, the bonuses given do not reflect the support ship capability adequately. This ship needs defence capability because as soon as the opposition notices this ship, it usually becomes primary. It needs just enough defence to escape. Any other Basilisk pilots care to comment?
lylaal	Posted - 2007.01.16 12:39:00 - [7] btw - just asking ... Is this in the right place to get noticed by someone that give a f**k to do something about it?
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2007.01.16 20:02:00 - [8] Originally by: lylaal btw - just asking ... Is this in the right place to get noticed by someone that give a fk to do something about it? Just fyi I've never seen a player idea or suggestion make it in game Best Dressed Corp of 2006 and 2007! -Marcus TheMartin** Marcus Thinks Eve who knew!?
Reggie Stoneloader eXceed Inc.	Posted - 2007.01.17 07:28:00 - [9] Nope, the devs all read general instead. Go whine there if you want changes made. This forum is purely for academic discussion of game design. I suspect the devs will open it up every so often, and if there's a gripe about nos at the top, they all do a shot of vodka. If it's about POSes, they chug a beer, and if it's about how ebil pirates are, they all log on and gank a newb in high-sec.
CrestoftheStars Deviance Inc	Posted - 2007.01.17 10:24:00 - [10] well support ships jsut sucks.. they gotten it all wrong... first of, remove any way of butting in attack drones (EW and support drones should be used) give it a drone bay that let them use atleast those 5 medium at a cruiser support and heavy on a t2 support ship.. give them a unbeateble TANK, which means the t1 cruiser have almost the tank of a bc's and the t2 have the tank of a bs. it should not be worth the effort to take out a support ship before the attacking ship. give them a recharge, so with maxed skills they can support a t1 support ship= 3 cruiser or 2bc or 1 bs with a recharge of 1,5 times the ship it is supporteds tank capacibillyty. t2 should do the same but with 3bc or 2 bs's... make it worth having a support ship around. NO i am not flying or planning to fly support myself, i just think it could be cool to get them in... ___________________________________________ come on.. stop thinking about YOU. and start thinking about All of us... how do we get a more fun and enjoyable game for all of us.

CrestoftheStars Deviance Inc	Posted - 2007.01.17 10:26:00 - [11] Originally by: Reggie Stoneloader Nope, the devs all read general instead. Go whine there if you want changes made. This forum is purely for academic discussion of game design. I suspect the devs will open it up every so often, and if there's a gripe about nos at the top, they all do a shot of vodka. If it's about POSes, they chug a beer, and if it's about how ebil pirates are, they all log on and gank a newb in high-sec. lol this is actually how i think of them right now:P hehe... doesn't seem like they are reading or replaying at this forum at all :S ___________________________________________ come on.. stop thinking about YOU. and start thinking about All of us... how do we get a more fun and enjoyable game for all of us.
arutha Infinite Improbability Inc Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.17 15:01:00 - [12] tbh the bonuses on all the support ships are crappy except the tech 2 scythe with a tracking boost . atleast from a pvp point off view . as for the basilisk and drone bay . umm train for a oneiros ? . caldari arent ment to be good drone carriers . but i will prolly get flamed for that .
lylaal	Posted - 2007.01.18 16:50:00 - [13] Well - u won't be flamed by me - I know and accept that the Caldari are not hot in the drone department As for training any other support ship - spose that is a possibility but as this thread has bought out - there is no active support for the support ships so until the basic issues get resolved then it really not worth continuing There are not other comments from any other support ship advocators???
Nian Banks	Posted - 2007.01.18 17:54:00 - [14] Funny you should mention the Scimitar (Tech2 Scythe), this is a prime example of "Why?" to do with drone bays, although I know the Scythe only had a 5m3 Drone bay, the Scimitar had 0m3 drone space 0 for goodness sakes! Although one light drone doesn't sound like much, its atleast better than none at all. expecially for a support ship. I believe that all Logistics cruisers should have a minimum of 25m3 drone space, gallente more perhaps? also lets reduce their high slots, they are not for combat and you only need a few for nos and defender missiles.
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO	Posted - 2007.01.18 18:18:00 - [15] Does anyone have a proposal on how CCP could make support ships viable? In any MMO when it comes to PVP, the first guy to go is the healer. How might CCP make it possible for the healer to stick around in a combat situation? Or, do we even want that to be possilbe? I know he warps in 60km behind the front lines, but those lines move much too fast with ceptors etc. Any ideas? ~~~~~~~~~ Caldari. It's so easy a Minmatar could do it.
Taedrin Gallente Mercatoris Technologies	Posted - 2007.01.18 18:21:00 - [16] Originally by: arutha tbh the bonuses on all the support ships are crappy except the tech 2 scythe with a tracking boost . atleast from a pvp point off view . as for the basilisk and drone bay . umm train for a oneiros ? . caldari arent ment to be good drone carriers . but i will prolly get flamed for that . I <3 my Scimitar. I still have yet to see what sort of carnage can be dealt out with a Scimitar + Rokh combo, but I sooooo want to see this in action.
Malena Perpetual Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.18 18:53:00 - [17] It isn't that noone cares, it is that this subject has been beaten to death, and CCP still hasn't done much about it. I have contributed to many threads-none of which show up when I search-over the years about potential changes to these ships, but none have come to fruition. You aren't the only one flying this ship, I have been since they came out, but I beat my head against the wall on different subjects now because I think CCP is stuck in the "We know this needs to change, but we aren't sure how to do it without making it overpowered" cycle.
Reggie Stoneloader eXceed Inc.	Posted - 2007.01.18 19:24:00 - [18] There really isn't a niche for them. Major battles are too fast for them to help, and minor battles would be better served by a proper combat ship instead. Combat in EvE is fast and brutal, and there's no time for the healing and buffing and carrying on that other MMOs use in the standard tank/gank/heal/buff/mez pentacle of combat. I like EvE better than other MMOs, and I like the speedy, decisive battles we participate in. I don't like sub-system targeting, I don't like the capital HP buff and I don't want to be doing a lot of remote tanking. That said, I think remote tanking should be freaking awesome. Set up Logistics ships to be able to heal POSes or otherwise fill some small niche. Trying to make EvE combat into WoW combat doesn't improve anything for anyone.
Nian Banks	Posted - 2007.01.19 04:26:00 - [19] Perhaps they could give logistics ships the ability to fit a module that gives them a reenforced mode similar to pos's and consumes racial specific material that pos's use. Make it that with a full cargo boy of the material will only make them immune for few short minutes. Lets fact it, a logistics ship will always be called primary when noticed. Make them ofcourse unable to do any damage. -100% to all weapon systems damage.
Jaketh Ivanes Amarr Riggers Incorporated	Posted - 2007.01.19 10:08:00 - [20] Good idea with the reinforced mode, but then the range should be reduced and the ship ofcourse immobile. This will force the allies to stay close to the logistic ship and be a new tactical decision to make.

James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2007.01.19 10:52:00 - [21] Out of interest...how many ships would you need to be able to tank a POS against a dread?
Lezx Stab Gallente	Posted - 2007.01.19 10:55:00 - [22] Logistic Ships Need a Boost Improvements that would be usefull: 1- Fast Active Repair Targetting (So pilot that call for Shield/Armor/Cap get autotargetted by logistic ships) 2- Prevent Gang Members from auto-targetting Logistic ship (for those Trigger happy pilots) 3- Still Better Protection (extra Mid/Low slots ?) 4- T2 Version of the Remote Shield/Armor/Cap Repairs 5- Very Fast Capacitor Recharge Rate (THAT should be the Special Bonus to all Logistic Ships) All ship including carriers can Shield Boost/Armor Repair/Cap Transfer; So where does it leaves the Logistic ship ? Why use it PvP then ? I tried lot of combination and got to the conclusion that a Very (near insane) Fast Capacitor Recharge Rate is the Key needed to unlocking the potential of those ships. Since Logictics ship are not design for HP damage why not give them the special ability of having a very rapid capacitor recharge rate so there will be able to make a impact in fleet battles.
Erim Solfara	Posted - 2007.01.19 10:58:00 - [23] A tier 3 command ship for logistics would be nice, either use the new bc models or swap them around so they use others. e.g. absolution = harbinger damnation = prophecy tier 3 support = prophecy/new model? just an idea... ---------------------------------------- Proposed new ship class
Nian Banks	Posted - 2007.01.19 13:20:00 - [24] Originally by: Erim Solfara A tier 3 command ship for logistics would be nice, either use the new bc models or swap them around so they use others. e.g. absolution = harbinger damnation = prophecy tier 3 support = prophecy/new model? just an idea... Lets not get ahead of ourselves here, why create a new larger tier 3 command ship when current logistics cruisers are not working effectively, we need to concentrate on fixing the core problems before making new ones. Anyway the reencforcement mode I still think is a good idea, tho making them stationary could be an idea for balance sakes its not necessary if the ships can't output any damage if thats the case then we may aswell give them movement.
Malena Perpetual Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.19 17:06:00 - [25] To the OP-the logistics ships have not been nerfed...they have always been on the short end of the stick. To later posters: Reinforcement is not a great idea, IMO. It forces a defensive mode, and if you have a a fleet that wants to go on the attack or be mobile in the defense, the effectiveness is gone. A fast recharge rate, coupled with a restriction on fitting propulsion jamming modules (I.E. webbers and scramblers) is a great idea and would keep the ship from becoming an even better tackler than it is now. It is a pricey one, but given it's resists, it is able to survive longer, and reduces production needs. A few small tweaks that would help with usability: 1. give them all a drone bay the size that the Oneiros has now, and double the Oneiros' bay. That way they can throw either some combat and get themselves on the kill board or increase sec rating if doing PvE. Or they could repair drones to add total overall healing ability. (still woulnd't be allowed to use webbing drones) 2. insta-target anyone currently in your squad when you warp in to a new zone. 3. bonus to shield or armor tanking(again-this requires a limitation to prevent them from becoming uber-tacklers) 4. Add a rig that reduces the cap requirements for shield transfers. (this has implciations beyond log ships, however) 5. Allow those who aid the combat ships to get on the kill mails for keeping their buddies alive. 6. Give them the ability to fit one (and ONLY one!) warfare link...tactical decisions about which one to use, and whether it is more important than the actual boosting would make this quite interesting. 7. Bring in named large and t2 shield transfers. Another possibility is a bonus to fitting requirements...that way even though there aren't t2 or named large transporters there would be a reason to fit the ones we have now-the reduced fitting requirements allow you to fit more of them. Sustainability would be an issue, but it always is.
Prosephonie	Posted - 2007.01.19 20:07:00 - [26] I don't fly my Oneiros anymore because the Dominix is hands down a better choice for tank support. It can support both Shield and Armor tanks equally as well. Whats the deal?
Vincent Almasy Gallente The Underground	Posted - 2007.01.19 21:01:00 - [27] I have the best solution.... make logistic BC/BS as surrently we only have support cruisers and limited like cruisers are, so to compair it to a BS who's a acting logistic ship is kinda not fair.
PNXR Admin	Posted - 2007.01.19 22:38:00 - [28] Posted some time ago by me: Originally by: Amda Portisse I've been flying Logistics for some time, and I'll still choose them in a fleet op. They are alot cheaper (between 1/3 - 1/8 of the price) than other T2 cruisers (loads cheaper than BS's) and in a fight of 5-10 are really really useful. With logistics 5 a Guardian can throw energy at over 70km and a basilisk can throw shield at over 55km. The most useful I've found them is as THE support ship for frigate ops. I don't necesarrily agree with the need for a bigger BC logistics ship (their small size (sig radius same as destroyer) is one of the plus points of their build. I'd always be in favour of maybe a slight increase in their abilities (i.e, increased range still, or yes, a full amount of med and large modules on the market) tho. The problem of logistics is not logistics at all. And from what I've read I think the Devs are aware of this. The problem is Blobs and 20+ gank fleets and massive fleet ranges. It doesn't matter what your flying or really the specific makeup of your fleet. If you get called primary your time is up. The devs are aware of this I think and in time I wouldn't be surprised if it was addressed in a very drastic way. In the meantime, I reckon use our brains and use logistics in specific ideal situations. In support of frig fleets, or yeh, for repping POS's (Basi), or use a Scimitar to make that sniper camp even more deadly. Or even fit 8 named heavy neutralizers on an Apoc (supported by a guardian at 70k) and simoultaneously insta-drain the cap out of the first 4 cruisers that jump into your gate camp... And there's more possibilities... Basically, it would be great to be able to use these ships as fleet-worthy rep-boats, but until CCP get round to seriously changing the whole way fleet warfare works, this just isn't going to be happen. So we need to get use to the idea that they are niche ships, for particular tactical situations, and use them appropriately. ..Orginally taken from: Linkage
Dawnstar Gallente Kiroshi Group	Posted - 2007.01.19 22:47:00 - [29] I too have a logistics ship (the Oneiros) that just sits in my hangar most of the time. I think that there are a combination of factors that make me leave it there usually. 1. Inability to use large repairers without a considerable number of extra modules. To make a logistics ship really viable as a "healer," range isn't enough. You have to be able to repair more than any other ship which is fitted for the task. If there's a better healing ship, it'll get used instead. As battleships make up the majority of the ships in fleets large enough to warrant a logistics ship, the logistics ship needs to be able to repair at a rate equal to or superior to a battleship, which it can't currently. A bonus to allow a large remote armor reps to be easily fitted would be very nice. 2. No T2 versions of the modules. 'nuff said. 3. Too large of a skill sink to get an ok configuration. One of the big problems I see with the ships are that you really need to have level 5 in Logistics to make the ships ok. Even at level 3 logistics, running 4 remote armor reps sucks the cap dry in nothing flat. Be kind. There's already a requirement of level 5 in cruiser, signature analysis, and long range targetting. To get the cap use for the remote armor reps to a sustainable rate you need level 5 in logistics too! Change the bonus formula to something a bit nicer - say 50% from the start and another 7.5% per level. This lets a player with only level 2-3 logistics be able to really use the ships. 4. The 3.5% bonus to remote tracking links per level... I'm skeptical that very many people (if any) even use these modules on the logistics ships. Its too little of a bonus for a module of marginal use to begin with - its a pain to use too. I think that Malena's suggestion regarding the warfare link module has some merits. I'd like to see this bonus replaced with the ability to use a single warfare link module (and some sort of a level based bonus to warfare link modules too). This gives a nice bonus to the entire fleet for having a logistics ship around, and lets the pilot of the logistics ship concentrate on "healing." -D
Malena Perpetual Dawn	Posted - 2007.01.26 16:36:00 - [30] Edited by: Malena on 26/01/2007 16:33:08 Couple more suggestions, with the following disclaimer: I do NOT actively advocate the first one, as I feel the skill point requirements to be effective (not just be able to use) for dedicated support pilots is deep enough as it is. I am just offering alternatives. 1) Create specific gang skills that increase the range and/or effectiveness of certain sized modules. E.G.: we have small arty and AC specialization, why not small energy transfer and shield transfer spec? Also creation of skill to increase effectiveness of tracking links. 2) Creation of a set of modules that are specifically designed to enhance either transfer range or boost amount at a cost. EG a mid slot module that gives a 7.5% bonus to boost amount for energy or shield transfers at the cost of 3% of total available cap. (Numbers are just from my head, clearly they would need testing) Make them fit-table only to ships that already give a bonus. (Scythe, Osprey, Augoror, logistics ships)



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.