EVE Search - The AMARR Thread

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The AMARR Thread

» 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)
Cosmo Raata Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.11 23:20:00 - [1] Dear CCP, I have played EvE for almost 4 years now, I have seen the rise and fall of many races through boost & nerf alike, of these 4 years, 3 have been with only the option of flying Amarr. I know, as per the live dev blog, CCP still has other things to help Amarr. As to what they are? I dont know but these are my suggestions & corrections to what you have already done. Consider these ideas CCP, Amarr needs the "Oomph" now. AMARR a) Cap Bonus - Change the "10% reduction in Energy Turret capacitor use" to "30-60% reduction in Energy Turret capacitor use". This becomes a real bonus and allows no need to increase cap to amarr ships to give them "oommph". They will tank well because they wont cap out, they will have more cap to spare than any other race, thus giving them the role they need. It may seem extreme, but its a fix that will work across the board. b) Retribution - Remove Utility high, add 1 med slot. c) Khanid ships - Damnation, Sacriledge, Vengeance, Malediction, Heretic. (Curse, Anathema & Impel are fine). All these ships are disliked, they have decent tanks & low offensive power. The original design was shield tanking missle spammers, which if it had been given time would have stuck. Too many players didn't want to cross train because CCP encouraged specialization. Proposal is to bring back the Missle bonuses, No "10% reduction in Energy Turret capacitor use" bonus, give them bonuses like unto Caldari ships, however, instead of shield tanking, let them stay armor tankers. It would be new, different and an option even for Caldari pilots looking for pvp ships. This has been suggested before, promoted as a good idea by Tuxford even and seems to be worthwhile. d) Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane - CPU reduction changes nothing. Make them like Damage Controls and allow ships to fit only one. Benefits are obvious as outlined by CCP in this very blog. e) Beams - If option a) is put into place, beams (besides smalls) would be fine left as is. The reason is Amarr would no longer need cap relays & cap rechargers everywhere on their ship and can use those additional slots to fit larger guns. We dont need those extra slots to just fit damage mods, thus leave grid usage on beams alone if option a) is accepted. If option a) is rejected then Beams need a 20% grid reduction across the board. f) Nosferatu - Many ideas have been proposed, most are disliked. The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots and have upgraded sized weapons at their disposal. E.g. Dominix (Large drone bay), Eos (Large drones, Large drone bay), Myrmidon (Large drones, Moderate Drone bay), Ishtar (Large Drones, Large drone bay), Iskur (Medium Drones, Moderate drone bay). These ships are not overpowered without nos, nor is nos overpowered on otherships. The answer is clear, limit amount of Nos allowed on ships (NOS POINTS). 2 Nos seems reasonable on any/all ships because a cap injector can easily counter it. Ships dedicated with NOS bonuses do not have the extra firepower without their meds, E.g. Curse (Medium drones, Small drone bay), Pilgrim (Medium drones, Small drone bay), Bhaalgorn (Medium Drones, Small drone bay). Therefore limiting the ammount of NOS on non-NOS platforms allows a way to balance these ships without the need of nerfing the Mod or NOS specific ships. Fixing Nos also fixes Amarr. This are the solutions to 2 large problems. There are surely other problems, however I know Amarr, I know Gallente, I am perfectly skilled in both. Amarr isn't in need of some huge fix as I admitedly once thought. The easiest fix is to take the bonus they already have & strengthen it from a bonus that makes them usable into a bonus that makes them better. CCP, please consider these. None of which I present overpowers or underpowers anything. It creates BALANCE. Those in favor of these please respond with a --signed response. If you have comments about it, feel free.
Ice Globe Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.11 23:32:00 - [2] Some nice ideas there, Increasing the laser cap bonus was one of the ideas I had too. It will encourage lasers to be used instead of projectiles, won't make a nos-based or missile-based armor tanker and solve some, if not all our cap problems. ______________
Kokoshu Caldari Militaris	Posted - 2007.06.12 00:01:00 - [3] /signed all good fair ideas to make amarr viable in not just BS fights or ones if u fly a pilgrim or curse.
Erim Solfara Amarr House of Solfara	Posted - 2007.06.12 00:09:00 - [4] Leave my retri alone : ( A new tool in the fight for balance?
Durao Amarr	Posted - 2007.06.12 00:10:00 - [5] I really like the idea of "nos points." It's an excellent idea for ships that do not have dedicated nos bonuses. --- "Eat a third and drink a third and leave the remaining third of your stomach empty. Then, when you get angry, there will be sufficient room for your rage." -Babylonian Talmud
SasRipper DIE WITH HONOUR	Posted - 2007.06.12 00:52:00 - [6] Originally by: Cosmo Raata D a) Cap Bonus - Change the "10% reduction in Energy Turret capacitor use" to "30-60% reduction in Energy Turret capacitor use". This becomes a real bonus and allows no need to increase cap to amarr ships to give them "oommph". They will tank well because they wont cap out, they will have more cap to spare than any other race, thus giving them the role they need. It may seem extreme, but its a fix that will work across the board. great so gallente will be the only 1 getting screwed over by nos affectiving there dps the rest i semi agree with unsure of single eanm to compare them to dc's which stack differntly anyway make them single & unstackable fine otherwise no. imo the problem with amarr is damage types thats it really, which is caused by the omini tank & the supidly heavy em damage by lasers & khanid ships poor poor khanid snip Sas has spoken this tread shall be locked.
Kardim Resurrection R i s e	Posted - 2007.06.12 01:02:00 - [7] /signed after thinking this post over i think your solutions to be the best fix, if they are not gimped on, as in ccp deciding to up the cap reduction bonus to 10.5% or the like. IMO if lasers need huge cap and huge fitting they should do huge dmg... but they do not. and i agree that if the cap was reduced to where all our slots werent full of cap gear our ships might be useful.
Audri Fisher Caldari VentureCorp Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.06.12 02:05:00 - [8] I agree with the above poster, If I am going to have huge fitting issues, and huge cap cost, I want to have huge damage. Increase beam and tachy damage by say 20%
Chainsaw Plankton	Posted - 2007.06.12 02:31:00 - [9] reduce laser cap by 50%, and give amarr the 7.5% bonus to rep amount give them the ungodly tank they are supposed to have. and last i checked omni tanks were supposed to be tanks with high resists to everything, how does this hurt amarr anymore then any other race?
Aerin Cloudfayr	Posted - 2007.06.12 02:39:00 - [10] /Signed With top skills I'd like to see Amarr ships using 0 cap with standard crystals. My fantasy. Originally by: Kardim "...and i agree that if the cap was reduced to where all our slots werent full of cap gear our ships might be useful..." Agreed.
king jks The Nine Gates Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2007.06.12 02:44:00 - [11] Controlled Bursts -> 10% reduction per level is another step in the right direction.
Aerin Cloudfayr	Posted - 2007.06.12 02:48:00 - [12] Edited by: Aerin Cloudfayr on 12/06/2007 02:48:50 Originally by: king jks Controlled Bursts -> 10% reduction per level is another step in the right direction. True, but you don't want to be sharing this capacitor bonus that amarr has(rather, needs) with the other races -do we?- fair enough it'll total up, but how will it affect Hybrids? Hybrids being the only other turret that uses cap. =\
Headless Giraffe Amarr Alpha Production Technologies Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.06.12 04:28:00 - [13] Sometimes I wonder why I bother reading posts on this forum. Maybe I'm just too addicted to Eve. However every once and a while someone posts something intelligent, well reasoned and (IMHO) unbiased. Thank you Cosmo for taking the time to write your post. We can but only hope some of your excellent suggestions filter through into the game in some form or fashion.
Cosmo Raata Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.12 05:21:00 - [14] Originally by: Aerin Cloudfayr Edited by: Aerin Cloudfayr on 12/06/2007 02:48:50 Originally by: king jks Controlled Bursts -> 10% reduction per level is another step in the right direction. True, but you don't want to be sharing this capacitor bonus that amarr has(rather, needs) with the other races -do we?- fair enough it'll total up, but how will it affect Hybrids? Hybrids being the only other turret that uses cap. =\ This is why the cap bonus that already exists would need to be changed instead of the guns itself. Abaddon would still have its same problems. And I dont quite agree that our guns should use zero cap. I just want at level 5 you'd use very little. E.g. Apoc, Amarr bs level 5, Tach II fitted should use under 1-10 cap per gun. This means if you cap out, you stop firing, but shooting in itself doesn't end your ability to fire. This is how amarr currently is, unless you fit some sort of cap mods/rigs. I know this is the same with gallente, however Amarr is meant to be a cap race, therefore this shouldn't occur.
Aerin Cloudfayr	Posted - 2007.06.12 05:33:00 - [15] Whats with the abaddon and no Cap usage bonuses? holy damn, I dont know how you're supposed to manage the cap consumption of a full rack of T2 large Lasers, and a repper, with only the 4 mids. I'd rather have 4 Geddons
un5een Cataclysm Enterprises Kraftwerk.	Posted - 2007.06.12 05:36:00 - [16] the change from -10% to -15% cap use on energy turrets seems to be the best solution. i didnt do the math but with that tachys should end up in the cap range from 425mm rails. megapulses will be even lower on cap consumption then neutrons. imho, that should be enough of a boost to amarr. ----------------------------------------------- there are 6 million ways to die... chose one! - i chose LAG Kraftwerk
Frothgar Caldari coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.06.12 05:44:00 - [17] Thank you for taking the time to write this up. The current "Fixes" to Amarr are a freakin ill concieved joke based on zero player feedback. Seriously, where on earth do they come up with this garbage?
ReePeR McAllem The Carebear Stare	Posted - 2007.06.12 08:06:00 - [18] /signed Good call on the nos. Damn gallente pvpeasymoders
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.12 08:32:00 - [19] see my reply here as to why your ideas do not work as a simple fix to the several problems with amarrian ships.
AntarisIX	Posted - 2007.06.12 11:22:00 - [20] /Signed
Neon Genesis Omniscient Order	Posted - 2007.06.12 11:31:00 - [21] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton and last i checked omni tanks were supposed to be tanks with high resists to everything, how does this hurt amarr anymore then any other race? Lots of armor tanks with 80+ Em resist makes it the worst damage type. _
Tmara Quantar Swords SynchronizerZ	Posted - 2007.06.12 11:59:00 - [22] Quote: f) Nosferatu - Many ideas have been proposed, most are disliked. The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots and have upgraded sized weapons at their disposal. E.g. Dominix (Large drone bay), Eos (Large drones, Large drone bay), Myrmidon (Large drones, Moderate Drone bay), Ishtar (Large Drones, Large drone bay), Iskur (Medium Drones, Moderate drone bay). These ships are not overpowered without nos, nor is nos overpowered on otherships. The answer is clear, limit amount of Nos allowed on ships (NOS POINTS). 2 Nos seems reasonable on any/all ships because a cap injector can easily counter it 1. Eos have no Drone Damage Bonus and no Hitpoint bonus like the Ishkur too! 2. Quote: The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots Drones can be shoot down - Highslot weapons cant! 3. 2 NOS points? does that include Neutralizer too?
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.12 12:10:00 - [23] Originally by: Tmara Quote: f) Nosferatu - Many ideas have been proposed, most are disliked. The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots and have upgraded sized weapons at their disposal. E.g. Dominix (Large drone bay), Eos (Large drones, Large drone bay), Myrmidon (Large drones, Moderate Drone bay), Ishtar (Large Drones, Large drone bay), Iskur (Medium Drones, Moderate drone bay). These ships are not overpowered without nos, nor is nos overpowered on otherships. The answer is clear, limit amount of Nos allowed on ships (NOS POINTS). 2 Nos seems reasonable on any/all ships because a cap injector can easily counter it 1. Eos have no Drone Damage Bonus and no Hitpoint bonus like the Ishkur too! 2. Quote: The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots Drones can be shoot down - Highslot weapons cant! 3. 2 NOS points? does that include Neutralizer too? I might me missunderstanding, but are you actually defending nos\drone boats? It's great being Amarr isn't it.
IHurricane Sniggerdly	Posted - 2007.06.12 12:13:00 - [24] /signed --------------------------------------------- There was never a genius, without a tincture of madness - Aristotle
Belenkas	Posted - 2007.06.12 13:11:00 - [25] The problem with cap use bonuses and lasers atm are that you need lvl5 in ship skill(well lvl4 at the very minimum) to be able to fire the lasers without sucking your cap dry. That should not happen... Every newbie pilot should be able to use lasers without training ship skill to the very high levels first. Thus I like the idea of having 30% or more cap reduction for having lvl 1 already. Setting it anywhere lower for lvl1 doesn't solve the problem. Make lasers only possible on Amarr ships, but the way it is now, only the rare of Amarr ships and only with good skills can use lasers... Good example of cap gimp is AutoCannon Punisher > Laser Punisher and AutoCannon Abaddon > Laser Abaddon.
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.12 13:45:00 - [26] Originally by: Belenkas The problem with cap use bonuses and lasers atm are that you need lvl5 in ship skill(well lvl4 at the very minimum) to be able to fire the lasers without sucking your cap dry. That should not happen... Every newbie pilot should be able to use lasers without training ship skill to the very high levels first. Thus I like the idea of having 30% or more cap reduction for having lvl 1 already. Setting it anywhere lower for lvl1 doesn't solve the problem. Make lasers only possible on Amarr ships, but the way it is now, only the rare of Amarr ships and only with good skills can use lasers... Good example of cap gimp is AutoCannon Punisher > Laser Punisher and AutoCannon Abaddon > Laser Abaddon. Aye, some frown upon auto-amarr, but hey, it works This is not how it should be, how many auto torax's and auto-megas do you see? any autocannon using caldari ships? It's great being Amarr isn't it.
Cosmo Raata Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.12 18:42:00 - [27] Originally by: Tmara Quote: f) Nosferatu - Many ideas have been proposed, most are disliked. The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots and have upgraded sized weapons at their disposal. E.g. Dominix (Large drone bay), Eos (Large drones, Large drone bay), Myrmidon (Large drones, Moderate Drone bay), Ishtar (Large Drones, Large drone bay), Iskur (Medium Drones, Moderate drone bay). These ships are not overpowered without nos, nor is nos overpowered on otherships. The answer is clear, limit amount of Nos allowed on ships (NOS POINTS). 2 Nos seems reasonable on any/all ships because a cap injector can easily counter it 1. Eos have no Drone Damage Bonus and no Hitpoint bonus like the Ishkur too! 2. Quote: The problem lies within ships that dont need their source of damage to come from their high slots Drones can be shoot down - Highslot weapons cant! 3. 2 NOS points? does that include Neutralizer too? To me its about being able to counter a mod. If an Eos has 5 nos, I can't hold with my absolution or my astarte (yes I fly both) even with an injector. If you are nossing me with 2, maybe 3 I can hold cap assuming I have the injector fitted & I spam the hell out of it. 2 Injectors is unreasonable to ask a pilot to fit because of its extreme fitting requirements. E.g. An ECM counter requires 1 ECCM generally. I'm not saying I should decide which ship gets how many NOS points, however the ships I mentioned lose very little dps when using their highs with nos instead of guns. I agree that these ships have their own drones vulerable whereas those with turret weapons do not, however I believe it is well known that the average player believe drones need a boost themselves. With such boost these ships would no longer need to rely on NOS. I fly the EOS, it has no problem doing well without the drone bonus. It also gets a damage bonus to guns, the only reason people fit NOS, myself included, is because it can use its drones to do plenty of damage while letting the NOS disable the target completely. I am arguing this from the standpoint of flying both Amarr & Gallente, and while I risk making gallente ships less omnipotent, I am only interested in BALANCE.
7ever	Posted - 2007.06.13 03:13:00 - [28] -signed
SteveDaPirate	Posted - 2007.06.13 03:24:00 - [29] I fly a Retribution and I think it would be an excellent idea to move the non-turret high slot down to a medium slot. This would allow the Retribution to do something besides just killing NPCs. While I really love my Retribution I find it's complete lack of PvP ability really annoying. Thanks for the great ideas Cosmo!
Amoilin	Posted - 2007.06.13 04:33:00 - [30] 3 things i'd like to see happen: change the cap usage on lasers (or even hybrids) changing the Controlled bursts skill to 7.5% per level would be a start. or change the cap bonus on the ship to 15% per level. or even better, do both. change the damage proportions on crystals i'd like to see more thermal damage and less em damage across the board on all the crystals. maybe 60%/40% em/therm. Change the fitting requirements for beams Beams have insane powergrid requirements and most ships can not use them at all and have any tank. Please decrease the powergrid usage of heavy beams and tachyons. Mega beams seem to be pretty balanced however. Amarr as a race would still struggle with capacitor issues, but having access to 3 damage types at once (counting drones here) would help our pvp tremendously.

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.