EVE Search - The Command Ship Nerf

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

The Command Ship Nerf

» 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)
Bradstone	Posted - 2007.06.17 19:49:00 - [1] 2 days away from patch woot!, but not woot! for command ship pilots. Why? its getting its first nerf... why? it can tank! Due to the overpowered nature of the Drake, the command ships are getting a nerf in their tank... emm? isnÆt that want command ships are for? lower firepower then a Battleship in order to take more dmg and give gang bonuses? The amount of skills needed for a command should be reduced when they reduce its capabilities. It makes me wonder why I have trained command ships 5 and all other tank skill to the max if one day they can be nerft with no say at all from the pilots. It seems to stem from 4 month old pilots in Battleships attacking a command ship and screaming "Over powered!!" because it tanked them... deeehh?!!! thatÆs its point!? and plus the fact, with the more skills needed to fly a command ship I should hope it can tank or what would be the point? Its all about balance, then why was the drake brought out in the first place? surely its tested before its released? or is it brought in as an a ship that can get a noob from a cruiser to a lvl 4 mission tanking ship in 2 months then to nerf it when every new player has trained for it? I agree its overpowered, but why drag the command ships down with it. WhatÆs next? a pilot screaming overpowered when his battleship gets popped by a mothership? oh please... "As a great friend once said - "Its a Game"
Umek Minmatar FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:10:00 - [2] The Drake is not a command ship.
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:13:00 - [3] Someone didn't read. Agreed OP this nerf is completly uncalled for.
HayesDuSid	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:22:00 - [4] -.- He isnt calling it a Comm ship, but Comm ships are getting nerfed here, that is what the topic is about. As an Absolution pilot, its annoying. It doesnt weaken me as such, but its a nerf aimed at 1 or 2 ships and weakening assorted other ships. Comm ships take forever to train to (and arent cheap), they are elite. Why weaken them? I trust the Devs, but looking at the amarr fix, I wonder if their ideas on fixing things through unusual methods is perhaps more dangerous than helpful. BTW to the Devs, thank you for your hard work. I see many complaints here (especially since I read the Amarr posts), and while I might not agree, I appreciate your efforts!
Aioa Planetary Assault Systems	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:23:00 - [5] Originally by: Bradstone 2 days away from patch woot!, but not woot! for command ship pilots. Why? its getting its first nerf... why? it can tank! Due to the overpowered nature of the Drake, the command ships are getting a nerf in their tank... emm? isnÆt that want command ships are for? lower firepower then a Battleship in order to take more dmg and give gang bonuses? The amount of skills needed for a command should be reduced when they reduce its capabilities. It makes me wonder why I have trained command ships 5 and all other tank skill to the max if one day they can be nerft with no say at all from the pilots. It seems to stem from 4 month old pilots in Battleships attacking a command ship and screaming "Over powered!!" because it tanked them... deeehh?!!! thatÆs its point!? and plus the fact, with the more skills needed to fly a command ship I should hope it can tank or what would be the point? Its all about balance, then why was the drake brought out in the first place? surely its tested before its released? or is it brought in as an a ship that can get a noob from a cruiser to a lvl 4 mission tanking ship in 2 months then to nerf it when every new player has trained for it? I agree its overpowered, but why drag the command ships down with it. WhatÆs next? a pilot screaming overpowered when his battleship gets popped by a mothership? oh please... "As a great friend once said - "Its a Game" /signed
lofty29 Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:24:00 - [6] The vulture / nighthawk will still have absolutely wicked tanks. --- Project Mayhem
Commander Thrawn Fluffy Rabbit Killers	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:38:00 - [7] Originally by: HayesDuSid -.- He isnt calling it a Comm ship, but Comm ships are getting nerfed here, that is what the topic is about. As an Absolution pilot, its annoying. It doesnt weaken me as such, but its a nerf aimed at 1 or 2 ships and weakening assorted other ships. Comm ships take forever to train to (and arent cheap), they are elite. Why weaken them? I trust the Devs, but looking at the amarr fix, I wonder if their ideas on fixing things through unusual methods is perhaps more dangerous than helpful. BTW to the Devs, thank you for your hard work. I see many complaints here (especially since I read the Amarr posts), and while I might not agree, I appreciate your efforts! i fail to how making sheild recharge time faster is nerfing a ship that armor tanks??? plus the vulture and nighthawk will still have wicked tanks do to based resistance. this wine is for nothing
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:39:00 - [8] Let the command ship nerf stand...but increase vulture and nighthawk shield hitpoints somewhat. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:40:00 - [9] Here's an idea: devs should nerf the EOS/Astartes damage by 10%, they'd still have "wicked" damage, no reason to complain.
Frodo Amarr Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:43:00 - [10] If you think the drakes passive tank isnt overpowered your delusional.

Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:45:00 - [11] And another. Points at the FATAL guy
HayesDuSid	Posted - 2007.06.17 20:48:00 - [12] Originally by: Commander Thrawn Originally by: HayesDuSid -.- He isnt calling it a Comm ship, but Comm ships are getting nerfed here, that is what the topic is about. As an Absolution pilot, its annoying. It doesnt weaken me as such, but its a nerf aimed at 1 or 2 ships and weakening assorted other ships. Comm ships take forever to train to (and arent cheap), they are elite. Why weaken them? I trust the Devs, but looking at the amarr fix, I wonder if their ideas on fixing things through unusual methods is perhaps more dangerous than helpful. BTW to the Devs, thank you for your hard work. I see many complaints here (especially since I read the Amarr posts), and while I might not agree, I appreciate your efforts! i fail to how making sheild recharge time faster is nerfing a ship that armor tanks??? plus the vulture and nighthawk will still have wicked tanks do to based resistance. this wine is for nothing Did you READ my post? I said it didnt nerf MY ship, but that it did nerf OTHER ships. I am not whining, just worried that this game will go the way of star wars galaxies. Heck, I havent whined about amarr on these boards at all. I love em. Complaining about your own race is always biased. I just believe that Nerfing with this method is too wide-spread. Next time, try to turn the flamer off and read what someone says. You MIGHT find SOME of us dont post for our own benefit only. PS. sorry to the op, this is rather off topic, but I needed to reply.
Dragon Lord Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:17:00 - [13] The biggest problem was caused by the release of the teir 2 bc's and rigs, before they came along a ferox could tank lvl3s np but would die badly in lvl4s unless skills were maxed out and if they were u would be better using a command ship. The event of the Drake and the miri plus the rather nice rigs turned passive shield tanking into a whole new ball game. For me a 2 month old shouldnt be able to solo lvl4s, they should have problems running some lvl3s tbh. At the end of the day despite this sight nerf to all passive tankers please remember how well a command ship could tank before rigs came out. Then realise how much better off u are since rev 1 came out.
Alchemos Gallente D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:29:00 - [14] correct me if im wrong but isn't the shield recharge rate the only thing being nerfed? Thats hardly a nerf to any command ship but vulture/nighthawk even then they were better as active tanks.
Killwing Minmatar Alcohol Fueled Brutality X-PACT	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:52:00 - [15] OK let me give everyone a little test,see who passes.Have you read the freakin patch notes or are you just looking for an excuse to P* and moan before the patch???The only thing that id getting "nerfed" in the BC class of ships and that includes command ships is the sheild recharge rate.CCP said that,the forgot to fix the Bc class of ships so now you have Joe Blow,a rather pathetic waste of flesh,sitin in a drake OR a cyclone OR a ferox or a command ship with a hand full of mods on that give him a massive amount of sheild regen.(Did I miss any other sheild tank BC's?) So what everyone who is b** about this "nerf" is scared that they are gonna have to learn how to tank.A passive tank on a shield tanker should only be there for a sniper set-up ship.An active tank is for true get in their face combat. ________________________________ The public will more easly fall for a big lie,than for a small one .
Sandra Last	Posted - 2007.06.17 21:59:00 - [16] ahm.. nerf cause of the drake???? you ever had fun with a scorp with 3 field purgers??
Djerin Obsidian Exploration Services	Posted - 2007.06.17 22:15:00 - [17] Fit an active tank and stop whining ffs! Seriously, command ships are still wtfpwn...
Scraqp Advocates	Posted - 2007.06.17 22:24:00 - [18] yea while i _kinda_ understand moaning about the CS "nerf" i dont understand the reason for crying about a few % less recharge rate on the BC sized vessels. as if drakes couldnt tank lvl4s anymore. carebears... with NOS being nerfed theres a good chance active tanking becomes a very acceptable method on smaller ships (ie if they base it on sigradius, which i hope for)
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.18 00:18:00 - [19] What does this have to do with level fours? Most drake pilots agree that the drake's tank was overpowered. But we disagree that the ship was overpowered. And it wasn't, go look at a killboard and see how many kills were done by drakes, then look at the other three BCs. Drake pilots would've been glad to trade survivability for more PvP utility.
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.06.18 00:42:00 - [20] Drakes and command ships still run insane active tanks.... -- t20: "So Let us play and enjoy the game you and I both love on the same level."

Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.06.18 00:50:00 - [21] Give it a rest already.
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.18 01:06:00 - [22] The point being that the Drake is still a crap PvP ship, but no use debating, you probably consider it fair since the Drake is a good mission running ship .
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.06.18 02:01:00 - [23] Originally by: Incantare The point being that the Drake is still a crap PvP ship What the F are you on about? I wish people would realise that being a crap ship for solo PvP =/= being a crap ship for PvP, period.
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.18 02:09:00 - [24] That's the problem though, the drakes performance doesn't come close to the Myrm's or Cane's even in gang. I'm not sure how the Harb compares. Anyway, I'm done derailing the OP's thread.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.06.18 02:58:00 - [25] Originally by: Incantare That's the problem though, the drakes performance doesn't come close to the Myrm's or Cane's even in gang. I'm not sure how the Harb compares. Anyway, I'm done derailing the OP's thread. The Drake's wicked tank is of great use as bait. An active-tanked Drake will far out-tank a Myrm for a short period of time (i.e. long enough for your gang to take out the hostiles, if you're smart).
Archonite	Posted - 2007.06.18 03:14:00 - [26] I agree... I dont think Command ships should suffer these consequences being in their class... The Drakes taking the passive nerf would be understandable... but fitting an active tank on lets say a Nighthawk... come on... it's going to have difficulty keeping up the reps short of using faction boosters or an sba in the mids... if NH pilots fit passive tanks.. then they lose their damage mods in the lows... I think this is an acceptable compromise... I dont see the reason for this nerf.. -Yes, I posted with an alt... and yes I do fly a NH.
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.18 03:34:00 - [27] Originally by: Deschenus Maximus The Drake's wicked tank is of great use as bait. An active-tanked Drake will far out-tank a Myrm for a short period of time (i.e. long enough for your gang to take out the hostiles, if you're smart). The myrm still has a better passive tank (on top of DPS from autos and drones) or a great active tank, tackle, e-war and sick dps with blasters + drones, oh and it can solo. So really no reason to go for a drake even if it does have a better active tank in the short term that's not worth all of the myrm's capabilities. Moreso since the BC skill is shared. Soon I'll be in a myrm so it'll play in my favor, but it is dissapointing to see an already sub-par ship nerfed rather than rebalanced.
Deschenus Maximus Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades	Posted - 2007.06.18 03:49:00 - [28] Originally by: Incantare Originally by: Deschenus Maximus The Drake's wicked tank is of great use as bait. An active-tanked Drake will far out-tank a Myrm for a short period of time (i.e. long enough for your gang to take out the hostiles, if you're smart). The myrm still has a better passive tank (on top of DPS from autos and drones) or a great active tank, tackle, e-war and sick dps with blasters + drones, oh and it can solo. So really no reason to go for a drake even if it does have a better active tank in the short term that's not worth all of the myrm's capabilities. Moreso since the BC skill is shared. Soon I'll be in a myrm so it'll play in my favor, but it is dissapointing to see an already sub-par ship nerfed rather than rebalanced. 1) The myrm's passive tank is going to be nerfed as well, so that's a non-issue. 2) It's drones can be destroyed, and with a small drone bay that can only hold 5 larges, that hurst your DPS seriously. 3) The Drake is a far better ship for med-large gangs due to the fact that it's not as badly affected by lag and that missiles move faster than drones. Although I agree that the Myrm is damn good (perhaps too good), saying that the Drake is worthless is not taking into account all the uses there are for it.
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.18 04:08:00 - [29] Edited by: Incantare on 18/06/2007 04:13:03 ] 1) My point was the myrm's passive tank is better, it was better before nerf and will still be. 2) Drones can be scooped/redeployed if the Myrm pilot is fast enough. They're easier to destroy with a web but most drakes don't fit webs, and if they do their tank is weakened. 3) True but then an arty cane would probably be better (more dps, instant hit) I'm not saying the Drake is worthless but that it's lacking compared to the alternatives. Ok I'm out of this thread .
HayesDuSid	Posted - 2007.06.18 11:26:00 - [30] Also worth a mention was the line about passive tanks only being for sniper set ups. Err no, its for anti nos setups too. The GET IN YOUR FACE thing you were talking about doesnt work currently with active tank. You get eaten alive as soon as the other side nosses you to death.

Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control	Posted - 2007.06.18 11:28:00 - [31] My Eos is still a bad mother ****. Nighthawk was reulous from what I read. Im meh about it all honestly. Hate caldari too. ---------------------------------------- Friends Forever**
The Painkiller	Posted - 2007.06.18 12:02:00 - [32] Originally by: Wrayeth Let the command ship nerf stand...but increase vulture and nighthawk shield hitpoints somewhat. /signed After spending a year for the skills for a vulture the nerf is a bit of a kick in the balls as i run a completly passive tank, i tried active tanks and lost two vultures as i was nosed and the small capacitor was dry very quick and that was when running 1 gang mod never mind 3, once Vultures get a few nos on him his cap is gone, gang mods cant be run, so the ships role is not there anymore... then you die, whats the point... passive tank more chance of keepin ya gang mods going so you can kill the people who are nossing you + i had a medium nos myself so i could gain cap, though as thats being nerfed as well well have to see how that works after the patch :/ bottom like for me.. Caldari suffer a lot more than any other race with this nerf, ok they still have a pretty good tank but it wasnt unbreakable and now its even more breakable and still people whine about how good the tank is.. its great tank or damage, the pilot has to decide, if you find yourself up against a vulture and he is tanking a lot of damage whats to worry about? his damage is going to suck. i just dont see why the nerf was needed, drake nerf yes, CS no. why cant CCP just nerf the drake and not the CS ok its the same hull but its a different class of ship, BC and CS + with the CS having less HP than the BC what good are nice resists when you have low hp.. im hoping CCP read all the threads and either explain the reason(s) for the CS nerf or change it / next patch sort it out
Jin Entres Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.18 12:36:00 - [33] Finally the ludicrously overpowered solopwnmobile that is Vulture has been nerfed! No longer will 5 hybrids with great optimal range dominate the skies of EVE. Justice has prevailed. Rejoice! ---
Jocca Quinn Matari BackBone	Posted - 2007.06.18 13:34:00 - [34] I can see why the change is necessary, the battlecruisers and their command ship cousins having the same shield recharge as cruisers is not balanced. However, Command Ships do have a right to a boost in my opinion. When the overall hitpoint boost happened, command ships were short changed. Their boosted hitpoint's were based on their old figures, which in turn were based on the old (pre-boost) numbers of the t1 battlecruiser hulls. What should have happened was that the Command ships base hitpoints should have been re-evaluated with regard to the newly boosted figures of the battlecruisers THEN the hitpoint boost applied. As it stands the teir 2 battlecruisers have very close to the same hitpoints as the command ships, and thats just wrong in my opinion. none of us are free as long as one of us is chained none of us are free
kill0rbunny Alpha-Hirogen Phoenix Allianz	Posted - 2007.06.18 13:53:00 - [35] Originally by: Jin Entres Finally the ludicrously overpowered solopwnmobile that is Vulture has been nerfed! No longer will 5 hybrids with great optimal range dominate the skies of EVE. Justice has prevailed. Rejoice! /signed Vultures tanking titans and instapopping them afterwards were too much, nurf ftw. I pew therefore I am.
Hudsonn FireTech Pure.	Posted - 2007.06.18 21:09:00 - [36] The sleips tank is going to suffer the most...gah ___________________________ [/url]
Saphros Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2007.06.18 22:31:00 - [37] Edited by: Saphros on 18/06/2007 22:30:35 Originally by: Hudsonn The sleips tank is going to suffer the most...gah Yeah, but when did anyone care about Minmatar pilots? We just hit 'em where it really hurts - then run like hell! ____________________________________________________________________________
The RepoMan Caldari Red Horizon Inc Red Horizon	Posted - 2007.06.18 22:54:00 - [38] umm did i miss a memo? Whats this command ship nerf you guys are crying about? lol, if you guys are talking about the eanm cpu increase and nerfs to passive tanking you truly fail at life.
Gareth Angel The Plexus Syndicate The Order of New Eden	Posted - 2007.06.18 23:03:00 - [39] Switch to active tanks - problem solved. Other folks do it too, you should give it a try, really...
Acoco Osiris Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.06.19 00:18:00 - [40] First of all, command ships are COMMAND ships, not solo OMGWTFBBQSAUCE 'pwnmobiles in my opinion. And frankly... you are whining about a 10.8% reduction in shield recharge rate. Wow. Amazing. You will never be the same again. Face it guys-90% of a beastly tank is still a beastly tank. Also, the slight increase in SPR CPU use is nothing, since from what I know, passive shield tanks aren't near the CPU limit. I've talked to my Drake-flying friend, and he is neither near the CPU cap nor losing much of his tank (he has only to scrap a BCU for an SPR to get it back to what it used to be anyways). Meanwhile, your armor tanking buddies are getting shafted, since many of them ARE by the CPU limit, and the increase in EANM CPU will push them over the top and force them to compromise something, quite possibly downgrading to an armor plate. Also, a Myrm might be able to recall its drones, true... But he loses DPS that way. Every second a drone has to fly back, dock, undock, and fly to the target again is a second it isn't doing damage. Meanwhile, nothing can do that to a Drake's missiles, except for Defender missiles which nobody uses anyways. I apologize if I am totally wrong on any points, I haven't played this game for long enough to know all that much about it. ------------------------------ One more soldier off to war... And one Velator in my hangars.

Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.19 00:32:00 - [41] Edited by: Incantare on 19/06/2007 00:31:06 In case you missed it the Caldari CS were never "solo OMGWTFBBQSAUCE pwnmobiles".
Havok Pierce Gallente Black Lance NBSI Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.19 00:49:00 - [42] Originally by: Incantare Edited by: Incantare on 19/06/2007 00:31:06 In case you missed it the Caldari CS were never "solo OMGWTFBBQSAUCE pwnmobiles". That position has been reserved for the Astarte and Eos...
Namingway Important Yet Underrated Video Game Characters	Posted - 2007.06.19 01:59:00 - [43] Change the NH model to a Drake base, give it the 7th launcher, which it needs, and give alittle grid/cpu love so it can fit said launcher, and all is forgiven CCP. Originally by: CCP kieron If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs.
Namingway Important Yet Underrated Video Game Characters	Posted - 2007.06.19 02:00:00 - [44] Originally by: lofty29 The vulture / nighthawk will still have absolutely wicked tanks. And the DPS? Now how about the other Command ships? Absolution can get a rather insane tank iirc, even compared to pure tank NH/Vulture. Originally by: CCP kieron If a member of the EVE community finds he or she cannot accept our current level of transparency, we bid you good luck in finding a company that meets your needs.
Narffy	Posted - 2007.06.19 02:30:00 - [45] Originally by: Havok Pierce Originally by: Incantare Edited by: Incantare on 19/06/2007 00:31:06 In case you missed it the Caldari CS were never "solo OMGWTFBBQSAUCE pwnmobiles". That position has been reserved for the Astarte and Eos... Yeah, that's the problem. Give the Astarte and Eos 5 blasters instead of 7 and 25m3 drone bays while we're at it.
E Vile	Posted - 2007.06.19 03:02:00 - [46] Originally by: Umek The Drake is not a command ship. The Drake also is FAR FROM OVERPOWERED. DPS sucks, and to fit a half decent tank you have train pretty much all shield skills max AND LEAVE NO ROOM FOR ANY GANK MODS. Anyone who thinks the Drake is overpowered really needs to seek out lessons on playing EVE. "The key to immortality is to first live a life worth remembering." Shohadaku New York Metal
FarScape III	Posted - 2007.06.19 03:04:00 - [47] Originally by: Killwing OK let me give everyone a little test,see who passes.Have you read the freakin patch notes or are you just looking for an excuse to P* and moan before the patch???The only thing that id getting "nerfed" in the BC class of ships and that includes command ships is the sheild recharge rate.CCP said that,the forgot to fix the Bc class of ships so now you have Joe Blow,a rather pathetic waste of flesh,sitin in a drake OR a cyclone OR a ferox or a command ship with a hand full of mods on that give him a massive amount of sheild regen.(Did I miss any other sheild tank BC's?) So what everyone who is b** about this "nerf" is scared that they are gonna have to learn how to tank.A passive tank on a shield tanker should only be there for a sniper set-up ship.An active tank is for true get in their face combat. I kmow what your saying, I wnted to say it but was too tired, thx :) But yeah it is not even a nerf, it is a corection that sgould of never happened in the 1st place. One of the ships a sail in is the Ferox and I can do L4's in it and I NEVER even thought of useing a passive tank on it. I must be the in your face kina guy huh? :) A Minmater City... Cool! My Skills
FarScape III	Posted - 2007.06.19 03:07:00 - [48] Edited by: FarScape III on 19/06/2007 03:05:59 A Minmater City... Cool! My Skills
Lunarmist	Posted - 2007.06.19 03:50:00 - [49] looked through patch notes didn't see anything about this nerf. Where did you get the info?
Snikkt Time Cube Syndicate Legionnaire Services Ltd.	Posted - 2007.06.19 04:15:00 - [50] Originally by: Lunarmist looked through patch notes didn't see anything about this nerf. Where did you get the info? It's there, keep looking. The other day, me and 8 alliance members fought a Vulture in low sec. This was 3 battleships, 2 cruisers, 2 battlecruisers, and A CARRIER. It took us about 15-20 minutes to kill that vulture. Granted, we weren't all there at once, but the point remains the same. ------------------- My opinions (ie, all of my posting here) are not my corporations. Nor should it be taken as such.

Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.06.19 04:15:00 - [51] Originally by: Lunarmist looked through patch notes didn't see anything about this nerf. Where did you get the info? Yer mom Sorry. Couldn't resist. More specifically, under "ships": Originally by: Huge-Ass Blog Battlecruiser & Command Ship shield recharge rate changed to 1400 seconds. I'd be fine with this if not for the fact that it's also nerfing Caldari command ships, which are supposed to be passive tanks (sorry, Potsey, but Caldari aren't the active shield-tanking race; that's Matari). This could've been fixed by letting the nerf stand...but increasing NH and vulture shield hitpoints somewhat. Unfortunately, it is now too late as Revelations II is being deployed at this very moment. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Amaldor Themodius	Posted - 2007.06.19 04:33:00 - [52] I am for the reduction in in shield charge time in this comming patch but like other posters here i would like to see the ships affected recieve a mild bonus to shields to preserve the elite status of the command ship archtype.. Command ships are one of the most difficult to train for / most expensive non cap ships in the game and the elite status of the ships needs to be protected (regardless of race).. Many players have invested a great deal of time and isk to become members of the elite cadre of pilots who field these vessels on the field of war. A decent setup can cost 300 - 400 mil, a wicked faction setup can run 1bil+.. When a command ship pilot fields their ship they are taking a 300 mil + gamble that they can beat the opposition. No other (non cap ship )pilot risks as much ISK as a command ship pilot so imho this should be sufficient reason to keep this class of ship as the strongest non cap ship vessels in the game. With virtually no insurance possible 1 or 2 losses will put many pilots in the poor house. My vote is to keep these ships expensive, keep the skills to qualify difficult to attain, and retain the ships as an elite vessel capable of fitting both strong tank and gank simultaneously. Command ships play an important part in the game.. they deliver FEAR.. why would anyone want that to change.. If something needs to be nerfed then nerf the price and make them more expensive to buy or to acquire the skills for, but do NOT nerf their performance. PS. While i am being opinionated, please open an extra rig slot for all T2 ships.. Makes no sense that T1 get 3 and T2 get 2.
murder one Gallente Death of Virtue Vigilance Infinitas	Posted - 2007.06.19 04:45:00 - [53] I fly a Drake, my corp mate flies a Nighthawk/Vulture. The Drake is overpowered tank wise, and the change doesn't even reduce it's tank that much. The Nighthawk/Vulture remain almost unchanged by the increase in recharge time. And active tanks work great. Because I said so...
The Protagonist	Posted - 2007.06.19 07:15:00 - [54] Heck i fly a drake as passive tank to drop cyno's as its the only ship able to AFK tank an oppertunistic bs or hac pilot for the 10 mins of nerf time (surely ccp should look at this as most cap pilots now have to factor in not only the fuel but a new cyno mule for every jump- but thats off topic). Currently the tank is sickenly good and 100% passive- better than my nighthawk as that needs cap. unless the nerf is massive it will still be nigh unbreakable. and if its uniformly big enough and applied to the whole class of ships (not just the tier 2 bc's) it will kill the entire class of ship. I'm Hope CCP will have looked at the issue properly this time and won't make command ships as useful as some of the tech 2 ammo.
Incantare Caldari Darkness Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.19 07:23:00 - [55] Originally by: The Protagonist Currently the tank is sickenly good and 100% passive- better than my nighthawk as that needs cap. That's a funny thing to say, comparing the Nighthawks active tank to the Drakes passive one, you'll find that the Nighthawk's passive tank far outdoes the Drake's, and your active tank outdoes the Drake's. Also passive tanks can be run at 0 cap but the killing the recharge is a large disadvantage, if I can't permarun a disruptor and active hardners on a ship I wouldn't say it's tank uses "no cap".
Chainsaw Plankton	Posted - 2007.06.19 08:44:00 - [56] have any of you played with the new recharge times on sisi? saw a vulture that had a sick nasty shield tank. that and the amarr/gallente command ships have active tanks so why not the caldari? (dunno how the minmatar one works :x) and the drake is fun in small gang pvp. its too bad i haven't gotten to play with it on tranq, but nothing like 7 launchers hitting unresisted hull. 250x7. got a good number of kills one night, and the tank still held up well.
kill0rbunny Alpha-Hirogen Phoenix Allianz	Posted - 2007.06.19 08:56:00 - [57] Originally by: Hudsonn The sleips tank is going to suffer the most...gah That must be because everyone and their mum fits XLarge Shield Boosters to it. I pew therefore I am.
VaderDSL Caldari Incoherent Inc Otaku Invasion	Posted - 2007.06.19 09:17:00 - [58] Edited by: VaderDSL on 19/06/2007 09:16:38 IF used for it's role, the Vulture should never have a passive tank, try running 3 warfare links with your lows filled with shield power relay II's. Try running 2 for that matter, it can't be done unles you rely on oodles of nos, and even then your cap will die eventually You can run a fully active tank a large shield booster, 2 warfare links, 5 250mm railguns permanently in the vulture if you use a cheapish faction shield booster, 4 pds II and 2 CCC rigs. Then you have a permanent tank, immense resistances and provide bonuses to your fleet.
Steyr Daghan	Posted - 2007.06.19 09:42:00 - [59] Originally by: Incantare ... Drake pilots would've been glad to trade survivability for more PvP utility. Damn right! Any day and twice on sunday. Well we got half of our wish, less survivability.


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.