EVE Search - Eagle -- 5th Turret?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Eagle -- 5th Turret?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.08.14 19:46:00 - [301] Originally by: MailFan ...I on the other hand have the practical experience. This is the problem with his argument, hes making assumptions based on an Eagles absolute peak performance on a completely hypothetical battlefield. His argument falls flat on its face when applied to Tranquility.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 20:53:00 - [302] Originally by: welsh wizard Originally by: MailFan ...I on the other hand have the practical experience. This is the problem with his argument, hes making assumptions based on an Eagles absolute peak performance on a completely hypothetical battlefield. His argument falls flat on its face when applied to Tranquility. The performance is in a similar ratio to all the other ships when training is lessened. It falls on no face when applied to Tranquility. If you want the ship to perform like the Muninn, use different ammo and you perform like the Muninn. Originally by: Liang Nuren Liang Look, if you think Dreads are for shooting battleships, then its your perogative to be wrong. In the mean time, stop trolling The reason to fly battleships is not that they instapop things, but that they do more damage. Isnt that the supposed problem with the Eagle? That it supposedly doesnt do enough damage compared to the rest of the HACs? Well if you want to shoot cruisers, then fly a Rokh, and do all the damage you want, hell you can do it before you hit tech 2 guns even. The Eagle is more than a stones throw between it and its competitors. You complain that its damage is low at short range, but when drones are suggest its shot down. You complain it doesnt have a unique short range role, but when a second tank bonus is suggested, you complain that it still needs a 5th turret. For you, it doesnt seem to be about damage in the shrot range, its about making the ship better than everything else. Null on a rokh hits 17km with 16km falloff with no tracking mods. That is far enough to hit anything coming in on a gate with no movement. Quote: , the range bonus is allegedly strong on paper not when applied to actual gameplay. Basically further reductions in speed across the board (before you bring up my other thread about missile ships and high mass), or a hitpoint reversal would ultimately have the same effect. The hitpoint buff happened, the need for speed initiative happened, the Eagle remained unchanged although its bonuses were hit significantly harder than the other hacs by both of these changes. If it is to compete at Revelations II levels it needs the extra turret with the damage bonus in place. Currently it is obsolete, a weakness in a fleet which another ship of similar or lower cost can perform as well as or better. edit: You're also using frigates of a lower level than assault frigates to make these assumptions about tech I ammo. It's a Heavy Assault Cruiser Goumindong, not a cheap ship with a poor fit designed for killing frigates. The Eagle can't kill assault frigates nevermind ships of its own size, the other hacs can. If the Eagles only role was to kill tech I frigates, interceptors and destroyers and it cost about 10 million isk I'd be inclined to agree with you. Interceptors are better than assault frigates[and require more training]. So are interdictors[and require a **** tonne more training]. Assault frigates suck, if you are flying them in fleets, you have larger problems than not understanding what ammo you should be loading into your guns. The other sniping HACs kill AFs just as well as they kill cruisers, Which is to say, terribly compared to Battleships. They really are designed to kill frigates, and they do it really really well. If you dont think they are designed to kill frigates then you have a huge path ahead of you in arguging for a damage buff of all the HACs up to battlecruiser level.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 20:53:00 - [303] Originally by: MailFan Yes, you have your theoretical numbers (which are mostly not even representative enough since you keep hammering on 1 thing and 1 thing only). I on the other hand have the practical experience. Let me guess, pratical experience shooting spike?
Liang Nuren The Refugees	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:00:00 - [304] Originally by: Goumindong In the mean time, stop trolling Take your own advice. You obviously have never flown a Caldari ship at all - because you don't know how they work on the actual battle field. And TBQFH, I'd be perfectly happy with a huge ass drone bay. Afterall, Drones = WTFBBQ. My ONLY contention in this thread is that you haven't the faintest ******* clue how to balance Caldari ships. It's bad with the missile ships, but its REALLY bad with the Eagle. Get a clue. Liang Originally by: "QproQ" When people say "Put 'stabs on your 'cane", they mean GYROSTABS"
Interval Grenadiers	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:04:00 - [305] Quote: The reason to fly battleships is not that they instapop things, but that they do more damage. Isnt that the supposed problem with the Eagle? That it supposedly doesnt do enough damage compared to the rest of the HACs? Well if you want to shoot cruisers, then fly a Rokh, and do all the damage you want, hell you can do it before you hit tech 2 guns even. So what you are saying is that I should just fly a Rokh if I want to do any damage and forget about the Eagle completely? Can we apply this unversally to all HACs if true?
Queen Hopy Your Friendly Booster Company	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:08:00 - [306] Goumingdong, really if you want to snipe frigates you should bring a harpy. Why? It does enough dmg to pop frigates in a matter of seconds, it can shoot up to 100km which is enough most of the time. Further more a harpy hardly ever gets fired on at a fleet battle so you can concentrate on doing your thing. If you are in a hac you will most likely be fired at. And yes, Eagle needs another turret.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:19:00 - [307] Originally by: Interval Quote: The reason to fly battleships is not that they instapop things, but that they do more damage. Isnt that the supposed problem with the Eagle? That it supposedly doesnt do enough damage compared to the rest of the HACs? Well if you want to shoot cruisers, then fly a Rokh, and do all the damage you want, hell you can do it before you hit tech 2 guns even. So what you are saying is that I should just fly a Rokh if I want to do any damage and forget about the Eagle completely? Can we apply this unversally to all HACs if true? Yes and no. Short range HACs are good at killing things in fast attack gangs. Long range HACs are not. Long range HACs are good at protecting large fleets from interceptors and other support. If you want to kill things that arent frigates, it wont be happening with an Ealge, Zealot, Or Muninn. Not well at least[Zealot and Muninn do less DPS than a thorax for goodness sake!]. It will work with a battleship though. You are flying a ship that is excellent at protecting large fleets, and terrible at being a battleship or a fast attack ship. But the solution proposed is not to make it a better fast attack ship[like all the rest of the HACs], but to make it overpowered when shooting the small ones. Is a 5 turret eagle better at shooting cruisers than a Rokh? Nope. So a 5 turret eagle doesnt really help you on that front. But it does overpower the ship when performing its primary role. And that is the problem.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:20:00 - [308] Edited by: Goumindong on 14/08/2007 21:21:58 Originally by: Queen Hopy Goumingdong, really if you want to snipe frigates you should bring a harpy. Why? It does enough dmg to pop frigates in a matter of seconds, it can shoot up to 100km which is enough most of the time. Further more a harpy hardly ever gets fired on at a fleet battle so you can concentrate on doing your thing. If you are in a hac you will most likely be fired at. And yes, Eagle needs another turret. \ It does half the DPS of an eagle at that distance and the people here are complaining that the eagle doesnt do enough dps. As i have shown with the graph[harpy damage is nearly identical to the cormorant], the eagle decimates them both. Saying that the Harpy is the way to snipe frigates is just plain wrong since the Eagle does twice its DPS. If people are killing Eagles in fleets, then it must mean something about their effectiveness ;)
Tovarishch Caldari Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:25:00 - [309] It's become fairly common knowledge among those with experience that the Eagle is one of the weakest HACs... and does not even fill it's role well. In this thread it's been almost unanimously agreed that it needs a boost in some regard... an additional turret hardpoint would certainly help. Goumingdong, it's not my intention to sound rude here, but you're making a fool out of yourself in this thread. Playing QuickFit does not make one an expert in ship balance. Your crusade in this thread became irrational a while ago. You make some good points on occasion, but this thread isn't one of them. All life is sacred... until the client says otherwise.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:29:00 - [310] Originally by: Tovarishch It's become fairly common knowledge among those with experience that the Eagle is one of the weakest HACs... and does not even fill it's role well. In this thread it's been almost unanimously agreed that it needs a boost in some regard... an additional turret hardpoint would certainly help. Goumingdong, it's not my intention to sound rude here, but you're making a fool out of yourself in this thread. Playing QuickFit does not make one an expert in ship balance. Your crusade in this thread became irrational a while ago. You make some good points on occasion, but this thread isn't one of them. Look at the graphs. Its damage is fine. If it needs a boost then the muninn and Zealot both need 6 turrets. It should be pretty obvious that those suggestions are ludicrous.
Liang Nuren The Refugees	Posted - 2007.08.14 21:36:00 - [311] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Tovarishch It's become fairly common knowledge among those with experience that the Eagle is one of the weakest HACs... and does not even fill it's role well. In this thread it's been almost unanimously agreed that it needs a boost in some regard... an additional turret hardpoint would certainly help. Goumingdong, it's not my intention to sound rude here, but you're making a fool out of yourself in this thread. Playing QuickFit does not make one an expert in ship balance. Your crusade in this thread became irrational a while ago. You make some good points on occasion, but this thread isn't one of them. Look at the graphs. Its damage is fine. If it needs a boost then the muninn and Zealot both need 6 turrets. It should be pretty obvious that those suggestions are ludicrous. Fly the ship. Just sayin'. Liang Originally by: "QproQ" When people say "Put 'stabs on your 'cane", they mean GYROSTABS"
Hyuuga Veralis Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.08.14 22:31:00 - [312] It is quite clear that if they give the Eagle a 5th slot it will break Eve just like the Hawk changes did.
Lord Loom Loom Service Derek Knows Us	Posted - 2007.08.14 22:38:00 - [313] Originally by: Hyuuga Veralis It is quite clear that if they give the Eagle a 5th slot it will break Eve just like the Hawk changes did. just like the Rokh made all other battleships obsolete for fleet fights, AMIRITE? ---------- KEEP TRY!!!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 22:45:00 - [314] Edited by: Goumindong on 14/08/2007 22:45:34 Originally by: Lord Loom Originally by: Hyuuga Veralis It is quite clear that if they give the Eagle a 5th slot it will break Eve just like the Hawk changes did. just like the Rokh made all other battleships obsolete for fleet fights, AMIRITE? If battleships were primarily, or ought to be primarily shooting tech 1 ammo it certianly would be.
Daald Grenadiers	Posted - 2007.08.14 22:50:00 - [315] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 14/08/2007 22:45:34 Originally by: Lord Loom Originally by: Hyuuga Veralis It is quite clear that if they give the Eagle a 5th slot it will break Eve just like the Hawk changes did. just like the Rokh made all other battleships obsolete for fleet fights, AMIRITE? If battleships were primarily, or ought to be primarily shooting tech 1 ammo it certianly would be. So what you are saying is that the Rokh while great on paper does not translate that greatness on Tranquility?
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 23:00:00 - [316] Edited by: Goumindong on 14/08/2007 23:01:16 Originally by: Daald Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 14/08/2007 22:45:34 Originally by: Lord Loom Originally by: Hyuuga Veralis It is quite clear that if they give the Eagle a 5th slot it will break Eve just like the Hawk changes did. just like the Rokh made all other battleships obsolete for fleet fights, AMIRITE? If battleships were primarily, or ought to be primarily shooting tech 1 ammo it certianly would be. So what you are saying is that the Rokh while great on paper does not translate that greatness on Tranquility? No, because the Rokh is not especialy great on paper unless your fleet contains entirely Rokhs or tech 2 ammo didnt exist. The eagle has no such stipulation since tech 2 ammo is not the ammo you ought to be using, nor is locking range capped below its optiaml. The most important part is that tech 2 ammo is not nearly so important to its operations.
Hyuuga Veralis Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.08.14 23:14:00 - [317] Originally by: Goumindong Interceptors are better than assault frigates[and require more training]. So are interdictors[and require a ** tonne more training]. Assault frigates suck, if you are flying them in fleets, you have larger problems than not understanding what ammo you should be loading into your guns. The pre-reqs for inties and AFs are the same amount of levels/ranks. They are equal as far as training goes. It's no secret that AFs sucks, lets not forget that AFs still only have 3 bonuses whereas all other T2 ships have 4**.
Hyuuga Veralis Pator Tech School	Posted - 2007.08.14 23:20:00 - [318] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Tovarishch It's become fairly common knowledge among those with experience that the Eagle is one of the weakest HACs... and does not even fill it's role well. In this thread it's been almost unanimously agreed that it needs a boost in some regard... an additional turret hardpoint would certainly help. Goumingdong, it's not my intention to sound rude here, but you're making a fool out of yourself in this thread. Playing QuickFit does not make one an expert in ship balance. Your crusade in this thread became irrational a while ago. You make some good points on occasion, but this thread isn't one of them. Look at the graphs. Its damage is fine. If it needs a boost then the muninn and Zealot both need 6 turrets. It should be pretty obvious that those suggestions are ludicrous. No, enough of the graphs, look at the reality of how the ship performs. You're starting to sound like people who scream 'omgwtfbbq torps hit 100km and have decent dps, NERF NERF NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRF!!!'
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.14 23:38:00 - [319] Originally by: Hyuuga Veralis Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Tovarishch It's become fairly common knowledge among those with experience that the Eagle is one of the weakest HACs... and does not even fill it's role well. In this thread it's been almost unanimously agreed that it needs a boost in some regard... an additional turret hardpoint would certainly help. Goumingdong, it's not my intention to sound rude here, but you're making a fool out of yourself in this thread. Playing QuickFit does not make one an expert in ship balance. Your crusade in this thread became irrational a while ago. You make some good points on occasion, but this thread isn't one of them. Look at the graphs. Its damage is fine. If it needs a boost then the muninn and Zealot both need 6 turrets. It should be pretty obvious that those suggestions are ludicrous. No, enough of the graphs, look at the reality of how the ship performs. You're starting to sound like people who scream 'omgwtfbbq torps hit 100km and have decent dps, NERF NERF NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRF!!!' Yes, but with torps there is a legitimate reason for why the "decent dps" isnt decent. Is there some sort of damage delay, tracking issues, or other stipulation that the eagle suffers from that the Muninn, and Zealot dont?
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.08.14 23:41:00 - [320] Edited by: welsh wizard on 14/08/2007 23:43:13 Originally by: Goumindong ..... Whats your point? Range is a hopeless advantage without high damage since the hitpoint/speed buffs. I'm still pretty sure you have absolutely no idea just how long the Eagle takes to kill a ship that isn't a tech I frigate/destroyer. We're talking 20-30 seconds for a relatively fast interceptor (or never if its too fast and the pilot is remotely intelligent), 30s+ for an assault frigate and atleast 1m30s for a tech I cruiser with any kind of tank. Now couple in all the time wasted shooting opponents that are too fast/too tough to bother shooting. Now think about this for a minute, no really, think. Just how small is the niche that the Eagle is able to fill? -The Muninn gets by with better ammo selection, massive alpha, a drone bay and far better speed/agility. In short it is able to improvise any given situation. -The Zealot again is a fast hac, it murders fast frigates with its huge raw damage, fast frigates that generally rely on passive shield tank to live through a fight, they don't last long to focussed em/thermal damage. Both of these ships have a far easier time displacing small ships than the Eagle. Trust me I have experience in all three. Now the Eagle has no way to improvise, all the pilot is able to do is hit F1-F4 and hope that a) It isn't noticed by a fast tackler, a 10km/s interceptor/dictor (not uncommon these days) is on that defenceless Eagle at 200km in 25 seconds. If the Eagle pilot is lucky enough to have chosen a tackled, slow tech I frigate/destroyer as his primary target he may be blessed with a kill before being incapacitated and ultimately deaded. b) He/she isn't immediately removed from the fight by a dampening platform. c) the target is too silly to warp out/is tackled and webbed in a bubble. d) ...a number of other criteria that need to be met if the Eagle is to have any kind of impact. In summary the Eagle is poor at its supposed role and extremely poor at any other operation. It is a better blaster ship than it is a rail ship because it can make use of its large blaster range and heavy shield tank. Theres a number of crucial factors that you keep ignoring in your posts: a) The relative worthlessness of DPS in comparison to alpha damage when applied to the Eagles preffered role. b) The relative worthlessness of the Eagles poor-moderate DPS when applied to a scenario since the hitpoint buff. c) " " " " applied to a scenario since the need for speed initiative. d) Ignorance of the time frames in which the Eagle is able to make any kind of difference in a generic battle on tranquility. e) Ignorance of just how small the Eagles niche role is and how useful it is when applied to Revelations Eve combat. There are other ways to fix the Eagle: eg,, A speed nerf across the board, a reversal of the hitpoint buff or a complete change of role (different bonuses + drone bay). I'm fully supportive of all three as an alternative. Personally I like the idea of an Eagle as a sniper ship, but currently it just is not powerful enough to pull it off in a fashion that supports its status as a Heavy Assault Cruiser. I mean why not fly a Ferox? It does precisely the same damage + it has a drone bay. There really is no reason to fly the Eagle ahead of the Ferox. You've already stated your support for a Ferox with 2 extra turrets, where the hell would that leave the Eagle!?
Sorja E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:24:00 - [321] Goumindog, drugs are bad, hmmkay? ____________________ A gentleman is someone who can play the bagpipe, but who does not.
IamBen Caldari Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:27:00 - [322] Originally by: welsh wizard Originally by: Djerin The Eagle is a worthwhile HAC to fly. Just dont use it against heavy targets and without a fleet or think outside of the box.. ie,, its not as worthwhile flying it as the other hacs. Exactly. If a ship cant handle other ships in its class by itself (without ridiculous mods/implants) then its not a very good ship. Give the eagle an extra turret :)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:29:00 - [323] Edited by: Goumindong on 15/08/2007 00:32:17 Edited by: Goumindong on 15/08/2007 00:29:11 Quote: We're talking 20-30 seconds for a relatively fast interceptor (or never if its too fast and the pilot is remotely intelligent) ~18 seconds for a crusader with CN iorn. And no, its not outrunning the tech 1 ammo. 7 Seconds for a crusader with CN thorium. .5 second behind the Muninn. Quote: -The Muninn gets by with better ammo selection, massive alpha, a drone bay and far better speed/agility. In short it is able to improvise any given situation. Its .5 seconds faster to kill an interceptor with its ammo of choice. Its infinity seconds behind the Eagle at longer ranges. Quote: -The Zealot again is a fast hac, it murders fast frigates with its huge raw damage, fast frigates that generally rely on passive shield tank to live through a fight, they don't last long to focussed em/thermal damage. BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. Quote: a) It isn't noticed by a fast tackler, a 10km/s interceptor/dictor (not uncommon these days) is on that defenceless Eagle at 200km in 25 seconds, less if hes using this wonderful tech I ammo you keep banging on about (which incidentally still won't hit an 8km/s+ inty who knows what hes doing). If the Eagle pilot is lucky enough to have chosen a tackled, slow tech I frigate/destroyer as his primary target he may be blessed with a kill before being incapacitated and ultimately deaded. An 8km/s inty making 4000m/s transversal will be hit 80% of the time at 105km by an eagle and close at ~6km/s. 5km/s trans will close at about 5.5-5km/s and be hit 80% at 135km. 6km/s trans will close 4km/s and be hit 80% of the time at 150km. 7km/s trans will be hit 80% of the time at 165, and close at about 2kms. No, the tech 1 ammo is still the way to go. If the inty is charging into the fray its going to die. You are exaggerating. Quote: b) He/she isn't immediately removed from the fight by a dampening platform. This applies to all ships. Why should it not apply to an eagle? Quote: c) the target is too silly to warp out/is tackled and webbed in a bubble. interdictors/interceptors that are 100-200km and warp out arent a thread to the fleet. Quote: a) The relative worthlessness of DPS in comparison to alpha damage when applied to the Eagles preffered role. A whole half a second... And if the Muninn misses once, then the Eagle wins hands down. Quote: b) The relative worthlessness of the Eagles poor-moderate DPS when applied to a scenario since the hitpoint buff. c) " " " " applied to a scenario since the need for speed initiative. So we need 6 turret muninns and 6 turret Zealots? Quote: But, the Ferox! A ferox with 7 turrets would still do less DPS than a 4 turret eagle with faction ammo at 100km. Eagle does 194. A 7 turret Ferox would do 181.7 dps. Quote: There are other ways to fix the Eagle: eg,, A speed nerf across the board, a reversal of the hitpoint buff or a complete change of role (different bonuses + drone bay). I'm fully supportive of all three as an alternative. Yes, a few of those are good ideas, which is one reason why when i proposed a change it was a 25 cube drone bay, a change from the damage bonus to a Shield hit point bonus, and an increase from 4-5 turrets with commensurate fitting[such that overall dps is not increased]. Now it snipes just as well[with better close range support] and is a super-heavy tackler with decent DPS[450 DPS, 60k effective shield hit points, 1300m/s possible on same ship] with the right fitting. I do not think the eagle should have 5 turrets and a damge bonus, I do not think that it couldnt use a change, like many of the other ships in the game.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:29:00 - [324] There is no need to character assassinate him folks. His arguments are very persuasive and the majority of the time they're correct. Just not this time (in pretty much everyones opinion :P). If you can't be arsed replying in a constructive manner then there is probably no point replying at all.
welsh wizard 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:42:00 - [325] Originally by: Goumindong ...interdictors/interceptors that are 100-200km and warp out arent a thread to the fleet. and other arguments which have little basis in reality You need to play Revelations II a bit more Goumindong. I'm positively soaking my pants in anticipation of taking on your wonderful gang full of sniping Eagles 'Winning the day!'. You seem to be a bloke who takes pride in logic and yet you reach your conclusions without ever having flown the ship in question. Simpily experience > mathematical conclusions applied to ideal hypothetical scenarios. Your Eagle doesn't do anything in practice.
Alyssee	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:43:00 - [326] Originally by: welsh wizard There is no need to character assassinate him folks. His arguments are very persuasive and the majority of the time they're correct. Just not this time (in pretty much everyones opinion :P). If you can't be arsed replying in a constructive manner then there is probably no point replying at all. There is no need to charcater assasinate him *but* he keeps posting in this thread with constantly more ridiculous, narrow, theoretical arguments. Gounmidong thinks he is right and will not be convinced otherwise, he downplays or flat out ignores the aspects in which the Eagle is inferior to the Munnin and Zealot. At this point he is contributing nothing worthwile to the thread. Here's a hint Gounmidong: rehashing the same arguments a thousand times will not make you right.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.15 00:58:00 - [327] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 15/08/2007 00:51:20 Originally by: Goumindong ...interdictors/interceptors that are 100-200km and warp out arent a thread to the fleet. and other arguments which have little basis in reality You need to play Revelations II a bit more Goumindong. I'm positively soaking my pants in anticipation of taking on your wonderful gang full of sniping Eagles 'Winning the day!'. You seem to be a bloke who takes pride in logic and yet you reach your conclusions without ever having flown the ship in question. Simpily, experience > mathematical conclusions applied to ideal hypothetical scenarios (without acknowledging the mechanical complexity of the system in question). Any professor of the sciences will agree with that, trust me. Your Eagle won't achieve much in practice. Just like all the other niche roles, a fleet does not need to be entirely composed of the ships, but i apreciate the attempt at strawman. If you want the eagle to perform like a Muninn in a fleet[and much better than a Zealot], you can. Just load CN thorium. If you want the eagle to hit farther, load CN iorn. If you want the Eagle to be an anti-support sniper that so outclasses the others that they have no reason to bring them to the battle, then i wont support it.
KD.Fluffy The Refugees	Posted - 2007.08.15 02:31:00 - [328] Edited by: KD.Fluffy on 15/08/2007 02:33:04 Edited by: KD.Fluffy on 15/08/2007 02:32:43 Edited by: KD.Fluffy on 15/08/2007 02:30:46 Quote: Not only am i supportive of tests on sisi, but ive put the god damn numbers in this thread, on this very page, with visual representation for you to see just how strong the range bonus really is The only numbers you've posted are comparing an eagle snipnig interceptors. So for the one and only role of sniping interceptors... an eagle just barely beats the others. But then it has no option of doing great damage, or coming in close with good speed and throwing a point on or anything like that. It can BARELY outperorm the others in sniping interceptors. JOy!!!!!!!11 Quote: Just like all the other niche roles, a fleet does not need to be entirely composed of the ships, but i apreciate the attempt at strawman. If you want the eagle to perform like a Muninn in a fleet[and much better than a Zealot], you can. Just load CN thorium. If you want the eagle to hit farther, load CN iorn. If you want the Eagle to be an anti-support sniper that so outclasses the others that they have no reason to bring them to the battle, then i wont support it. So what about the other ships.. they can compete with the eagel in its 'niche' role. They come damn close to outdoing it in its one specific purpose... the problem though, is these other ships can do a myriad of other things, while the eagle is stuck barely outperforming the others in sniping intes..... its really not a balance.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.08.15 03:31:00 - [329] Edited by: Goumindong on 15/08/2007 03:31:40 Originally by: KD.Fluffy The only numbers you've posted are comparing an eagle snipnig interceptors. So for the one and only role of sniping interceptors... an eagle just barely beats the others. But then it has no option of doing great damage, or coming in close with good speed and throwing a point on or anything like that. It can BARELY outperorm the others in sniping interceptors. JOy!!!!!!!11 Barely? It is equal with the others at ranges that matter, and it can also operate farther than the others. That is like saying the Myrmidon just barely outperforms the other battlecruisers in the short range, or the Thorax just barely outperforms the Omen/Moa/Caracal. Quote: So what about the other ships.. they can compete with the eagel in its 'niche' role. They come damn close to outdoing it in its one specific purpose... the problem though, is these other ships can do a myriad of other things, while the eagle is stuck barely outperforming the others in sniping intes..... its really not a balance. 1. These ships do not do a myriad of other things, they are clearly outclassed in those things by other ships. And they do not do these things at the same time in any significant capacity. 2. They dont compete with the Eagle in its role, both of them are slightly better in a small range[Zealot: 50-80km] and the other is slightly better between another small range[Muninn: 80-100km(drones wont hit until the inty is at 40km, and wont actualy hit most fast support anyway, both the Muninn and current Eagle have the same number of launchers)], and then the eagle is terribly better in excess of that range.
KD.Fluffy The Refugees	Posted - 2007.08.15 04:32:00 - [330] Edited by: KD.Fluffy on 15/08/2007 04:31:43 Quote: They dont compete with the Eagle in its role, both of them are slightly better in a small range[Zealot: 50-80km] and the other is slightly better between another small range[Muninn: 80-100km(drones wont hit until the inty is at 40km, and wont actualy hit most fast support anyway, both the Muninn and current Eagle have the same number of launchers)], and then the eagle is terribly better in excess of that range. once again... your assuming the only thing worth shooting at is intercpetors....... I'm sorry but therea re other ships in the game, and there is also t2 ammo in the game. The fact you choose to ignore these facts is beyond me, but these things do exist. Oh well, ccp im begging you to consider a few caladri buffs.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 61 :: 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.