EVE Search - time to fix caldari?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

time to fix caldari?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 09:51:00 - [1] Originally by: d026 Originally by: The ArchWarder Amarr need seeing to before caldari even gets on the radar screen tbh you just got iwinueberhax ships and u still complaining?:) im allready training amar firg V btw:) 3-5 amar ships get half-caldari bonuses and they become iwinueberhax and u still complaining about caldari ships? for caldari pilots to understand what amarr pilots suffer i suggest the following changes: missiles should only do kinetic dmg and no other dmg, so caldari ships will do only 1 type of dmg kinetic dmg bonuses of caldari ships should be removed and replaced with +5% cap recharge rate per ship lvl cap boosters should be low slot all caldari ships should have their low slots reduced to 1-3 EW modules should be changed to low slot shield extenders should add mass instead of sig radius shield shouldn't regenerate, and should be solid like armor, so no more passive nos-proof tanking only THEN you would understand what flying amarr ships is like
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 10:09:00 - [2] Originally by: d026 Originally by: VanNostrum Originally by: d026 Originally by: The ArchWarder Amarr need seeing to before caldari even gets on the radar screen tbh you just got iwinueberhax ships and u still complaining?:) im allready training amar firg V btw:) 3-5 amar ships get half-caldari bonuses and they become iwinueberhax and u still complaining about caldari ships? for caldari pilots to understand what amarr pilots suffer i suggest the following changes: missiles should only do kinetic dmg and no other dmg, so caldari ships will do only 1 type of dmg kinetic dmg bonuses of caldari ships should be removed and replaced with +5% cap recharge rate per ship lvl cap boosters should be low slot all caldari ships should have their low slots reduced to 1-3 EW modules should be changed to low slot shield extenders should add mass instead of sig radius shield shouldn't regenerate, and should be solid like armor, so no more passive nos-proof tanking only THEN you would understand what flying amarr ships WAS like i fixed that for you... you still don't get amarr != khanid please read races? or better yet check out the ships and learn which ones are amarr and which ones (how many) are khanid?
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 11:06:00 - [3] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton i was going to try to make sense of what VanNostrum said, but i cant do it. the game doesn't consist of the ships only you fly your ships/race doesn't have a priority to be "fixed" if you can't make sense of this, go play some more, don't litter the forums with this "fix caldari" garbage
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 11:28:00 - [4] Originally by: d026 Quote: missiles should only do kinetic dmg and no other dmg, so caldari ships will do only 1 type of dmg Lasers do em/therm so why should we be restricted to 1 dmg type? also we have kinetic bonuses on most of our ships. that means 50% les dmg for every other dmg type we fire.- this is quite significant imho. and amarr ships don't have an EM bonus, yet crystals do 70% EM 30% thermal dmg mostly Quote: Quote: cap boosters should be low slot i love this idea:) you wouldn't, if all caldari ships had 1-3 low slots, like amarr ships have 1-3 med slots Quote: Quote: EW modules should be changed to low slot NEED! Also make ECM not chancebased such as all other ew:) yes, i'd like to see how you'd fit ANY EW module in your 1-3 low slot Quote: Quote: shield extenders should add mass instead of sig radius If you give them the equivalent HP of Armor plates sure, should also make shield extenders use as much PG too LSE II = 2625 hp, 165 PG = 16 hp/PG 1600mm Rolled Tungsten = 4200 hp, 500 PG = 8.4 hp/PG Quote: Quote: shield shouldn't regenerate, and should be solid like armor, so no more passive nos-proof tanking As long as all Shield modules are lowslot:) uhmm...no? caldari ships already have more med slots, plus you wouldn't want that if all caldari ships had their lows reduced to 1-3 Quote: Anyway you get everythign so completely wrong it scares me rly why? this is what amarr pilots deal every time they fly an amarr ship cant use EW modules, can't fit web+mwd+scram+booster due to few med slots deal 70% one type of dmg cant do nos-proof-passive-self-regenerating tank cant fire without cap lose speed with plates it is scary indeed, but i am right
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 11:58:00 - [5] Originally by: putukas Edited by: putukas on 05/08/2007 11:17:58 My char is Caldari/Amarr char. Both are quite well maxed. All t2 lasers/missiles armor/shield hardeners. And i can say Amarr has been much much much better then Caldari in pvp. I have'nt used any caldari ship in fleets for ages, last i used raven was before they nerfed missiles. Im also fleetcommander and i dont wanna see scorpions/ravens in fleets. If possible i would have turret ships. EW is so nerfed that i have'nt seen any scorpions in fleets. I wont even take them as primary in enemy fleet coz i know they cant jam sht anyway. If you surf around on killboards and look when was caldari ships last used you'd be amazed :p on our kb i belive they are not even in top30. Somebody told that caldari has ONLY ew ships in game. How can you say that. Ever used dampners on lachesis/arazu/curse/pilgrim ?? thats no EW you say?? I'd better use dampner bonus ships then rook or falcon or scorpion. I dont even wanna talk about caldari capitals. If you dont use faction modules they all suck big time. Revelation, moros, nagflar all of them are better then phoenix. Revelation with its insane tank, moros with hes drones and damage, nagflar with insane damage. Talk about Carriers? Thanatos/Archon are only carriers there is. All others are so nerfed. You whining about shield recharge? Have you ever fitted any shield tank??? Caldari does'nt have ANY pvp capable ship in game. And when malediction get bonus's even flying crow is useless. If i could back in time i would have trained for gallente. Gallente has the most best ships ingame. I dont know even one bad gallente ship. Caldari is only for PVE nothing else. Tho Caldari should be PVP race shoul'nt it? you bought your char on ebay or something? how on earth is malediction gonna make crow obselete? crow has range bonus on rockets and light missiles while malediction will be using rockets within web*and nos range malediction will be a joke! you say you're a fleet commander and you won't allow a nighthawk in your "fleet" cos it has no turrets? you fly abso instead? you must be joking ever got attacked by a vaga in your zealot? or in any amarr ship? ever got attacked by a vaga in your cerb? which would you prefer? talking about capitals, i see more chimeras than any other carrier around we've had enough ppl training amarr cruiser V to fly a curse only, then saying amarr ships are good for pvp or showing their killboards as a proof, which only actually shows curse was kind of op due to nos imbalance
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 12:47:00 - [6] Originally by: Ogul Originally by: General Apocalypse Originally by: Ogul Originally by: VanNostrum ever got attacked by a vaga in your zealot? or in any amarr ship? ever got attacked by a vaga in your cerb? which would you prefer? How many vagas have you killed in a cerb? And reverse how many solo vagas can kill a cerb ? Both ship unless they are fitter in some wonderous way draw to a halt , ammo halt usualy Precisely, a solo vaga would not engage a cerb, and the vaga can choose its fights. It is an empty argument right from the start. I would agree that Caldari would need a bit of boost for pvp purposes, but since I have trained Gallente in the meantime, I don't really care anymore. a vaga wouldn't pick on a cerb but it would pick on a zealot/omen any day so it is not an empty arguement after all cerb is a viable ship, compared to it's amarr counterparts when you compare each caldari ship with the amarr ones only curse would be the better one in it's class
VanNostrum Cataphract Securities	Posted - 2007.08.05 13:18:00 - [7] my first char was a caldari already and i've flown them all except the nighthawk and capitals with this char i trained amarr and minny, but i am just trying to be objective and saying that amarr is the worst of all, and i don't care people telling me to give up amarr and fly minny, i just want some balance and more variety in game why forget the crappy races/ships in game when there is so many, and add new ships into game? i'd like all races and ships to be decent, not equal but worth flying, worth training for amarr ships need change, along with some caldari ships but i'd completely give higher priority to amarr fix before anything else amarr complete revamp missile velocity and explosion velocity improvement (should fix a lot of caldari problems) along with removing caldari ships' kinetic dmg bonus and replacing with rof or simple dmg bonus drone AI fix some gallente ships adjustments these fixes are essential for a balanced game

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.