| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Alaric Faelen
Aquila Venatici
Bringers of Death.
44
   |
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:13:00 -
[31] - Quote
I disagree with the entire premise.
Anyone can train anything, there there is no 'favorite'. It's clearly no secret which ships, modules, or weapons hold some advantage at any given time in an ever-evolving game. Especially when something new is added and unexpected fall out occurs. Train missiles, train guns, quit whining.
Drakes are very good for PvE, and tank well in PvP- but missiles carry limitations as well. In a world dominated by high alpha strikes from outside scram range- missiles are always panned in favor of insta-damage weapons. And even a nano-BC is never going to keep up with a decently flown frigate, nor should the fight be that one sided.....
I fly drakes around and often die just as fast as in frigates. Eventually everyone that undocks, dies.
ECM is an even better example of balance- it's all or nothing- it can either be a win-button or a waste of a ship. No one puts a single random ECM in a mid- the chances of being attacked by that one race out of four is terrible odds- and that's just to get a change to jam!!! Multi=spec's are a waste of a slot better spent on tank.
only dedicated ECM birds are really worth outfitting with it, usually in a rainbow, and if you haven't flown a Blackbird- let me tell you that you might spend hours playing Eve flying around to last exactly 5 seconds in a fight when you are primaried with no tank of your own.
It's just like Logi- it's really strong if you use it and have specialized ships for it- but useless on it's own or outside of tight parameters.
The problem is poor FC skills. A call for ships rather than CHARACTERS is the first sign of Fail in an FC. YOU ARE NOT YOUR SHIP. I'd rather people fly what they are actually good at, than think of them as little more than sentient BC-sized drones.
After that- blobs are sign number two your FC needs replaced. Eve works remarkably like the real world Navies where all ship sizes are represented and fill specific roles.
I get that with poor fleet turn outs, DPS is at a premium- but a good FC will look at what his fleet is made of- THEN work up a plan based on that- rather than just demand everyone fly one thing.
My biggest pet peeve in this game in fact- FC's that mistake players for talking drones.
|
Alara IonStorm
1434
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:14:00 -
[32] - Quote
Mars Theran wrote:
Go to 1:12 and watch. 3 Drakes vs. Deimos that's already been fighting for a bit.
Their you have the number one reason not to only pack Kinetic Missiles on your Drake. 
Bet Orbiting at 1km did not help much ether against those Blaster Boats.
|
Hoskoal Ricks
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:25:00 -
[33] - Quote
Garmon wrote:caldari needs a complete overhaul, apart from the drake and the tengu, their ships are terrible when the alternatives are considered
The gospel of my lord. Thanks be to Garmon. |
Xpaulusx
Hosti1e Traff1c Control
15
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:30:00 -
[34] - Quote
Garmon wrote:caldari needs a complete overhaul, apart from the drake and the tengu, their ships are terrible when the alternatives are considered
^ This, yes and instead of nerfing an entire race, bring the other races up to snuff, caldari really have no front line effective combat pvp battleship like the malmstrom, tempest Apoc, abby, etc. There HACs are almost never seen in small gangs. If there going to nerf the Drake & Tengu, they better dam well fix our other ships and missles as well. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
2616
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:32:00 -
[35] - Quote
I for one welcome the prospect of a RoF-bonused, velocity bonused Drake.
BRB buying HAM II launchers 
Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
supr3m3justic3
Imperium Technologies
F0RCEFUL ENTRY
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:34:00 -
[36] - Quote
LOL @ everyone in this thread whinning about drakes....
Caldari is the worst PVP race to fly with, the only ships they have are Drakes and falcons.
And because of caldari being the most popular race, the ships are overly used...well atleast the drake is.
There are easily 2x as many pilots flying minmitar ships than caldari. Even though 1/2 prolly started out as caldari, like me.
I fly caldari, min, and gall.....
and to say the talos needs a buff...HAHAHAHAHAHA, sounds like CCP needs to play thier own game.
|
JC Anderson
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
157
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:49:00 -
[37] - Quote
They should just change every single ship in the game to a Rifter.
Then we wont have to have these debates anymore. |
Hanoch Wheel
Free Wheeling Industries
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:50:00 -
[38] - Quote
Val MeR wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/council/transcripts/2011/CSM_CCP_Mettings_7-9_12_2011.pdf
It seems like CCP is favoring Minmatar, while CSM is made up of Gallente... well, of course its all made in the name of "balance", but see for yourself if you like those small changes:
GÇ£CCP and the CSM discussed the new Tier 3 battlecruisers. CCP noted that the Talos needs adjustment upwards; the CSM noted that the Naga is too powerful compared to the Talos. CCP acknowledged this, citing the difficulty of finding a role for blasters as well as the power of passive shield tanking.GÇ¥
Naga is overpowered? Power of passive shield tanking on a Naga?
GÇ£CCP and the CSM agreed that remote sensor dampeners have been rendered useless and need rebalancing. CCP wants to look into this, as well as the damping ships themselves. The CSM also discussed the merits (or lack thereof) of ECM.GÇ¥
Yeah, Caldari are unworthy of ECM magicGǪ
GÇ£The CSM and CCP both acknowledged the need to rebalance Drake, which GÇÿdoes everything too too wellGÇÖ. CCP is considering giving it a more offensive role like Raven or Caracal where it would lose the shield resistance bonus and the 5% Kinetic damage bonus and instead gain a rate of fire bonus and a missile velocity bonus. The CSM vehemently approved of this idea. CCP and the CSM also agreed that this possible change to the Drake would help add more uniqueness to the Nighthawk, which is presently overshadowed entirely by the Drake.GÇ¥
Nerf Drake, so it can become as GǣdesirableGǥ as Gǣoffensive Raven or CaracalGǥGǪ NightHawk will finally GǣshineGǥGǪ at least when compared to a NEW "offensive Drake."
I was a bit stunned by this as well. Mostly I was pleased by the CSM minutes, but this stuck out like a sore thumb.
Not that it is news that the Drake is a very capable ship. But that it is being singled out as apparently the only ship worthy of the nerfbat at this time. While simultaneously people decrying how bad missiles suck, the Drake missile boat is overpowered? The only reason its not a failboat is that its got shield to spare while slowly dishing out volleys of decent damage.
Its not like people are calling Caldari the Win-dari or anything. Drake fleets are not rampaging across the known universe in unstoppable masses. Nerf the Drake and leave the Cane alone? Not that the cane really needs it with Tier 3 battlecruisers around.
Comparisons against a T2 battlecruiser seem also surreal, the amount of time it takes to train into Nighthawk is comparable to a Tengu. No one is going to decide not to fly a Nighthawk because they prefer a Drake; it is going to be a decision between a Nighthawk or Tengu.
The Drake is one of the few joys a young Caldari pilot gets to look forward to. Nerf that and there will likely be a drastic decline in Caldari pilots who are not exactly the vast majority.
I don't get the perception that the Talos needs a boost over the Naga either. At first it seemed like the Naga was better with the superior range, but more recently the consensus is that the Naga is weaker at least solo, due to lack of drones and slower tracking. I suspect the CSM's fleet focus may be the reason the think the Talos is not so capable. Talos could use a touch more speed I think, maybe. Help it get to blaster ranges, but aside from that, maybe the Naga needs a boost (drone bay?).
Generally speaking, I think nerfings should be avoided unless ABSOLUTELY necessary, continued mild buffs to the weaker ships are far more interesting, and simulate a wartime economy and march of technology much better.
Taking away both Drake's bonuses and changing them is going to lead to a whiplash of Drake pilots feeling abused and betrayed. If the Drake must be nerfed I would advocate subtlety, rather than respec'ing the ship into a different role. |
Hanoch Wheel
Free Wheeling Industries
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 22:53:00 -
[39] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:I for one welcome the prospect of a RoF-bonused, velocity bonused Drake. BRB buying HAM II launchers
Would it be wrong to characterize this proposed nerfing as HAM-fisted? |
Hoskoal Ricks
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:08:00 -
[40] - Quote
The drake tank nerf isn't something we should bemoan. The silly part is the lack of address to the rest of caldari after taking away the shining stars in their lineup. Quite literally the tengu is the only best-in-class ship caldari have left when the drake and falcon are out of the picture. The rokh, for all it's current hype (thanks to PL) will not take up that much slack. The naga fills a niche the size of a thimble. Remaining hybrid platforms run from moderately useful (harpy) to abhorrent garbage (eagle). Other missile platforms follow a similar trend, but they inhabit niche roles that are tiny or non-existent themselves.
|
Hainnz
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
54
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:13:00 -
[41] - Quote
Nothing has happened yet. :) I'm going to operate on the assumption that CCP aren't stupid. |
Fredfredbug4
Kings of Kill
EVE Animal Control
22
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:17:00 -
[42] - Quote
Although I like my shiny Caldari ships, I would much rather see further boost to Gallente. Specifically the Drone Boats. I'd like to see them do something other then say "herp derp" while their drones do a minor amount of DPS. |
Ursula LeGuinn
65
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:23:00 -
[43] - Quote
I'd honestly started to forget that the other races even had T1 BCs.
Even so, I still don't think the Drake should be nerfed... but what will be, will be. Hopefully the Myrmidon will be un-nerfed at the same time, and new players will finally recognize that word (Myrmidon) as actually being a ship you can fly in EVE again.
"The EVE forums are intended to provide a warm, friendly atmosphere for the EVE community."-áGÇö-áEVElopedia |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
553
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:24:00 -
[44] - Quote
I am about one hundred THOUSAND percent against any kind of change to the drake.
Are you out of your mind?! The resistance bonus the drake gets are the REASON to get newer players to train the battlecruiser skill and a nice spread of other skill. The drake IS the whole idea of "train subskills first THEN ship"
Do NOT do this CCP. The drake is NOT overpowered. It takes extreme training to use right! |
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:42:00 -
[45] - Quote
Soulpirate wrote:Balancing based on PvP is bad for ANY game. Well, unless it's an FPS and has no other game play.
Balancing based on PvP is the only way to balance in a PvP-oriented game. I'd agree with you, if all we had were instanced fights; but that is most definitely not the case.
PvE is easy. What am I fighting? What am I going to fit? What ship will I use? 3 questions easily answered, and the rest is history.
edit: Balancing based on the Bolb is wrong. Nothing matters when there is a blob, and balance is irrelevent, unless it is relevent to SuperCapitals and Titans. |
Lord Aliventi
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:43:00 -
[46] - Quote
Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
But in all reality drakes don't need to be nerfed. One of my corp members recently went to the drone regions in a dram and soloed 3 ratting drakes. If you all stopped flying your Canes without RF EMP and put projectile turrets on your Winmadons so you could use RF EMP with excellent drone bonuses you wouldn't have this issue.
Here is a secret about missiles: If you move fast, and keep your sig radius low a drake's missiles don't hit well.
As a Caldari pilot I know drakes, tengus, and ECM don't need a nerf. You all just need to HTFU and not suck so much. I mean when your BC has 500m sig radius that goes to 2.5km when you turn your MWD on you can complain about drakes. When you have to sacrifice tank on your drake to fit a web or a TP so you can hit for decent damage you can complain about the drake. When you can fit a 12k EHP tank to your Falcon because you have a bunch of jammers then you can complain. And Tengu's are like any other t3 cruiser.
Really it isn't hard to kill a drake. If you suck less and fly drakes enough to realize just what their drawbacks are you will have no problem killing them. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
555
|
Posted - 2012.01.17 23:51:00 -
[47] - Quote
They have medium DPS for good tank (With heavy HEAVY training especially for newer players) that is perfect for newer players to spend time getting used to and learning to quirks of before going on to other ships.
Changing the drake bonus would show that CCP only favors large alliances in this game. Because #1 it is currently the only thing that can reasonably stop their Win Alpha fleets. and #2 It allows newer players to make funds in the game without needing a giant alliance at first.
Such changes will give large alliances that can field huge alpha and force members to go on CTAs even more power. |
Kietay Ayari
Rogue Elements.
318
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:05:00 -
[48] - Quote
Do what ever you want to anything :3 Just don't touch my Tengu.
Ferox #1 |
Hanoch Wheel
Free Wheeling Industries
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:10:00 -
[49] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:They have medium DPS for good tank (With heavy HEAVY training especially for newer players) that is perfect for newer players to spend time getting used to and learning to quirks of before going on to other ships.
...
This is something I've noticed as well, and failed to mention in my post.
Drake initially gives you a platform to stop getting clobbered in, but you aren't very effective with offensively. It takes a lot of skilling and research to learn how to fit and fly a drake well.
Its a great platform to develop good pilots on (even if they end up with tons of SPs in Missiles, which don't translate well to other things except Tengu and maybe stealth bombers).
|
Hanoch Wheel
Free Wheeling Industries
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:14:00 -
[50] - Quote
Lord Aliventi wrote:Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
...
Actually from the notes, it was CCP that proposed this. But the CSM enthusiastically agreed.
Trend is for more firepower and less survivability? More explosions? More replacement ships? Is this the goal?
|
Hoskoal Ricks
Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:16:00 -
[51] - Quote
Hanoch Wheel wrote:Lord Aliventi wrote:Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
...
Actually from the notes, it was CCP that proposed this. But the CSM enthusiastically agreed. Trend is for more firepower and less survivability? More explosions? More replacement ships? Is this the goal?
Just makes alpha look better and better. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
555
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:17:00 -
[52] - Quote
Hanoch Wheel wrote:Lord Aliventi wrote:Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
...
Actually from the notes, it was CCP that proposed this. But the CSM enthusiastically agreed. Trend is for more firepower and less survivability? More explosions? More replacement ships? Is this the goal?
Very doubtful. The goal is to remove the ability of newer players to enjoy eve without joining a super big alliance that has NAPed areas for moon goo in my opinion. Otherwise why on earth would CCP propose this in the first place?
What on earth is going on CCP? Please say you will NOT implement this! |
Hoskoal Ricks
Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:21:00 -
[53] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Hanoch Wheel wrote:Lord Aliventi wrote:Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
...
Actually from the notes, it was CCP that proposed this. But the CSM enthusiastically agreed. Trend is for more firepower and less survivability? More explosions? More replacement ships? Is this the goal? Very doubtful. The goal is to remove the ability of newer players to enjoy eve without joining a super big alliance that has NAPed areas for moon goo in my opinion. Otherwise why on earth would CCP propose this in the first place? What on earth is going on CCP? Please say you will NOT implement this!
Can we please not derail an important discussion about caldari ships with your tinfoil asshattery?
thnx <3 |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
555
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:22:00 -
[54] - Quote
Hoskoal Ricks wrote:Hanoch Wheel wrote:Lord Aliventi wrote:Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
...
Actually from the notes, it was CCP that proposed this. But the CSM enthusiastically agreed. Trend is for more firepower and less survivability? More explosions? More replacement ships? Is this the goal? Just makes alpha look better and better.
Which of course benefits greatly large alliances. This nerf and nerfs like it that are a boon to nullsec alliances need to be opposed greatly. |
Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
555
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:25:00 -
[55] - Quote
Hoskoal Ricks wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Hanoch Wheel wrote:Lord Aliventi wrote:Alright let me get this straight.: CSM wants to nerf the drake by taking away it's drake bonuses and giving it Tengu-like ROF and velocity bonus. 716 DPS at 100km on a drake? Hell yeah! Nerf away!
...
Actually from the notes, it was CCP that proposed this. But the CSM enthusiastically agreed. Trend is for more firepower and less survivability? More explosions? More replacement ships? Is this the goal? Very doubtful. The goal is to remove the ability of newer players to enjoy eve without joining a super big alliance that has NAPed areas for moon goo in my opinion. Otherwise why on earth would CCP propose this in the first place? What on earth is going on CCP? Please say you will NOT implement this! Can we please not derail an important discussion about caldari ships with your tinfoil asshattery? thnx <3
Not tinfoil in the least. There is NO othwe argument for nerfing the drake other than "WAHHH MAH ARTY ALPHAS CANT ONE SHOT IT NERF NERF NERF!" It may be partly that but it is 90 percent punishing newer players.
|
Skydell
Space Mermaids
103
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:25:00 -
[56] - Quote
Dunno if this is serious or not.
Drakes die all the time, they don't need to be nerfed. Armor needs to be buffed. Oh wait, this is EVE where we play a perpetual game of unsustainable PvP and wonder why people quit when they are broke, again. |
Thor Kerrigan
Guardians of Asceticism
21
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 00:32:00 -
[57] - Quote
Soulpirate wrote:Balancing based on PvP is bad for ANY game. Well, unless it's an FPS and has no other game play.
So very true, unless you are playing EVE Online. |
Leisen
Interrobang Inc.
17
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:03:00 -
[58] - Quote
Awww sheeeeeeeit. I'm bout ta drop dis like a hawt Incarna. |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1121
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 01:31:00 -
[59] - Quote
Val MeR wrote:http://www.eveonline.com/council/transcripts/2011/CSM_CCP_Mettings_7-9_12_2011.pdf
It seems like CCP is favoring Minmatar, while CSM is made up of Gallente... well, of course its all made in the name of "balance", but see for yourself if you like those small changes:
GÇ£CCP and the CSM discussed the new Tier 3 battlecruisers. CCP noted that the Talos needs adjustment upwards; the CSM noted that the Naga is too powerful compared to the Talos. CCP acknowledged this, citing the difficulty of finding a role for blasters as well as the power of passive shield tanking.GÇ¥
Naga is overpowered? Power of passive shield tanking on a Naga?
GÇ£CCP and the CSM agreed that remote sensor dampeners have been rendered useless and need rebalancing. CCP wants to look into this, as well as the damping ships themselves. The CSM also discussed the merits (or lack thereof) of ECM.GÇ¥
Yeah, Caldari are unworthy of ECM magicGǪ
GÇ£The CSM and CCP both acknowledged the need to rebalance Drake, which GÇÿdoes everything too too wellGÇÖ. CCP is considering giving it a more offensive role like Raven or Caracal where it would lose the shield resistance bonus and the 5% Kinetic damage bonus and instead gain a rate of fire bonus and a missile velocity bonus. The CSM vehemently approved of this idea. CCP and the CSM also agreed that this possible change to the Drake would help add more uniqueness to the Nighthawk, which is presently overshadowed entirely by the Drake.GÇ¥
Nerf Drake, so it can become as GǣdesirableGǥ as Gǣoffensive Raven or CaracalGǥGǪ NightHawk will finally GǣshineGǥGǪ at least when compared to a NEW "offensive Drake."
Whoa!
Looks like they are not going into that "show Gallente some love and boost blasters" thing but are instead looking at the reason why a blaster boat cannot get within a proper range in the first place.
Blasters will do heinous damage in the right range, got the loss mail to prove it, but a Gallente ship has a lot of trouble just getting there. Many times it's been said to put Gallente weapons on par with the others, but I always felt it's not the damage or the short range, it's not having superiority or some balance in resisting damage and webs. A ship that is going to have to go in closer, and do this with a bad traversal, is going to get a lot flak.
OR...
Would be nice to see Gallente ships be able to field 7 drones like the other races can field 7 of their signature weapon.
Edit: if the want the nighthawk to get off the backburner, stop making them so damned fugly.
Furthermore, as a drake pilot who crosstrained from Suck.... er... Gallente - a lot of Drakes used in missions are speed-tanked anyway.  |
Ocih
Space Mermaids
53
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 02:07:00 -
[60] - Quote
If I could survive the Artillery wall 50 km behind it, my Harbi would melt a Drake. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |