EVE Search - Sansha faction ships have been gutted!!!

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Sansha faction ships have been gutted!!!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
IHaveTenFingers Caldari ADVANCED Combat and Engineering Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.10.06 00:24:00 - [1] Someones gonna have to explain the logic behind these changes: Succubus: Special Ability: 100% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage Amarr Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Small Energy Turret tracking per level Caldari Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage per level. 2 Low / 4 Mid / 4 High / 2 Turret / 0 Launcher Phantasm: Special Ability: 100% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret tracking per level Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage per level 3 Low / 6 Mid / 6 High / 3 Turret / 0 Launcher Nightmare: Special Ability: 100% bonus to Large Energy Turret damage Amarr Battleship Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret tracking per level Caldari Battleship Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Energy Turret damage per level 5 Low / 7 Mid / 6 High / 4 Turret / 0 Launcher Now obviously these shipss are designed for use with lasers, but the midslots.... Shield tank? Lasers? No cap use reduction? Baby Jesus? Tears on his face? If you do your very simple math, youll notice the damage output of the nightmare is in line with the abaddon, the phantasm is in line with the harbinger, and the succubus i suppose is in line with mabye the retribution, all of these using 1/2 the turrets for the same DPS, so therefore 1/2 the cap. Very sneaky built-in 50% cap use reduction i suppose (an answer to the abaddon?) This overhaul is "interesting" but really unecessary. The succubus was fine, the phantasm needed a little more grid, and the nightmare needed 35-50Tf more CPU, and all would have been peachy. Now we have some wierd combo of lasers and shield that ive only seen noob rokh pilots use (sigh...) Flame away. -TF
Cyan Nuevo Dudes In Crazy Killing Ships	Posted - 2007.10.06 00:36:00 - [2] Wow how weird... these things are gonna suck at tanking. --- Proud Amarr pilot.
Sonya Rayner Unicorn Enterprise Blind Octopus	Posted - 2007.10.06 00:39:00 - [3] Crap! Didn't see that one coming... Shield tanked sansha ships? You're kiddin' right!? Please, say you're kidding!! now back to the point. Ok, khanid tried to marry amarrian armor tank with caldari missiles, they somewhat suceeded, but sansha's - i've always used to see them armor tanked, and spewing missiles. Isn't this in any way related to the khanid mkII™ patch? So like ok, i'm used to use pew-pew, that's where i'm skilled most anyway, and i almost never use missiles, but sheesh - shield tanking!? p.s. never thought phantasm needed any changes - i've got my perfectly setup (to my needs at least), although i disliked the nightmare, mostly because of its look anyway... Well, at least we'll have spare slots to fit nos/neuts, hehehe ____________________ couldn't resist... sorry...
Cyan Nuevo Dudes In Crazy Killing Ships	Posted - 2007.10.06 00:55:00 - [4] Actually, this idea is growing on me. These things will put out the damage quite well and mount an OK tank (note that half the guns = built in 50% cap use reduction). At least the Nightmare wouldn't now be obsoleted by the Abaddon. But in terms of RP?! Caldari Battleship giving a bonus to lasers? Sansha ships shield tanking? No missile hardpoints? That's just weird. --- Proud Amarr pilot.
Sonya Rayner Unicorn Enterprise Blind Octopus	Posted - 2007.10.06 00:57:00 - [5] Originally by: Cyan Nuevo Actually, this idea is growing on me. These things will put out the damage quite well and mount an OK tank (note that half the guns = built in 50% cap use reduction). At least the Nightmare wouldn't now be obsoleted by the Abaddon. But in terms of RP?! Caldari Battleship giving a bonus to lasers? Sansha ships shield tanking? No missile hardpoints? That's just weird. Indeed it is ____________________ couldn't resist... sorry...
Dominique Vasilkovsky Techmart Industries	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:06:00 - [6] Those are some interesting changes. The damage output remains but all of a sudden a lot of spare highslots available for nos/neuts(pvp) or salvagers/tractorbeams(pve). With all that spare capacitor it will be interesting to see how well they can run shield boosters. Signature approved by Eldo
Zosana	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:10:00 - [7] Edited by: Zosana on 06/10/2007 01:16:31 Urgh. In principal I think removing the split weapon system is the way to go. Sansha have the worst faction ships atm, but those changes don't look like fixes to me, just shifting their problems... I have trouble seeing them as shield tanks to be honest. The nightmare could run an 8 slot armor tank + 4 pvp mids. I can't see it being very useful with 7 mids. MWD, cap booster, 5 slot shield tank. OK it'll gank better but meh.
The ArchWarder Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:19:00 - [8] I would have to say, as a Sansha fan. I support these changes however the logic behind making them shield tankers boggles me. By all means keep the current changes but take atleast one mid from eace ship and give it to a low shot. Sansha are armour tankers. ( kinda negates my officer tank lol )
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:34:00 - [9] Wait, these are supposed to be bad changes? These numbers are "OMFG WTF PWN" How much fitting do they have, because... Succusbus == 4 turrets + damage bonus + 2 free high slots[nearly as much DPS as a retribution!] + 4 MEDS! Phantasm == 6 effective turrets + damage bonus, 6 meds!!!! +3 Free high slots! Nightmare == 8 effective Turrets + damage bonus + 2 free highs + 7 MEDS!
The ArchWarder Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:38:00 - [10] Yeah it all sounds very nice damage wise however the shield tank is just such a total kick in the pants. I mean its the only faction ship that has weapons of a race that armour tanks and a tank of a race that shield tanks. Faction ships should be a reward and an oppertunity to flaunt your style of play. Not something you have to train "specificaly" for
Hon Kovell Gallente Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:42:00 - [11] I think the changes are unnecessary and don't make sense. If they're going to made anyway for some inexplicable reason, then at least have the Caldari ship bonus be a shield bonus. Add another laser hardpoint to keep similar damage and reduce the shields to keep a similar shield tank. That way you still keep the new concept for the Sansha ships but at least the bonuses make some sense. Alternatively, rewrite all Sansha rats as solely laser using, convert them to shield tanks then redo all their faction and deadspace gear as shield tanking modules. Once that's done, redo all Caldari ships with laser bonuses so it makes sense that the Caldari ship skill gives the Sansha ships a bonus to lasers.
Cyan Nuevo Dudes In Crazy Killing Ships	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:48:00 - [12] Well having a shield-specific bonus would kinda suck in my opinion as in their current state the ships could be armor-tanked, and choices are good. I can't, however, think of a very good, more Caldariish bonus to give instead of the tracking. --- Proud Amarr pilot.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:48:00 - [13] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 06/10/2007 01:49:12 At least let the ships keep their existing missile hardpoints. They won't be adding all that much damage, and it keeps the connection with the rat versions/old-Sansha ships a lot better. Especially for those of us who LIKE missiles, and have no interest in fitting neuts on already cap-heavy ships. As for a more Caldari-like bonus: give us 5% shield resist/level instead of the tracking bonus.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.06 01:51:00 - [14] Edited by: Goumindong on 06/10/2007 01:54:20 Originally by: The ArchWarder Yeah it all sounds very nice damage wise however the shield tank is just such a total kick in the pants. I mean its the only faction ship that has weapons of a race that armour tanks and a tank of a race that shield tanks. Faction ships should be a reward and an oppertunity to flaunt your style of play. Not something you have to train "specificaly" for 1. You dont tank a frigate anyway, or cuisers. And freaking 6 meds! Holy lords of ewar or passive shield tank of doom. mwd, web, scram, lse, lse, inv == great tank for a cruiser and tackle. 2. You can armor tank with 5 lows just fine. And really, 8 guns with a damage bonus is just peachy. You can fit a 4 slot injected tank with full tackle, 3 damage mods, damage control and speed mod. 3. And tracking? Icing on top of the cake. For instance, here might be a Nightmare now supposing it fits 4x MP II[amarr navy mf m] Mwd, web, scram, injector, damp, damp, damp lar, lar, eanm, eanm, dc armor tanking rigs 764 dps, full double rep armor tank, tackle, and ewar. The Phantasm 3 x heavy pulse mwd, scram, injector, damp, damp, damp sped, sped, dmg/spd :ED Not to mention the new best freaking amarr mission runner
Xequecal	Posted - 2007.10.06 02:12:00 - [15] Have they changed the armor/shield/structure values? The old Nightmare has 12750 base armor and 8600 shield, I hope they switch those if they're doing a 5/7/6 config, because that requires a shield tank if you want any damage mods.
Lithalnas Amarr Headcrabs	Posted - 2007.10.06 02:14:00 - [16] actually this is kinda growing on me, instead of useing shield tanks, use them as ewar armor tankers, they have almost the same DPS as an ok fit abaddon but with midslots and a somewhat respectable armor tank. Nightmare: MPII WMD, web, scram, injector x2, damp, sensor booster LAR II x2, hardeners x3 aux nanos x3 should have one of those "zomg he just repped 50%" tanks. and a sniper would be interesting. 4x tachs WMD, injector, 2x sensor boosters, 3x tracking comps 3x heatsink II and 2 fitting mods. ------------- fixed for greater eve content
source Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.10.06 02:35:00 - [17] Just spent 2 months training missile skills and gave my firstborn for a set of slaves implants. Put my girlfriend to work on the streets to afford officer launchers/domi web + disruptor/ core x type + officer armor tank, and I still like where these changes are going. As long as these aren't final, and ships are given somehow on test server to properly test them, I say yay. Perhaps like somebody suggested, keep the launcher hp's on so it is still 'caldarish'
xOm3gAx Caldari Stain of Mind	Posted - 2007.10.06 02:37:00 - [18] those things will make a sick gank and with a passive tank probably a decent all rounder... ----------- "Mercinaries never die, we just go to hell to regroup." -xOm3gAx '99
Rilder Caldari THC LTD Dogs of War.	Posted - 2007.10.06 03:21:00 - [19] Immagine these changes before the nos nerf with the extra highslots not having to sacrifice weapons for the high slots. --
Law Enforcer	Posted - 2007.10.06 03:29:00 - [20] a passive tanked nightmare or cap injected nightmare is going to be absolutely nasty. I can't believe you guys can't see the potential here.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.06 03:39:00 - [21] Mandatory offer: since some of you clearly believe these are horrible changes, and the ships will be worthless after the change, I will buy your Sansha ships at the following prices: Succubus: 15 million ISK Phantasm: 50 million ISK Nightmare: 250 million ISK ======================================================== Now then: these changes are excellent, in my opinion. As has been mentioned, you either get a good shield tank, or a fair armor tank with ewar/injector/etc. And lets not forget the nos/neut ability here. There are only two real issues: 1) Removing the missile slots is a poor idea. It puts them out of flavor with their NPC versions, it puts them out of flavor with their Caldari background, and it has the potential to annoy a lot of people who might have invested missile skills in the ships. Un-bonused missile launchers add marginal damage to the ships, so there's little reason to remove them. 2) Laser damage from the Caldari skills makes very little sense. Remove the tracking bonus, move the damage bonus to the Amarr skill, and add a 5%/level shield resist bonus in its place.
The ArchWarder Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.06 03:52:00 - [22] well after flying the nightmare on SISI it has Huge potential now with the changes. There are certian parts of the ship that feel lacking somewhat but nothing is perfect right. Fully 100% support these changes now.
Arcadia1701 Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2007.10.06 04:19:00 - [23] Edited by: Arcadia1701 on 06/10/2007 04:18:42 so let me get this stright. You want to keep the 100% damage bonus AND be able to uber tank? umm no. My sig> Post with your main, or don't post at all.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.10.06 04:29:00 - [24] Originally by: Arcadia1701 Edited by: Arcadia1701 on 06/10/2007 04:18:42 so let me get this stright. You want to keep the 100% damage bonus AND be able to uber tank? umm no. Keep in mind the 100% damage bonus is applied to half as many turrets. For example, the Nightmare with its 100% damage bonus and 4 turrets does the same damage as the Abbadon with 8. It's just an odd way of giving the 50% cap use reduction while keeping free high slots (at the moment, without much purpose).
Deva Blackfire D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.06 06:58:00 - [25] Edited by: Deva Blackfire on 06/10/2007 07:06:10 HAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA Stop crying. You wanted shieldtanking laser boats? HAVE FUN :) EDIT: after re-read. OMG O_o
Capt Rapace Alpha Production Technologies Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.06 07:52:00 - [26] Edited by: Capt Rapace on 06/10/2007 07:54:29 Ok. Machariel vs. Tempest. The Machariel gets: +1 low +37.5% tracking Nightmare Vs. Abaddon/Raven: (Abaddon)+2 highslots (needs only 4 turrets for the same damage) (Abaddon)+37.5% Tracking (Abaddon) Swaps 25% armor resists for 50% cap usage. (Raven)+1 Mid Seems more than fair, if you ask me.
Eric Fuhrmann Insidious Existence Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.06 10:38:00 - [27] I fly a phantasm for pvp and I like these changes, except that it loses a slot - 4/6 to 6/3 :(
Abye Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.10.06 10:55:00 - [28] Can't wait till the first tachyon wrecking hits show up in peoples sigs. (All about the epeen) ___ CCP Garthagk: "And that is why GMs aren't DEVs"
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.06 11:13:00 - [29] Originally by: Capt Rapace Edited by: Capt Rapace on 06/10/2007 07:54:29 Ok. Machariel vs. Tempest. The Machariel gets: +1 low +37.5% tracking Nightmare Vs. Abaddon/Raven: (Abaddon)+2 highslots (needs only 4 turrets for the same damage) (Abaddon)+37.5% Tracking (Abaddon) Swaps 25% armor resists for 50% cap usage. (Raven)+1 Mid Seems more than fair, if you ask me. A little bit more than fair I would say. THey becoem the best faction ships (nothign wrong here). If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Leandro Salazar The Blackguard Wolves Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2007.10.06 11:19:00 - [30] Oh and, WTBorrow Nightmare on Sisi! There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction There is no 'a' in Scorpion There is no 'e' in Caldari There is no makeup in rogue drones

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: 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.