| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
   |
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:15:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:28:36
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:21:35
Preface
The following paragraphs reflect my own experience and is based on my grasp of game mechanics. Since I started using Amarr Recon ships, some game mechanics changed. Apparently the impact is not obvious to all involved parties. Thus I wrote this text to outline all corresponding facts, their consequences and possible solutions.
Bear with me: it is a text wall.
Furthermore this text is only about Amarr Recon ships. I refrained from any comparison to other recon ships. I ask all posters in this thread most kindly to stick to Amarr Recon ships and their claimed roles only and to argue based on facts. Remarks to other recon ships were only made for filling specific roles. Any comparison whatsoever is not intended. Any hints, suggestions or corrections welcome.
Hydrogen
Content
I. Summary
II. Amarr Recon ships and their role
III. Issues on Amarr Recon ships
IV. Consequences
V. Possible solutions
VI. Discussion of solutions
VII. Hydrogen's remarks
I. Summary
Amarr Recon ships had a dedicated role. Due to the NOS changes this dedicated role can not be filled anymore. As such the Amarr Recon ship line is broken as it is now. Also diversity has been taken from the game, effectively elimnating a full range of viable game tactics. Several solutions are offered to compensate, thus enabling Amarr Recon ships to fill their niche once again.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:16:00 -
[2]
II. Amarr Recon ships
II.1 General
According to the description, Recon ships are "Cruisers specialized in reconaissance operations and electronic warfare." For that goal, two design lines are available:
- Combat Recon ship, designed to take on enemy support vessels.
- Force Recon ship, designed as reconaissance vessels and to enter enemy territory unscathed to open Cyno fields for incoming friendly Capital ships.
Combat Recon ships are basically Heavy Assault Cruisers specialized in Electronic Warfare. Force Recon ships are in general the Cruiser equivalent of Covert Ops frigates specialized in "hidden" operations and Electronic Warfare.
Both Amarr Recon ships heavily rely on drones as their damage dealer. In sorts of Electronic Warfare, both ships got a bonus to NOS/Energy Destabilizers and to Tracking Disruptors.
Additonally Amarr Recon ships have superior Radar strength (24 and 28) and a drastically increased targetting range (104 and 130 km). Keeping their main strengths in mind, Amarr Recon ship are least or less likely affected by tracking disruptors, sensor dampeners and ECM.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:16:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:22:50
II.2 The Curse
"Built to represent the last word in electronic warfare, combat recon ships have onboard facilities designed to maximize the effectiveness of electronic countermeasure modules of all kinds. Filling a role next to their class counterpart, the heavy assault ship, combat recon ships are the state of the art when it comes to anti-support support. They are also devastating adversaries in smaller skirmishes, possessing strong defensive capabilities in addition to their electronic superiority."
A Curse's tasks:
- Tank-breaker in a gang: by draining/destabilizing a target's cap, the target can't repair/boost.
- DP-killer: by draining/destabilizing a target's cap Hybrid or Laser turrets are effectively disabled.
- Disabling targets: Tracking Disruptors can reduce turret ships effectiveness drastically.
- Nano-killer: With 28.5+ km range on NOS/Neut a Curse can disable any Nano-ship in range within mere seconds (except for the Nanophoon ;) )
- Ratting (PvE) in PvP setup: while a Curse does not excel in PvE, it is able to stand its ground in PvE, while in a PvP setup
- Solo/gang-nano ship: up to 7,348 km/s with a snake set and 10.8 km/s with a snake set and overheating are feasible. This while maintaining either ECM or a shield tank. Drones and missiles kill target.
For this task, the Curse offers the following functionality:
1. Increased Radar strength
2. Increased targetting range
3. Bonus to Tracking Disruptors
4. Similar but slightly lower resists compared to Amarr HACs (lower in Explosive and Kinetic resists)
5. Bonus to range and draining/destabilizing amount of NOS/Neutralizers
6. Bonus to drone hitpoints and damage
7. 4 low slots, 6 medium slots and 5 high slots
8. 4 launcher hardpoints
There are several distinct setups allowing the Curse to fill its role:
i. bred and butter setup: NOS/Neut in high, MWD and EWAR in mid, Armor tank in low
ii. Nano: Launcher/NOS/Neut in high, MWD/EWAR in mid and speed in low
iii. Shield tank: NOS/Neut/Launcher in high, Shield tank in mid and dmg mods or speed in low. The shield tank also exists as a passive shield tanked Curse.
Variations exist to these setups, still they cover the most common ones. In all those setups, the NOS basically fuel the tank, speed, neutralizers and/or the ECM.
Tactics:
Basically a Curse tries to keep targets in range of 15km+ or even better 30km+, while drones, NOS/Neut and/or missiles do their dirty work. Tracking disruptors keep other enemy turret ships at bay or can be used to further disable the target. A Curse heavily relies on keeping distance to enemy vessels. In close combat a Curse generally dies really fast.
As a result: the Curse heavily relies on Cap to fuel MWD, tank, EWAR and neutralizers.
Usability:
- solo in 1vs1: a Curse poses a threat to any turret-reliant ship. Due to its specific prey it is most unlikely for a Curse to find this specific prey. Missiles as a rule of thumb kill a Curse. Specialized drone boats (Gallente) kill a Curse too.
- gang: In a gang a Curse is an assett offering crowd control mechanics. A Curse dies extremly fast in gangs.
- fleet: A Curse lacks tank to survive fleet battles. Due to their abilities Curse's are often hit as first, without a chance to even travel to their range. Also a Curse's range is too low (up to 45km) to offer safety. Last but not least: a fleet offers so much raw firepower, that a Curse's "surgical abilities" are not needed.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:17:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:29:12
II.3 The Pilgrim
"Force recon ships are the cruiser-class equivalent of covert ops frigates. While not as resilient as combat recon ships, they are nonetheless able to do their job as reconaissance vessels very effectively, due in no small part to their ability to interface with covert ops cloaking devices and set up cynosural fields for incoming capital ships."
A Pilgrim's tasks:
- Cyno ship: a Pilgrim can enter almost any system unharmed and travel deep into enemy territory to finally set up a cyno field.
- Reconaissance vessel (see further down)
- Solo ship: A Pilgrim can choose its targets and thus is able to find its specific prey. Solo-miners in lowsec and 0.0, ratting ships etc. are preferred targets. Basically a Pilgrim can hit where it is least expected - the EvE equivalent of a real life assassin.
For this task, the Pilgrim offers the following features:
1. Increased Radar strength
2. Increased targetting range
3. Bonus to Tracking Disruptors
4. Increased resists compared to T1 Cruisers; way less resist than HACs
5. Increased Armor hitpoints compared to a Curse
6. Bonus to draining/destabilizing amount of NOS/Neutralizers
7. Bonus to drone hitpoints and damage
8. 5 low slots, 5 medium slots and 4 high slots
9. Bonus to use Covert Ops cloak
10. Bonus to liquid ozone consumption
Two variations of a Pilgrim setup exist to fill its role:
i. standard setup: NOS/Neut/cloak in high, ECM (scrambler/webber/TD) in mid and armor tank in low.
ii. speed setup: NOS/Neut/cloak in high, MWD and ECM in mid, speed in low ( a shield tank does not appear to be viable on a Pilgrim).
Usability in varying scenarios:
- solo in 1vs1 a Pilgrim poses a threat to any solo ship. The Pilgrim can wait and hit when the target least expect it, eg until rats are fighting the target or when capacitor is low or...
- scouting/reconnaisance: a Pilgrim lacks the ability to fit scout/recon probe launchers. As a matter of fact a cov ops can do anything in recon better, than a Pilgrim (less sig size, higher agility, probe launchers,...). Whenever a Pilgrim tries to live to this task it is more likely a suicide commando, whereas a cov ops gets away anytime if played smart. Usability as scout: close to non-existant.
- gang/fleet: nothing a Curse can not do better, except setting up Cyno fields.
- Cyno setup: a Pilgrim excels in this task.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:17:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:24:04
III. Issues on Amarr Recon ships
Due to recent changes the following issues now exist.
III.1 General
The changes to NOS force the Amarr Recon ship line to mount an additonal Capacitor booster. Changes to grid were needed and applied by CCP to fit the Capacitor booster. This effectively took a medium slot off the Amarr recon ships, heavily increased cargo bay needs, crippled one or even several high slots and reduced the effectiveness of several mid slots.
- A NOS is useless against ships with low capacitor. Thus all NOS slots are crippled in its effectiveness on Curse and Pilgrim. Before the NOS was an offensive weapon, while fueling an Amarr Recon's capacitor. This is no longer possible.
- The need to "play" with an Amarr recon ships capacitor cripples the effectiveness of the mid slot ECM modules. Simply as those will deactivate by times due to lack of capacitor. A single Capacitor booster is not able to supply the capacitor needs for a full neutralizer setup and ECM and tank.
- Recent developments in PvP gameplay show, that a ship without MWD lacks survivability (even on Pilgrim). Thus taking another mid slot away, while drastically increasing the already existant Amarr Recon's capacitor issues.
- additionally the Curse was already tight on grid. By now a Curse simply lacks grid to fit what it needs.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:18:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:27:10
III.2 The Curse
Curse as they are today fullfill their role as follows:
- Tank-breaker: A Curse in a gang can still break heavy tanks and speedtanks by using 1 NOS with several Neutralizers together with its missiles, drones and capacitor booster. On the not so bright side, heavy tanks are uncommon on Cruisers nowadays, but more likely speed tanks. Whereas Huginn and Rapier as well as other speed tanked Cruisers are more suited to break speedtanks. In gang combat a Curse pilot is well advised to choose a different Cruiser type (preferably HAC, eg. Vagabond, Sacrilege, Ishtar) instead of a Curse. A Curse is thus unable to fullfill its role in real game play. Simply as other ships can fullfill the same task (bringing down speedtanks) while offering their owner a higher survivability. Finally NOS/Neutralizing cripples a Curse's tank, making it more a glasship (not a glasscannon).
- DP-killer: Due to recent NOS changes, the Curse is unable to fuel its tank. Being a DP-killer cripples a Curse's tank, makes the Curse primary and is effectively a suicide playstyle.
- Disabling targets: A Curse can still disable a target. On the not so bright side, turrets are only affected by tracking disruptors in specific and not in all situations. Furthermore a lot of damage is done by drones and missiles, thus effectively making sure, that a Curse is soon primary and due to lack of tank - killed. Additionally a Curse lacks range to disable sniper ships at 110+ km distance. Caldari ECM jammer ships, but also sensor dampener ships are better suited to disable enemy ships.
- Shield tank: The role as active shield tank is no longer viable, as a Curse can not fuel its capacitor for the shield tank reliably. The role as passive shield tank always crippled a Curse's effectiveness, while drastically increasing signature radius. Still the Curse is a good passive shield tank plattform.
- Ratting (PvE): The Curse is good in ratting still. A PvE ratting setup is no longer an effective PvP setup due to neutralizers having no positive effect for a Curse pilot on rats. NOS is not viable as a primary weapon for a Curse in PvP. Thus the PvE in a PvP setup role is no longer viable. Dedicated PvE ships are way better: Ishtar, Sacrilege, Myrmidon and Raven. Even with the upcoming changes there are still loads of better PvE ships.
- Solo-/Nano-ship: there are several feasible solo or nano setups available for a Curse. Still the lack of mid-slots and armor generally result in a rather poor tank, which is not comparable to HAC-tanks at all (compare mid slot layouts and resists and armor values with Zealot and Sacrilege). Also the need for MWD nowadays and Cap Injector reduce the EWAR-effectiveness of a Curse. Last but not least a fitting heavily relies on specific named items to unlock a Curse's specific abilities, this includes esspecially Diminishing NOS and Unstable Neutralizers. In 1 versus 1 a Curse does not excel at all. The only exception being a Nano-killer. But the same applies here too: as a Nano-plattform other ships appear to be better suited. Examples are Huginn, Rapier,... On a last note a nano Curse still seems to be a viable option. Due to limited low slots (4) the Curse doesnt excel here.
Issues:
- it is impossible to field a decent setup with NOS/Neut/Neut/HML/HML in high, MWD/Cap booster/... in mid and MAR/tank in low. It is close to impossible to field this setup with an Afterburner even without sacrificing tank/EWAR in rig slots. Setup issues arise simply due to lack of grid.
- To use its special abilities a Curse is Cap hungry and never able to use its special abilities to its fullest extent. Even jigsaw games with its own capacitor are unplayable - the least said.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:18:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:30:25
III.3 The Pilgrim
Pilgrims as of today fullfill their role as follows:
- Cyno ship: a Pilgrim can enter almost any system unharmed and travel deep into enemy territory to finally set up a cyno field. A Pilgrim excels here and fully fills this role.
- Reconaissance vessel: A Pilgrim is basically a Cruiser able to use a cov ops cloak. Besides that a Pilgrim doesnt offer distinct advantages which outweigh Covert Ops ships. As a scout a Covert Ops is better suited at all times (higher agility, higher survivability due to size,...). Additionally the Pilgrim is not a solo ship anymore, thus negating any combat advantages for scout ships.
- Solo ship: To solo a Pilgrim already uses 4 mid slots. MWD is needed to escape gate camps and cloak directly after initiating warp. A scrambler is needed to hold targets and a webber is needed to keep a target in range, as a Pilgrim lacks the NOS/Neut range bonus. To break a tank with Neuts, a Capacitor booster is a must, leaving 1 mid slot of the Pilgrim for ECM. The best setup possible to stand a chance for solo requires 2 Neutralizers and 1 NOS, thus also disabling dual repper setups as a setup alternative due to cap and grid usage.
Despite having 5 low slots and more armor than a Curse, a Pilgrim heavily suffers from less resists than a Curse.
Example1: in a fully T2 setup including rigs, leaving grid issues aside, using dual repper setups, a Pilgrim can achieve a 433 reinforced defense value (while crippling its grid for Neut/NOS, MWD/AB and Cap booster), whereas a Curse achieves 403 reinforced defense value (also crippling mid and high slot setups). Considering other design lines of ships, the Amarr Recons in general and the Pilgrim in specific are unable to offer a more than average tank, while still maintaining an acceptable offense at all.
(remark: reinforced defense value is from EFT and is one possibility to evaluate a ships tank. Eg the Sacrilege achieves 500+ easily and can go upt o 660+ in T2 setups while still offering decent offense of its main weapons.)
Example2: Now looking at a viable tank setup with one MAR only, the Pilgrim can achieve 266 reinforced defense maximum, whereas the Curse achieves 252.
Conclusion from both examples: the increased resists of a Curse almost evens out the additonal low slot of a Pilgrim. Survivability with maximum skills is below average.
That said, a look at offense of a Pilgrim is needed.
1. a Pilgrim needs to stay in range of less than 12 km on Medium Diminishing NOS.
2. a Pilgrim has a low damage output with its drones, thus needs to disable/break an enemies tank with cap draining/destabilizing.
3. a Pilgrim thus needs to tank damage or disable a targets turret
4. one Tracking Disruptor requires the Pilgrim to orbit a target at high speed to reduce opponent's turret damage. But: an Afterburner is too slow and an MWD is suicide with less than 2,500 speed (at less than 12 km orbit!!). Please also consider opponents drone damage, which a lot of ships offer.
5. ...
This list could go on and on... The result is simple: a Pilgrim might excel in killing non-Khanid Amarr ships of less than bs size. So in the end viable and preferred targets are most Amarr T1 Cruiser, T1 battlecruisers, the Zealot and maybe an Absolution (with some luck).
Well as long as there are Zealots, Absolutions,... without capacitor injectors...
A lot more examples show, that a Pilgrim is unable to solo at all. The ability to kill poorly set up opponents is not a niche for the Pilgrim but daily business for an average player in almost any ship.
Issues:
- the Pilgrim lacks survivability
- the Pilgrim lacks ECM
- the Pilgrim lacks a niche to be useful except setting up Cyno fields. There is no other role, which the Pilgrim fills.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:19:00 -
[8]
III.4 Future changes
With the proposed bandwidth change to 50MBit/s, the Curse also drastically looses its usability in PvE, where it was close to average so far. A Pilgrim would need a lot longer to kill enemies (if at all). Or in other words: a lot more time for opponents to call for and receive help. Before such a change takes place I recommend to completly delete the line of Amarr recon ships.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:19:00 -
[9]
IV. Consequences
Both Amarr Recon ships lack distinct advantages and a usable niche to fill - again except setting up Cyno fields for the Pilgrim.
V. Possible solutions
Solutions for both ships come in a package.
V.1 General option
The simplest solution would be to remove the NOS nerf from both Pilgrim and Curse, while maintaining their drone offense at 75MBit/s (Please look at discussion further down). This would also be inline with on how the ECM nerf was handled.
Additonally the Pilgrim lacks a tank enabling it to solo. The role defintion as a force recon ship is already applied by a lack of high slots. Thus in this package it is recommended to offer the resists of the Curse to the Pilgrim too.
V.2 Curse options
The following options exist solely for the Curse alternatively:
1. One more mid slot and 120 grid increase and a drastic cargo bay increase by 300m3 at least (cap booster charges). Also leave armor hp as it is and increase shield hp. Leave the Curse at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
2. Neutralizer bonus, which effectively decreases the cap use of neutralizers by 10% per recon level. Leave the Curse at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
3. Apply HAC resists and armor to the Curse. Leave the Curse at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
4. Double the NOS/Neut drain amount of the Curse. Leave the Curse at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
5. Increase tracking disruptor range by 25% per Amarr recon level
V.3 Pilgrim options
Options to change the Pilgrim are:
1. One more mid and one more high slot. Increase Cargo to 500+ m3. Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
2. Drastically increasing Pilgrim's cap by 50%. Increase Cargo to 400+ m3 and add a mid slot. Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
3. Add 10%/level to cap recharge of Pilgrim. Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
4. Increase range of Neut/NOS on Pilgrim like on Curse. Increase Cargo to 500+ m3 (left in place as some consider it a valid change). Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
5. Add a Neut bonus of 10% less cap usage of Neuts per recon level. Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
6. Double the NOS/Neut drain amount of the Pilgrim. Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
7. Apply HAC resists to the Pilgrim, thus freeing up the rig slots for Neutralizer/Cap improvements. Leave the Pilgrim at 75MBit/s bandwidth.
8. Add a high slot and a launcher hardpoint to the Pilgrim and apply a 10% reduction to duration/activation time of modules requiring Astrometrics per level.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:20:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:32:00
VI. Discussion of solutions
VI.1 General option
Applying this solution would bring back the Nano Curse. Due to the common appearance of Nano ships, a Curse would be the most effective anti-nano Nano ship and a serious threat to any ship. Still a Curse's speed is subpar to eg. Vagabond as it lacks natural speed advantages and low slots. Effective counters to a Nano Curse are some missile types and all other race's recon ships. Apart from the Nano-Curse (which needs a close look at), the Curse would be able to fill its old role.
For the Pilgrim this change would bring back its old role, while the Nano-setup is not an issue, simply as a Pilgrim lacks range on NOS and Neutralizers. This change would bring back the Pilgrim's old role and enable it to fill its niche to solo perfectly. A Reconaissance role is not available but still reserved for Covert Ops.
VI.2 Curse options
Corresponding to "V.2 Curse options" my remarks to those options and its consequences
1. This would enable the Curse to fill its old role once more and change its status from glasship to glasscannon. A trade off: still primary, but offering advantages, which make suicide missions beneficial to the gang. A Curse would have the option to trade off ECM for a heavy shield tank with speed.
2. This option would enable the Curse to fill its role once more, where cap and grid limit the Nano-Curse option. Shield tanks are not viable.
3. The lack of drastic offense is equaled out by decent defense. Grid and Cap limit a Curse's options. Due to lack of low slots, a Curse's tank will always be subpar to HACs, while raw dp power compared to HACs is exchanged with a mix of dps (missiles) and EWAR (NOS/NEUT/TD).
4. This option would also bring the Curse back to fill its old role, where a lack of defense is equaled out by raw EWAR offense. The Curse would be a glasscannon, more of the type of a surgeon's instrument, which is easily broken.
5. The Curse would fill a complete new role in disabling sniper ships and become a great assett to fleet fights by protecting close range fleet wings.
VI.3 Pilgrim options
Corresponding to "V.3 Pilgrim options" my remarks to those options and its consequences
1. A viable option for the Pilgrim, but needed to be able to use its strength at all effectively. A poor solution, as the cap booster usage would be implied by design.
2. A poor solution, as the cap booster usage would be implied by design.
3. Similar to the new desing lines, this would enable a Pilgrim to at least use Neutralizers. 3 Neut setups would be viable.
4. The Pilgrim could become a cloaked nano-wonder. But on the bright side it would enable a Pilgrim's role as a solo ship, able to disturb enemy fleets even and/or to take out support ships. While offering a fleet use, the Pilgrim would compete with the Curse, while being subpar compared to the Curse. The cloak would be useless in these scenarios.
5. The Pilgrim could fill its old role.
6. A Pilgrim could fill its old role again.
7. This option would strengthen a Pilgrim's solo role and as a Cyno ship.
8. Where Amarr lacks an Astrometrics T1 frigate, this version would still heavily lack in the solo department but the Pilgrim would be of extreme use for fleets. Scouting behind enemy lines, finding targets and even able to Cyno support in - in future maybe even Black Ops? The versatility makes this ship usefull and a great assett to any fleet without pushing a solo ship setup. Still its size and lack of agility would not make Covert Ops obsolete. The design of a Covert Op's "big brother" would finally come true. Last but not least a Covert Ops in exploration is useless when it found a site. This bonus would enable the Pilgrim to fill a whole new role and to excel in it.
__
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:21:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 24/10/2007 23:33:16
VII. Hydrogen's remarks
All these are my personal thoughts with different input from various threads, players,... I really hope that I was able to point out various issues with Amarr recons and do not claim thatI offer a final solution, but... food for thought on a more informed basis.
Personally I favor option 3 of the Curse options and option 8 for the Pilgrim. In both cases both ships would fill completly new roles. Apart from that it is a pitty, that there is no real solo-ganker covert ops ship. Simply as I strongly believe that a highly effective sneaky assassin type adds a lot to balance and gaming experience in a PvP setting.
Additonally one needs to keep in mind, that sensor dampeners, jammers and stasis webifiers are of greater use in PvP settings than tracking disruptors. This is also the reason on why I highly recommend to not compare Recon ships of different races to each other. To me offense, defense and usability must correlate to each other. In current Curse and Pilgrim designs this balance does not exist.
It needs to be said, that the appearance of ships with a covert ops cloak in local totally contradict their purpose - being sneaky. This should be changed in any case. Using a covert ops cloak must remove the pilot from appearing in local.
Any critic - if constructive - and corrections welcome.
Bear with me for the text wall.
Yours
Hydrogen
__
|
Hardtail
Red Dawn Empire
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:47:00 -
[12]
tl;dr
|
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2007.10.24 23:56:00 -
[13]
Too long, too repetitive. Stopped reading. Sorry. 
Taxman IV: Rogue Agent
|
goodby4u
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 00:08:00 -
[14]
oh...mai.....gawd!!
__________________________________________
Yes it is great being amarr.
I am minmatar,fly amarr,use gellente drones and am in caldari space. |
Pure Murder
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 00:11:00 -
[15]
 One man thread.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 00:52:00 -
[16]
Fair play Hydrogen you've done some homework there.
My reccomendations are:
Pilgrim
40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level, bringing it in line with the other recons in 'ability' terms (i.e the Curse and the Sentinel)
Reduce the Pilgrims Cap Recharge time by 30% to 240.625sec
Set its Bandwith at 50MBit/Sec
Curse
Add '5% bonus to all armor resistances per level', bringing it in line with other Khanid vessels.
Reduce the Curses Cap Recharge time by 30% to 240.625sec
Increase Curse Armor HP to 1800
Maintain its Bandwith at 75MBit/Sec
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Bardi MecAuldnis
Amarr
Heretic Army
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 01:59:00 -
[17]
Hydrogen,
I like your analysis, and agree with it, up until your solutions. Honestly, most of them are trying to make the Recons into HACs.
The one thing I wholeheartedly agree with you on is removing the NOS nerf for these two ships. This is their specialization and gives them their survivability and niche. You were right that the Pilgrim was an "assassin" type and played that role well, where the Curse was an anti-tank/support platform. I would like to see those roles brought back, but with the restriction of 50Mbit/s bandwidth.
The viability of pre-nerf NOS combined with the larger drone bay and lessened drone damage output would allow for a more combat oriented Recon line (when compared to the other races), but keep them from stepping on the HACs' toes. They would be able to assassinate small ships (up to cruiser some t2), but relegate them to only weakening hardened targets.
I say this as a fellow Curse pilot, mind you.
Unfortunately, I am not in the position to argue item by item, but I thought I would share my overall view of the situation.
Good work on the research and format, but keep in mind that these forums tend to have short attention spans.
Short version:
1. I believe they should be returned to viable Recon ships without making them HACs.
2. Long post is long.
---
Amarr/Caldari, and proud of it.
Hey hey let's go kenka suru!
Taisetsuna mono protect my balls!
Boku ga warui so lets fighting!
LET'S FIGHTING LOVE!!! |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 07:19:00 -
[18]
 Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
Too long, too repetitive. Stopped reading. Sorry.
In fact if you are familiar with the issue, I recommend you start reading at Chapter III and all is good ;)
This text is meant to start with the basics, thus giving non-Amarr-Recon players a chance to understand the issues.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 07:29:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Cailais
My reccomendations are:
<snip>
Fair play. On your Pilgrim recommendation I truly fear the cloaked nano Pilgrim fotm and the Pilgrim competing with the Curse. Still I am not sure here, but point out my concern.
Your Curse recommendation appears to me as a viable and good improvement. One needs to keep in mind, that a Curse is meant to be a HAC by design (Chapter II.2 lists CCP's intentions). Currently it does not come close. Your suggested changes makes it an EWAR HAC, thats what it is meant to be by design.
__
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 07:38:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Bardi MecAuldnis
Hydrogen,
I like your analysis, and agree with it, up until your solutions. Honestly, most of them are trying to make the Recons into HACs.
Suggested solutions are just that: suggestions. Still reading through (here again Chapter II) it is appaerant, that Amarr Recons are meant to be designed as HACs. It is not my opinion, but CCP's design goal.
Your answer clearly shows one part on what my proof is about: Amarr Recons are not HACs right now at all.
Originally by: Bardi MecAuldnis
Short version:
1. I believe they should be returned to viable Recon ships without making them HACs.
2. Long post is long.
ad1. There are a lot of options. But: if there is a design goal, CCP should stick to it, or change the design goal. I believe there is a niche for true EWAR HACs, but anythign goes, as long as they got a design goal, which they can fill. Curse and Pilgrim both fail right now.
ad2. Bear with me... Besides that, this post is meant to be complete and to include proof, what is broken and why. This takes some lines...
__
|
|
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 07:58:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Cailais
My reccomendations are:
<snip>
Fair play. On your Pilgrim recommendation I truly fear the cloaked nano Pilgrim fotm and the Pilgrim competing with the Curse. Still I am not sure here, but point out my concern.
Your Curse recommendation appears to me as a viable and good improvement. One needs to keep in mind, that a Curse is meant to be a HAC by design (Chapter II.2 lists CCP's intentions). Currently it does not come close. Your suggested changes makes it an EWAR HAC, thats what it is meant to be by design.
I agree with your concern about a 'nano-pilgrim' as a fotm ship, but then nano-whatever is pretty common place: I even saw a nano-drake a few weeks ago. If thats 'overpowered' then Id suggest its due more to the modules used than the ship itself.
Worth noting also that the Pilgrim with only 5 mids lacks the space to EWAR tank, and/or shield tank and would be almost totally reliant upon speed: it might try and emulate the Curse but my thinking is it would do a pretty poor job of it.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:00:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 25/10/2007 08:00:52
I'm getting into the mindset that the Pilgrim, and the Curse, are meant to be used as, well.. nothing. Train for Gallente or Minmatar recons.
I can almost predict that, since there are not enough "whiners" for this issue (Take a look at the Pilgrim/Curse "whines", versus the Carrier "whines" to see the difference), nothing will be done.
Which leads me into Rev3 crap, the total amount of m3 drone bay that each of these ships get now (150m3) versus the amount of bandwidth they use, the drone user interface is horrid, and lacks user friendliness. Again, I predict nothing will be done to remedy it.
My 2 cent solutions:
Curse: Never flown it, but once or twice, and decided it was too; overpowered 1v1.
Pilgrim:
1) 150 m3 Drone bay, 50mb/s bandwidth.
2) 100% Reduction to energy emission capacitor use (or recon bonus, per level, of Capacitor use).
3) Change the Energy Emission hardwiring bonuses to: 10%, 30%, 75%, 100% range respectively.
4) Up the cargo bay to 400m3, possibly 500m3 (you will still need cap boosters to fuel your tank).
Or hell, just make a new module, 10,000 tf, 10,000 pg when not fitted on a Force Recon ship, that does 1/2 of the energy killing of the neutralizer, but gives the same amount of energy back of a nosferatu.
other than that, I will add nothing to this thread. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:04:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Edited by: Feng Schui on 25/10/2007 08:00:52
I'm getting into the mindset that the Pilgrim, and the Curse, are meant to be used as, well.. nothing. Train for Gallente or Minmatar recons.
I can almost predict that, since there are not enough "whiners" for this issue (Take a look at the Pilgrim/Curse "whines", versus the Carrier "whines" to see the difference), nothing will be done.
Which leads me into Rev3 crap, the total amount of m3 drone bay that each of these ships get now (150m3) versus the amount of bandwidth they use, the drone user interface is horrid, and lacks user friendliness. Again, I predict nothing will be done to remedy it.
My 2 cent solutions:
Curse: Never flown it, but once or twice, and decided it was too; overpowered 1v1.
Pilgrim:
1) 150 m3 Drone bay, 50mb/s bandwidth.
2) 100% Reduction to energy emission capacitor use (or recon bonus, per level, of Capacitor use).
3) Change the Energy Emission hardwiring bonuses to: 10%, 30%, 75%, 100% range respectively.
4) Up the cargo bay to 400m3, possibly 500m3 (you will still need cap boosters to fuel your tank).
Or hell, just make a new module, 10,000 tf, 10,000 pg when not fitted on a Force Recon ship, that does 1/2 of the energy killing of the neutralizer, but gives the same amount of energy back of a nosferatu.
Heh maybe we need a 'boost teh pilgrim' siggy - start a leaflet campaign, sell T shirts, that might do it 
I'll get right on it...
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:10:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 25/10/2007 08:11:17
Originally by: Feng Schui
I'm getting into the mindset that the Pilgrim, and the Curse, are meant to be used as, well.. nothing. Train for Gallente or Minmatar recons.
With close to maximum skills for Amarr recon (AWU 5, Recon 5, close to 7mill sp in missiles for Curse,...) this somehow sums it up...
__
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:14:00 -
[25]
Same here, but the skills for the Pilgrim (max drones, max turret-based ewar, etc..)
Oh yea, no one mentioned that Tracking Disruptors are getting nerfed as well on SiSi (they require "scripts" - either kill optimal, or kill tracking).
Because Tracking Disruptors where sooooooooooooo overpowered 
other than that, I will add nothing to this thread. |
munia
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:40:00 -
[26]
Respect Hydrogen. Good thread.
I am full amarr pilot and was like curse and pilgrim. No i don't want fly in that recon ships.
cora |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:41:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Same here, but the skills for the Pilgrim (max drones, max turret-based ewar, etc..)
Oh yea, no one mentioned that Tracking Disruptors are getting nerfed as well on SiSi (they require "scripts" - either kill optimal, or kill tracking).
Because Tracking Disruptors where sooooooooooooo overpowered
TDs should be left well alone. They have a built in nerf - they dont effect missiles, webs, drones, neuts, scrams...we could go on. Yet another 'oompf' for the Amarr...
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:44:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Same here, but the skills for the Pilgrim (max drones, max turret-based ewar, etc..)
I just did the maths: In my past EvE time, I learned 11.52 millions skill points only to use Amarr Recons to their fullest extent.
1. Amarr Recon 5 - sure
2. Missile skills - I only started those, when I felt I cant use a Curse's missile slots... (have to admit I even did Heavy Missile Specialization to 5  ) - 7 mill skill points total
3. Drone skills - only did those to use a Curse's drones to its advantage
4. AWU 5 to reduce overall fitting issues - sure
I am all in that a fine ship needs skill. But laying waste to all that effort (and skill points) in fact has a major impact for players.
__
- click here -
(http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0608/A-WAR_Hydrogen.jpg) |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 08:50:00 -
[29]
@Cailais: could you change the sig and remove the black text? Just write somethign less agressive instead, like: "Amarr Recons: in dire need of love!"
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 09:29:00 -
[30]
OMG! my third pilgrim loss of the day!
why? CAP ISSUES.
this **** is ****ing me off.
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 09:35:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Feng Schui
OMG! my third pilgrim loss of the day!
why? CAP ISSUES.
<snip>
In my last Pilgrim loss I had no cap issues, but thus died due to lack of tank ;)
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 09:43:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 25/10/2007 09:45:40
ran through 21 cap booster 400's, with just my MAR going, the 2x Balmer TD's, warp disruptor, and 1 nos. but of course, the PROPHECY i was fighting, was able to shoot throughout the fight, and repair, and web, and scramble.
seriously, what the **** it this ****? I may as well be flying a god damn arbitrator again.
|
Mark Lucius
Forbidden Lore
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 09:53:00 -
[33]
I support this thread. Good suggestions. 
---
|
N1fty
Amarr
Galactic Shipyards Inc
HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:01:00 -
[34]
I would suggest a cap regen improvement to both ships. This will make neuts easier to use and not have to rely on a cap injector.
============================================
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:01:00 -
[35]
In general:
Your changes are way way (way way way) to big. Think small & steady. There is no need for sledgehammer modifications. It is better to create a still-slightly-underpowered-mobile than a OMGWTFBBQ-mobile.
Underpowered things can still be boosted. Overpowered things will create a publlic outcry and are more likely to get a sledehammer nerf back to their old performance.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:02:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2007 10:03:01
Curse:
It's dead, Jim.
Well, not really. Honestly, the curse is fine. Yes, it can only use 5 meds now, but having twice the drone bay more then balances this. Having no replacements was the biggest achilles heel of the curse before.
I can fit 4 nos/neuts, MWD, cap injector and a LSE2 with one PDU2 in my lows, that is rather reasonable.
Only got room for 2 damps now which sucks a bit, but I could fit 3 if I would loose the LSE2. It's a tradeoff.
As solo ship the curse is still pretty decent. With a 2 damp setup you can still get unboosted BS below 20k and with a 2 Nos - 2 Neut combo kill their cap and pulse your MWD when needed. The cap booster is only needed to get your own cap up again after you killed your targets cap.
In gang combat it can leech cap from different targets whole neuting another one. The cap booster is nothing you need to permarun there either.
In short: all the curse really lost is a bit of EW power. And it got a bit more tricky to use correctly, but that is IMO a good thing.
It is still by far the best solo recon.
Pilgrim
Now that one is really dead. The core principle of the pilgrim was that it worked essentially like a mini nosdomi, but with less of pretty much everything.
Half the dps, half the tank, half the range. Only the nos amount was about the same. These limitations made IMO the pilgrim pretty balanced under conditions where the nosdomi was rather overpowered.
And, while the nos changes balanced out the domi they kill the pilgrim as effective combat ship.
Now, a constant argument here is "recons should be no solopownmobiles!". Great. However the pilgrim is compared to the other force recons rather pointless in gangs. Getting into webrange vs multiple opponents is nothing short of stupid with it, so it is limited to use TDs (least effective EW) with its 5 med slots (least amount of meds of force recons). Any other force recon does a good deal better.
So, either you need to buff its solo power or you need to buff its group power. Because solo right now it is compared to the other force recons only around average now and for groups very sub-average.
So...?
Firstly, one thing about new bonuses:
If you add a bonus you need to remove/replace another bonus. It won't get more than 4 bonuses. And, no, CCP will not change its role bonus to something else.
Forget that. Stay realistic. What we should look at is not adding bonuses to the current ones, but finding a better new combination of bonuses.
We can assume 2 of the 4 bonuses as given. The 50% drone damage/hp one is IMO needed and the cov ops cloak one is there to stay. This leaves the tracking disruptor and nos/neut one.
One option would be to change the nos/neut bonus slightly. Instead +20% amount change it to 15% amount and 10% range. This would reduce the pilgrims nos power slightly, but give it a much needed range increase to 18k. Which is enough to operate outside web range, but not enough to do realistic speedtank setups.
Add to this a cap amount boost of 25% to make it a more viable neut plattform.
Tracking Disruptors
Are meh. Boosting them could also solve issues with the EW efficiency with the pilgrim and curse. The new scripts could be a good way for that.
Scripts are basically "ammo" (which does not run out) for some modules which modifiefs what they do somewhat.
You could for example add a script which removes the tracking reduction of TDs but adds a falloff reduction. So amarr recons could actually use TDs to be out of effective turret range in the sub 30k area.
And a script which removes the range reduction but is boosting the tracking reduction for closerange work.
There is also the option to add one to remove the tracking reduction but add range. Although that might be a bit too powerfull vs snipers.
In either case, there are lots of possibilities there.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:24:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Aramendel
Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2007 10:03:01
Curse:
It's dead, Jim.
Well, not really. Honestly, the curse is fine. Yes, it can only use 5 meds now, but having twice the drone bay more then balances this. Having no replacements was the biggest achilles heel of the curse before.
Well, like outlined in the Chapter about CCP's Curse design goals, it is meant to be a HAC with EWAR. Even in your suggested setup it is nothing like that at all. Also the Pilgrim was meant to be the solo-mobile (heavy scout), heavily limited by range.
The design goals are effectively not met except on the Pilgrim in setting up Cyno fields.
About your comments:
1. I understand your reasoning and concern.
2. The Curse lost a mid slot and lacks grid. The Pilgrim lacks a mid slot.
3. All playstyles involving to fuel a tank or to fuel offense are disabled. A playstyle for which the Curse and Pilgrim were designed for.
4. About the drones the replacement is nice, but in my case I was able to keep my drones alive. High drone skills, scooping if needed and also using Minmatar drones helps a lot combined with tracking disruptors. The drone bandwidth change takes a full load of dps.
If there are other changes, I am all in.
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:32:00 -
[38]
Quote:
If you add a bonus you need to remove/replace another bonus. It won't get more than 4 bonuses. And, no, CCP will not change its role bonus to something else.
Forget that. Stay realistic. What we should look at is not adding bonuses to the current ones, but finding a better new combination of bonuses.
I disagree. Since the Pilgrim is a solo ship, and using frigates to launch cyno fields are so much better cost wise, why does it need cyno bonuses? Lets just pretend the people that are already in the system don't go directly to the cyno and kill you, what are you going to do in the fleet battle? die? rofl.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:43:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2007 10:48:09
Originally by: Hydrogen
Well, like outlined in the Chapter about CCP's Curse design goals, it is meant to be a HAC with EWAR.
IMO you are misinterpretating the flavor text there (and nevermind that that one is most likely the very worst thing to use as guideline for what a ship can do..for example, Khanid ships had for ages "the best shield systems outside caldari space" as text - when gallente and minmatar shields were superior).
But anyway, as said...the text is:
Filling a role next to their class counterpart, the heavy assault ship, combat recon ships are the state of the art when it comes to anti-support support.
This text is identical for all combat recons. Are the lachesis, huginn and rook "HACs with EWAR"? Not really.
They are more effective EW ships with slightly better defence and a bit more dps. Just like HACs their primary function got boosted and their survivability got increased.
That is what "class counterpart" means. They do not fill the HAC role, they fill a role "next to it". The EW/disabeling role.
Quote:
Even in your suggested setup it is nothing like that at all.
How exactly?
Quote:
Also the Pilgrim was meant to be the solo-mobile (heavy scout), heavily limited by range.
Chicken-egg. The pilgrim is limited by range because that was balancing him before. However the advantage why this balance factor was needed is non existant now. Balancing it out again by adding range to it is a rather valid option - especially since its main problems now are casued by its low range. Which is also atypcial compared to all force recons.
Originally by: Feng Schui
I disagree. Since the Pilgrim is a solo ship, and using frigates to launch cyno fields are so much better cost wise, why does it need cyno bonuses? Lets just pretend the people that are already in the system don't go directly to the cyno and kill you, what are you going to do in the fleet battle? die? rofl.
Why do the other recons need cynos?
They don't. That they do not really need that bonus is the whole point. And is the reason it is a role bonus which does not really cost the ships anything. It is a minor additional option for all force recons and has a rather low value.
Replacing it with an high value bonus has no justification.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 10:56:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Hydrogen
Well, like outlined in the Chapter about CCP's Curse design goals, it is meant to be a HAC with EWAR.
IMO you are misinterpretating the flavor text there (and nevermind that that one is most likely the very worst thing to use as guideline for what a ship can do..
<snip>
This text is identical for all combat recons. Are the lachesis, huginn and rook "HACs with EWAR"? Not really.
<snip>
At this point you need to compare the effectiveness of each single EWAR module. In fact this is pointless as each EWAR module's use and usability heavily differs. I for myself consider the tracking disruptor the lowest priority EWAR module.
Tracking disruptors are limited to specific situations: turret ship, preferably at high transversal velocity, dependant on falloff range and without a tracking speed buffer when shooting at its target. Or in short words:
On a more extreme point of view: Tracking disruptors are a great assett on Nano Recons versus turret ships or on "normal" Recon setups versus Nano-Battleships with turrets. The last one is a poor setup for the bs pilot, the first one is imho not a viable setup in standard T2 equipments.
Keeping this usability in mind, you can not compare the non-EWAR setups of different race recons at all. You can only stick, what we know about the Amarr Recon's former design goals.
Either they need to be able to fullfill their former design goals or different design goals are needed, including the abilities to fullfill those new goals.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:11:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2007 11:13:43
Recons are not their single t1 EW bonus. You ignore the cap warfare abilities of the curse which are despite what you claim virtually unchanged (edited in a bit more in my previous reply).
But, yes, TDs are rather meh compared to damps and ECM. But that is no curse/pilgrim issue. It is a TD issue. The EW module must be modified, not the ships.
Like I said in my original post:
You could for example add a script which removes the tracking reduction of TDs but adds a falloff reduction. So amarr recons could actually use TDs to be out of effective turret range in the sub 30k area.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:26:00 -
[42]
Quote:
Why do the other recons need cynos?
They don't. That they do not really need that bonus is the whole point. And is the reason it is a role bonus which does not really cost the ships anything. It is a minor additional option for all force recons and has a rather low value.
Replacing it with an high value bonus has no justification.
You're right, personally, none of the Force Recons should have this bonus. Hell, give it to the Covert-Battleships, at least they have some tankage ability + firepower to survive a minor assault.
But, as Hydrogen said, this thread is about the Amarr Recons.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:27:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Aramendel
<snip>
But, yes, TDs are rather meh compared to damps and ECM. But that is no curse/pilgrim issue. It is a TD issue. The EW module must be modified, not the ships.
<snip>
We are lookign at extreme changes to tracking disruptors in this case:
1. usefullness versus missiles
2. usefullness at low transversal speed
3. possible counters
A ship targetted by tracking disruptors is able to reduce and even almost negate a tracking disruptor effect by intelligent playstyle without the use of a module.
You need modules and/or help from another ship to reduce the effect of jammers.
You need modules and/or help from another ship to reduce the effect of dampeners.
There is no real counter to target painters.
Jammers and dampeners affect missile boats, tracking disruptors do not. In all due respect I consider it close to impossible to even out the EWAR ground - it is just too complex, too much, too many differences...
Instead: Look at usability and what a ship needs to fill its role.
__
- click here - |
Neo Rainhart
Caldari
Leela's Lamas
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:38:00 -
[44]
I support.
The amarr recons are dying out more and more by every patch, i.e the upcoming RSD nerf, versatility is a legend.
I would love to pick up on my recon training where i left off when this ship got a kick in the nuts. Good points Hydrogen 
♥♥♥
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:44:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2007 11:44:35
Originally by: Hydrogen
You need modules and/or help from another ship to reduce the effect of jammers.
You don't. The achilles heel of jammers is that they are chancebased. If a jamming ship is missing a jammer it is in trouble since it has no tank (this includes speedtanks). What you need vs them is in the end luck.
And lacking that, a jamming ship alone will not kill you since they have none or very low dps. You need another ship to do something against you, they need another ship to do something to you. Where is the problem?
Quote:
You need modules and/or help from another ship to reduce the effect of dampeners.
With the new patch you will not be able to reduce targeting range and speed at the same time.
So all you need to do is get close enough. FoF missiles also work (yes, they atatck outside your targeting range in case you think this particular piece of misinformation is correct). A bit more limited compared to TDs, but still applies for most targets. Launchers which cannot use FoFs are now really closerange and ships with them should be fast and are able to use the first get close option.
Quote:
There is no real counter to target painters.
They have also no real effect vs most ships.
Quote:
Jammers and dampeners affect missile boats, tracking disruptors do not. In all due respect I consider it close to impossible to even out the EWAR ground - it is just too complex, too much, too many differences...
A td with a falloff instead tracking modifier would work pretty much just like damps will.
Missile vulnerabilities are not much different due to FoFs.
They are alltogether not as effective as damps even then, but not much less effective. And in exchange the cap warfare abilities balance this out very well. Did I mention that you can still use cap warfare without permarunning a booster very will with the curse? Oh yes, I did. Twice.
|
Krist Valentine
Amarr
Veto. Academy
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 11:48:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Krist Valentine on 25/10/2007 11:55:54
Agreed.
I f**king miss these ships. It's what I got into EVE for, really, after seeing Ginaz' movie.
Quote:
Or hell, just make a new module, 10,000 tf, 10,000 pg when not fitted on a Force Recon ship, that does 1/2 of the energy killing of the neutralizer, but gives the same amount of energy back of a nosferatu.
Quite like this idea :] Though, why not just make it Amarr Recons, as opposed to Combat Recons? Curse would need it too...
|
Sheamis Kast
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 12:10:00 -
[47]
Really good work here. Was a bit long but I can handle a few pages of well written text. While I don't agree with any of the of the proposed fixes I do think that these ships could use a boost, just not as large of one in the case of the Curse. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be as many Amarr pilots as there are people who love carriers, so I doubt CCP will pay us any heed...
I have read dozens of "Fix Amarr" threads it would be nice if some one form CCP would at least acknowledge us.
|
Krist Valentine
Amarr
Veto. Academy
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 12:16:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Sheamis Kast
Really good work here. Was a bit long but I can handle a few pages of well written text. While I don't agree with any of the of the proposed fixes I do think that these ships could use a boost, just not as large of one in the case of the Curse. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be as many Amarr pilots as there are people who love carriers, so I doubt CCP will pay us any heed...
I have read dozens of "Fix Amarr" threads it would be nice if some one form CCP would at least acknowledge us.
Stick it in your sig and they'll have to :p
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 12:47:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Hydrogen
You need modules and/or help from another ship to reduce the effect of jammers.
You don't. The achilles heel of jammers is that they are chancebased. If a jamming ship is missing a jammer it is in trouble since it has no tank (this includes speedtanks). What you need vs them is in the end luck.
<snip>
If you do a forum search for app. 2005 you will find me reasoning like you do right here. I do understand you, I also see the FoF missiles, usability or lack thereof of target painters, the change to double-stat EWAR modules,...
But the usability of EWAR fits very well except for the trackign disruptors. A target painter on a Cruiser makes it more than just extremly vulnerable to BS-size missiles. We are talking about something along the lines of insta-death paired with Precision missiles.
Reducing lock range is a huge assett today: no chance nothing... In fact a sensor dampener, which only reduces lock range, offers a greater assett to an Amarr Recon ship than current tracking disruptors. The niche of the ships affected by tracking disruptors is so small, that it makes more sense to fit racial ECM jammers, therby disabling a whole race's ship line.
__
- click here - |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 13:59:00 -
[50]
Nice first post(s). Good research. I hope CCP will realize soon that they utterly destroyed the Amarr recons.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The A in Amarr seems to stands for Adapt... |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 14:28:00 -
[51]
I just suspect they didnt see the issues, which their changes implied.
__
- click here - |
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 15:14:00 -
[52]
Giving the Pilgrim a range bonus and effectively turning it into a nano-pilgrim would be fine and here's why:
Comparing it to the Curse
> 1 less mid for EW
> No launchers = less dps
> Good luck fitting a probe launcher
^^ you sacrifice the above to fit a cloak
It would still be the least desirable Force Recon for gang, but it would make a good solo ship.
|
Krist Valentine
Amarr
Veto. Academy
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 15:39:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Kruel
Giving the Pilgrim a range bonus and effectively turning it into a nano-pilgrim would be fine and here's why:
Comparing it to the Curse
> 1 less mid for EW
> No launchers = less dps
> Good luck fitting a probe launcher
^^ you sacrifice the above to fit a cloak
It would still be the least desirable Force Recon for gang, but it would make a good solo ship.
Why not just return it to what it was? I don't see the point in having two recons which both need to be flown pretty much the exact same.
Click Me Pl0x
|
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 15:51:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Krist Valentine
Why not just return it to what it was? I don't see the point in having two recons which both need to be flown pretty much the exact same.
Because what it was before had to do with nos. The only way to change it back would be to make nos work like it used to on the Pilgrim.
Besides, the other recons are all flown pretty much the same. People nano huginns, rapiers, lachs, and arazus all the time... while the Caldari recons both sit at 100k and jam.
|
Natalie Jax
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 16:05:00 -
[55]
The Curse is currently at least somewhat viable in its role. It needs a bit of love, but at least itĘs not ōlolwhy?ö
The Pilgrim, on the other hand, is currently a massive disappointment. My perspective is that of a Force Recon pilot, a ship class that I see having a very specific role: survivability. ItĘs a ship class that is meant to go behind enemy lines, be able to make trouble, pick its battles and GTFO of things arenĘt going to plan. That doesnĘt mean theyĘre supposed to be solo-ownmobiles. Each of the other recons has situations where it shines, and situations where the only reasonable course of action is to stay cloaked. The bonuses and modules that they use let them enter battle when they want to, but more importantly it lets them leave it as well.
The Arazu engages at long range where it can scramble the target and use RSD to keep itself from being targeted/locked. Its DPS is moderate, itĘs not particularly fast. Its biggest advantage is relative invulnerability at range. If the situation is not optimal it can warp off long before its target can get to/lock it. For the most part it has no tank.
The Rapier engages at medium range (15-24) where it can scramble the target and use its Webs to completely stop its target in its tracks. Its DPS is good, it can be very fast, and can take a few hits. If the battle doesnĘt go well it will be out of scram range and away in a matter of seconds, as it will invariably be much faster than its webbed down foes.
The Falcon IĘm not quite as familiar with, but from what I understand it has its perks. Solo it has to engage at medium range in order to scram (15-24). Its DPS is rather unfortunate, itĘs not particularly fast, it doesnĘt tank particularly well but that doesnĘt matter because it really can permajam damn near any ship. If the engagement isnĘt in your favor odds are they donĘt have a lock on you so you can cloak and warp away. Wow, hadnĘt really looked at how much this one sucks for dps ą damn, be a rough time killing anything.
The Pilgrim also has to engage at medium range in order to scram its target, and be dangerously close to web range in order to use its NOS/Neuts (10-13). It can actually put out the most DPS even restricted to medium drones, itĘs pretty slow and the tank just sucks. However, one of the biggest problems is that it has no way to (reliably) flee the battle if things arenĘt going well. If you are lucky you can bottom out their cap enough that they miss a cycle of their disruptor allowing you to warp off ą IĘd rather rely on the chance based FalconĘs ECM than that any day.
This was longer than intended. The Pilgrim just doesnĘt function as intended in any way, shape or form. Just to be at least a tad constructive in this post, IĘd say that improving tracking disruptors or giving its NOS/Neuts a bit more of an edge would go a long way to fixing the Pilgrim, and as a side effect, the Curse.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 16:59:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Aramendel on 25/10/2007 17:00:50
Originally by: Hydrogen
But the usability of EWAR fits very well except for the trackign disruptors. A target painter on a Cruiser makes it more than just extremly vulnerable to BS-size missiles. We are talking about something along the lines of insta-death paired with Precision missiles.
Precision cruises have with GMP4 *alreay* an explosion radius of 160m. Even a frigging *vagabond* has more than that.
The only cruisers where a painter would make a noticeable damage boost are the logistics. For everything else it does not make any real difference.
Quote:
Reducing lock range is a huge assett today: no chance nothing... In fact a sensor dampener, which only reduces lock range, offers a greater assett to an Amarr Recon ship than current tracking disruptors.
*Sigh*
Which...is....why....TDs....need...a....change.
What is so difficult to understand here? You are just mantralike repeating what was already said while utterly ignoring what I am trying to tell you.
For the at-the-very-least-3rd-time, AGAIN:
If we have a TD script which is replacing the tracking reduction with a falloff reduction then 2 TD on the amarr recons are an reduction of optimal an falloff to 12%.
What does this mean? A minnie BS with 800mm ACs, barrage, max skills and 3 falloff rigs will have as result a lovely 0.7k optimal and 4.8k falloff.
Its chance to hit a target at 20k is a lovely 0.001% Or, in other words: one out of 78390 shots will hit on average. Will be a wrecking one though.
And this is the worst case scenario. Any other shortrange turrets will be even worse off.
For all intents and purposes its turrets will be useless and there would be *no* (none. zero. zip. zilch.) effective difference to damps in regards to the disabeling of its turret dps. Vs damps from a damp specced ship, mind you, vs 2 damps on the curse the TDs would beat them hands down.
It does nothing vs missiles, but as explained already damps do not really help much vs these as well.
The main problem with TDs would be enemy EW, where damps (and ECM) can do something against.
But the curse has other means to defnd against that. Its high sensorstrength and targeting range makes it relatively resistant vs both and it can with its capwarfare disable enemy gallente and caldari recons pretty well.
Quote:
The niche of the ships affected by tracking disruptors is so small, that it makes more sense to fit racial ECM jammers, therby disabling a whole race's ship line.
Yes, because less than 25% of all ships use turrets, right? 
The main problem of TDs is that they are not really the turret killer as advertised. If that is fixed - and they are deadly against *all* turrets of *all* sizes then their niche will get rather large.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 17:50:00 -
[57]
hey,
good post, read it all.
I like the idea of doubling the nos/neut drain amount. So make it 40% per level instead of 20%, close range should come with an advantage, since you either die or win at that range.
R.E.C.O.N. is recruiting
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 18:47:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Kruel
Giving the Pilgrim a range bonus and effectively turning it into a nano-pilgrim would be fine and here's why:
Comparing it to the Curse
> 1 less mid for EW
> No launchers = less dps
> Good luck fitting a probe launcher
^^ you sacrifice the above to fit a cloak
It would still be the least desirable Force Recon for gang, but it would make a good solo ship.
I do accept this change as an alternative, but do not like it as it is not my playstyle. The reason is simple: I enjoy versatility and diversity. The design decision to ensure a huge difference between both, while enforcing different roles is something I like.
Still I agree, that such a change would pretty much enable the Pilgrim to fill a role.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 19:05:00 -
[59]
Dear Aramendel,
I like you and I do enjoy our discussion. Please take my answers as part of a serious discussion and not personally at all. In fact I do read your posts very closely. If I do mistakes, I gladly accept and tell my wrongdoings.
That said:
- your point is: tracking disruptor need a change and balancing in regards to other ECM-modules.
- my point is: if a fitting and implementable change exists, I am all in, but I doubt it exists. Therefore my point is: Curse and Pilgrim need a complete readjustment with the shortcommings of tracking disruptors in mind.
What do I do, when I am affected by trackign diruptors? I tell my teammates on TS and make this one primary. In solo situations I just close in and try to reduce transversal velocity. Even with both tracking disruptor abilities I will/might be able to almost negate tracking disruptor effects on my turrets.
Ok, let us assume it is fixed in any regard and tracking disruptors are on even ground. Still in the case of missiles the issue remains. Tracking disruptors have zero impact on missile turrets. Jammers and sensor dampeners have an effect on a ship in a whole, be it missile or turret ship or both. A missile ship needs to use FoF missiles then, but those are missiles, which a Curse or Pilgrim do not fear at all. Precision Cruises and Torpedos make a huge difference in damage output compared to FoF missiles. If I lay ECM on a target, I do not want to be hit by Precision missiles at all.
Those are two different opinions. Please show me where I am wrong or accept my differing opinion.
Kind regards
Hydrogen
__
- click here - |
mallina
Caldari
Core Contingency
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 20:09:00 -
[60]
Edited by: mallina on 25/10/2007 20:10:17
Originally by: Feng Schui
Quote:
Why do the other recons need cynos?
They don't. That they do not really need that bonus is the whole point. And is the reason it is a role bonus which does not really cost the ships anything. It is a minor additional option for all force recons and has a rather low value.
Replacing it with an high value bonus has no justification.
You're right, personally, none of the Force Recons should have this bonus. Hell, give it to the Covert-Battleships, at least they have some tankage ability + firepower to survive a minor assault.
But, as Hydrogen said, this thread is about the Amarr Recons.
I agree, Cyno bonus simply isn't worth it in it's current form. 50% of forever is still a long time, perhaps if it were 5-10% (roughly 45 seconds) it would be more viable in that role.
On the whole, Good thread though. I think the Curse isn't too bad as it is, but Pilgrim definately needs some love
---
|
|
|
Crazy Tasty
Beyond Divinity Inc
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 20:49:00 -
[61]
Quote:
Chicken-egg. The pilgrim is limited by range because that was balancing him before. However the advantage why this balance factor was needed is non existant now. Balancing it out again by adding range to it is a rather valid option - especially since its main problems now are casued by its low range. Which is also atypcial compared to all force recons.
This sums up the only problem at all with Amarr recons. I would gladly trade the Nos/Nuet amount on the Pilgrim for a range bonus.
The Curse is absolutely fine, even post nerf, my setup didn't change a bit (it also doesn't involve a cap booster).
What is quite awesome though, atm, you can fully t2/best named fit a curse for 80m. Both Amarr recons are selling for under 50m.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 21:45:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Crazy Tasty
The Curse is absolutely fine, even post nerf, my setup didn't change a bit (it also doesn't involve a cap booster).
What is quite awesome though, atm, you can fully t2/best named fit a curse for 80m. Both Amarr recons are selling for under 50m.
Meaning you use a Curse to its niche and role by taking advantage of its natural bonus, which is: NOS/Neut in high (similar to other ships in 4 high slots), maybe a missile launcher or similar in 5th, tracking disruptor in med and tank or speed in low?
I do miss your setup and would find it kind and nice from you to post more hints about it...
__
- click here - |
Crazy Tasty
Beyond Divinity Inc
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 22:26:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Meaning you use a Curse to its niche and role by taking advantage of its natural bonus, which is: NOS/Neut in high (similar to other ships in 4 high slots), maybe a missile launcher or similar in 5th, tracking disruptor in med and tank or speed in low?
I do miss your setup and would find it kind and nice from you to post more hints about it...
I currently run 2 best named Nuets and 3 named Nos, 3x damps, and typical nano lows.
1x grid rig to squeeze in the 2nd nuet. Its no where near cap stable with both nuets on, I typically run 1 or 2 nuets till they cap out or I get below 25% then cycle as needed. Runs the damps + point fine with no issues. Multiple targets are a little easier as I can Nos one and nuet another.
The only difference post nerf is micromanaging cap, I normally finish a fight at about 25% or lower.
|
Julius Romanus
Amarr
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.10.25 23:20:00 -
[64]
I fly an arbitrator when I fly cruisers, and I have to say being able to ajust the modifiers on Tracking Disruptors so they would actually have some effect on Autocannon's would make me very very happy.
Vs Amarr and Gallente TD's make for rather effective ewar, but even against the targets they are useful against they fail once the fight enters web range. Against med AC's 2 of them work decently as long as there is transversal, one just doesnt have enough impact unless you are heavily nano'd out.
My point being, tracking disruptors in their current state are ineffective inside the combat range of the Pilgrim. If they actually worked as a serious turret dps(which face it most of the time you're dying, its because a turret of some kind is blowing you up) reducer the pilgrim might be effective again.
--
All these graphs show is how bad the apocalypse is with different kinds of weapons.
-Dr Jigglez |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 00:18:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Crazy Tasty
I currently run 2 best named Nuets and 3 named Nos, 3x damps, and typical nano lows.
1x grid rig to squeeze in the 2nd nuet. Its no where near cap stable with both nuets on, I typically run 1 or 2 nuets till they cap out or I get below 25% then cycle as needed. Runs the damps + point fine with no issues. Multiple targets are a little easier as I can Nos one and nuet another.
The only difference post nerf is micromanaging cap, I normally finish a fight at about 25% or lower.
Just to sum it up according my view:
1. You need rig slots to fit your main weapons, leaving you with no grid to field a tank
2. Instead of tracking disruptors you use damps
3. you speed the Curse up, where the tank by shield/armor/hull is jsut your buffer before you kill/or be killed.
A viable setup for sure. But it is not a Curse's role at all :) Also not viable in fleets - where Curse is meant to excel and be effective....
__
- click here - |
Crazy Tasty
Beyond Divinity Inc
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 01:44:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Crazy Tasty
I currently run 2 best named Nuets and 3 named Nos, 3x damps, and typical nano lows.
1x grid rig to squeeze in the 2nd nuet. Its no where near cap stable with both nuets on, I typically run 1 or 2 nuets till they cap out or I get below 25% then cycle as needed. Runs the damps + point fine with no issues. Multiple targets are a little easier as I can Nos one and nuet another.
The only difference post nerf is micromanaging cap, I normally finish a fight at about 25% or lower.
Just to sum it up according my view:
1. You need rig slots to fit your main weapons, leaving you with no grid to field a tank
2. Instead of tracking disruptors you use damps
3. you speed the Curse up, where the tank by shield/armor/hull is jsut your buffer before you kill/or be killed.
A viable setup for sure. But it is not a Curse's role at all :) Also not viable in fleets - where Curse is meant to excel and be effective....
I really don't think any recon is meant for the typical fleet warfare. TDing, Damping, Or Jamming a handful of a fleet means nothing when you are called primary and dead a few seconds later.
My setup is not even meant for gangs, its meant purely for solo work. I also don't really need the rigs, I only added the grid rig to be able to fit another Nuet instead of a launcher.
All that said, you're last comment hit the nail on the head for the Pilgrim. The only reason the Curse is viable is because of the nano fit, which for various reason the Pilgrim is not good at.
Bottom line, is you can still TD fit and armor tank either ship, just with current game mechanics (short range in a recon is suicide, armor tanked Curse is slow and almost as bad) its not as effective. Those same mechanics really make the Pilgrims shortcomings obvious.
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 01:52:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Aramendel on 26/10/2007 01:55:09
Originally by: Hydrogen
- my point is: if a fitting and implementable change exists, I am all in, but I doubt it exists. Therefore my point is: Curse and Pilgrim need a complete readjustment with the shortcommings of tracking disruptors in mind.
And I answered that already. Two times. With examples. Which you so far utterly ignored.
I won't repeat myself again, read my last post. You "doubt it exists". I showed with which changes it WOULD exist. Twice. Why are you ignoring that?
Please tell me what would be the problem there. Because I for sure cannot see it.
Quote:
Still in the case of missiles the issue remains....A missile ship needs to use FoF missiles then, but those are missiles, which a Curse or Pilgrim do not fear at all. Precision Cruises and Torpedos make a huge difference in damage output compared to FoF missiles.
Damp specced ships do not have the same speed potential as the curse. FoFs are about as dangerous to it than Precs for the curse.
Nevermind ECM ships.
Originally by: Hydrogen
But it is not a Curse's role at all :) Also not viable in fleets - where Curse is meant to excel and be effective....
No I've heard it all.
The curse is anything but a fleetship.
Your problem is that you have a very subjective perception of its role and are using that as fact for what it is "intended".
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 07:37:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Crazy Tasty
Bottom line, is you can still TD fit and armor tank either ship, just with current game mechanics (short range in a recon is suicide, armor tanked Curse is slow and almost as bad) its not as effective. Those same mechanics really make the Pilgrims shortcomings obvious.
All other discussion aside for a second:
So far we have one viable Curse setup (Nano) and still a broken Pilgrim... Simply as the Nano option forces the Pilgrim to enter web range, thus die.
__
- click here - |
CountDrakula
Fracked Inc
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 08:20:00 -
[69]
all i ahve to say is
LMAO
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 13:48:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 26/10/2007 13:49:24
Originally by: Aramendel
And I answered that already. Two times. With examples. Which you so far utterly ignored.
Simply put your change doesnt work, as you can not do the math it seems.
3 jammers on a Rook (multi jammers with skill) reduce average damage output of turret ships by 60%+
3 jammers on a Curse (multi jammers with skill) reduce average damage output of turret ships by 38.6%
3 targetting range dampeners (only use targetting range) reduce damage of turret ships to 0% when used on a Curse. Why? 1st Curse can NOS/Neut speedtanks. If the Curse is in a speedtank himself, he can dictate range.
About missiles: Precision Cruise eg do close to 92% damage (of 386.2) on a Curse with MWD off. Fury or T1 make app. 60% damage (at 474.4 resp. 412.5 base damage at max skill). FoF Cruise make app. 60% damage (at 386.7 base damage at max skill).
In the missile scenario a TD is worthless. Jammers and/or dampeners make a huge difference.
Now one can argue, that your Falloff script makes a huge difference, disabling all turrets in range.
1. blasters: heavily rely on falloff, when not in extremly short range. Curse can and should dictate range. Your change works here.
2. rails: Falloff is less an issue. Your change might reduce damage output depending on playstyle.
3. lasers: Falloff is not a real issue with lasers as long as you are in optimal.
Result: Jammers and targetting range dampeners are by far more effective than TD with your changes even with your falloff script, even after the proposed scripting changes.
Now please tell me, where your suggested change is an improvement?
__
- click here - |
|
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 14:11:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Hydrogen
3 targetting range dampeners (only use targetting range) reduce damage of turret ships to 0% when used on a Curse. Why? 1st Curse can NOS/Neut speedtanks. If the Curse is in a speedtank himself, he can dictate range.
Jepp, it will be more effective than ECM or damps against turret ships.
But could you please tell me why this should not be the case? TDs are are more specialized module and should be vs their specialized target more effect.
In turn they have disadvantages mainly not vs missiles but vs enemy EW.
Quote:
About missiles: Precision Cruise eg do close to 92% damage (of 386.2) on a Curse with MWD off. Fury or T1 make app. 60% damage (at 474.4 resp. 412.5 base damage at max skill). FoF Cruise make app. 60% damage (at 386.7 base damage at max skill).
Firstly, copy-paste:
Damp specced ships do not have the same speed potential as the curse. FoFs are about as dangerous to it than Precs for the curse.
Nevermind ECM ships.
Feel free to ignore it again.
Secondly, do you *really* think that the damage difference between precs and FoFs makes any practical difference here? If you do:
Doesn't matter if it is shot by precs or FoF, in both cases the curse has to pull out AFAP or go boom.
Quote:
In the missile scenario a TD is worthless. Jammers and/or dampeners make a huge difference.
Yes, you said that already 10 times or so.
Yet you still fail to aknowledge that damp specced ships have virtually the same vulnerabilities because you fail to realize that they cannot "tank" FoF fire as well as the curse.
Quote:
Now one can argue, that your Falloff script makes a huge difference, disabling all turrets in range.
1. blasters: heavily rely on falloff, when not in extremly short range. Curse can and should dictate range. Your change works here.
2. rails: Falloff is less an issue. Your change might reduce damage output depending on playstyle.
Already answered that in my very first post here. Copy-paste:
Scripts are basically "ammo" (which does not run out) for some modules which modifies what they do somewhat.
You could for example add a script which removes the tracking reduction of TDs but adds a falloff reduction. So amarr recons could actually use TDs to be out of effective turret range in the sub 30k area.
And a script which removes the range reduction but is boosting the tracking reduction for closerange work.
Different turret types, different vulnerabilities, different scripts. The vulnerability of closerange turrets is their range. So you reduce their range. The vulnerability of longrange turrets is their tracking..so you reduce that.
Quote:
3. lasers: Falloff is not a real issue with lasers as long as you are in optimal.
Pulse lasers are just as efficiently neutralized by a range & falloff reduction as ACs. Do the math.
For beam lasers - see previous paragraph.
Quote:
Result: Jammers and targetting range dampeners are by far more effective than TD with your changes even with your falloff script, even after the proposed scripting changes.
Completely wrong, as shown.
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 16:08:00 -
[72]
I feel a lengthy post coming on...
While all the stats and ideas being thrown around here about tracking disruptors are all well and good, and certainly gave some food for thought, I suspect it is something of a moot point. TDs are Amarrian ewar, that is not going to change, we are not going to get a different type of ewar bonus on the Curse/Pilgrim. Since we're talking about droneships, any kind of module that can help protect said drones must be a good thing, yes? Effectiveness beyond this, while important, is not the real problem with the Curse/Pilgrim. And yes, they are effective - killing a Wolf took ages the other day because of the combination of rapid orbits and a TD against my Brutix.
The other point is that there is a counter to each type of ewar, and not just in terms of counter-modules. Damps you beat by getting up close, jammers by FoF (or luck =P). TPs you just gank the painting ship.
Let's take a look at the other recons. Based on the ewar bonuses they have, each has a specific role.
Arazu/Lachesis have the Scram/RSD bonus, making them very good tacklers - they warp in, stop the target from running and screw over its locking so that by the time it can start shooting back, it's already taken a lot of damage.
Rapier/Huginn have web/TP bonus. In effect, this is like a secondary tackler. Someone goes in and scrams the target - the Rapier/Huginn then gets in, webs to stop said victim from outrunning everyone and paints them to give everyone else in the gang a boost to ganking.
Falcon/Rook just have obscene ECM bonuses in terms of range and strength. This is a simple support role to stop the target from shooting back.
All three of these allow for a lot of range. An ordinary web gets 40k range on the rapier/huginn, T2 disruptor 48k on the lach/arazu, TPs and RSDs 45k with 90 falloff, and the falcon and rook easily get triple figure ranges, over 200 including falloff. These are ships that are designed to engage from long range and keep a target locked down while the HACs and company gank the hell out of it.
Now let's look at the Curse.
A T2 tracking disruptor has 72k range with 36k falloff, which matches the other races. Similarly a Med Dim nos gets 38k range. So far, we seem to be getting a similar story - a ship designed to lock down and screw over from long range.
Pilgrim also has TD range of 72/36. So far so good. Nos range of... oops, 13k! Suddenly we have a choice of wasted bonus or getting in far too close. Now, this could be understandable for a ship designed for gang support, able to get close and provide additional DPS while killing the target's cap. So that's fine - except wait, it isn't, because this is a Force Recon, not a Combat Recon, and has inferior damage! To make things worse, because the ewar that is restricting that range is Nos/Neut, it takes up valuable high slots that could be used for guns!
Frankly, this feels like the main problem, for the Pilgrim at least. It's in a nasty mid-way zone between a short-range ewar duellist and a long-range support ship, lacking the tank and damage for the former and the nos range for the latter. If it were a combat recon ship with more high slots and better resists, this could work.
In terms of what feels right, if nothing else, the Pilgrim should have a range bonus rather than an amount bonus, although the usefulness of this is highly dubious.
(Continued in next post)
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 16:37:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Mortis Tyrathlion on 26/10/2007 16:38:37
So how do we stand? We've got a combat recon that sits back (or at least can based upon the bonuses, I'm not making any sweeping comments on setups or stats or anything) like the rest. We also have a Force Recon that has to get up close to be effective. Surely in the very names of the classes we can see that this is wrong, and possibly even the wrong way around.
The other thing to note is the damage bonuses. The Rook only has the one missile bonus, while the Lachesis and Huginn have a missile bonus and a hybrid/projectile bonus. This kind of makes sense, looking at the relative ranges - Lachesis and Huginn have a maximum operational range of around 40-50k, where artillery and railguns are still more or less effective. The Rook only has the missile bonus because it operates in the triple figure region, and thus cannot make use of an alternative weapon, and damage is less important. Besides, while the Huginn and Lachesis have 3 launchers, the Rook has 5!
The Curse has only a drone bonus and 4 launchers. However, it has the lowest ewar range of all, and unlike the others, is in danger of losing its damage through drones getting popped! Moreover, because the nos/neuts take up high slots, it cannot fit many weapons at all, giving a wasted set of hardpoints...
Stat tinkering is not my speciality, but out of this twisted mess of information, here are the best conclusions that I can come up with. I'm aware that these are far from ideal, but I would be interested to see what the general opinion is.
1. Remove the amount bonus on the Pilgrim and replace it with a range bonus. Its ability to kill enemy cap is greatly reduced, but now it can do it from a safe distance, where fragility is less of an issue. Its soloing abilities are effectively null, but it can provide some kind of support in a gang. Alternatively, remove the drone bonus and keep the amount bonus, but raise the bandwidth. Not out of the question, as the cruiser bonuses are changed between the Bbird and Falcon/Rook.
2. Remove the range bonus on the Curse and replace it with an additional drone bonus; maybe bandwidth increase? Add on some cap tinkering to allow it to nos and neut properly without crippling itself, and you have the interesting situation of a borderline nanoship that can do a fair amount of damage to both cap and hull, but at the cost of being very close in. The primary problem here is that the 13k range of a med dim puts it at great risk of getting webbed and slaughtered.
The Curse change suggested is just thinking aloud, and almost certainly shouldn't be implemented. The Pilgrim one is also far from ideal, but something along those lines might be necessary.
As far as I can see, the biggest problem is that the nos/neut bonuses are split into range and amount, whereas for the other races it is one or the other. Caldari have three bonuses, but they have plenty of range, and more importantly only one Ewar.
The Curse suffers now from cap problems, but it has been shown to still be semi-effective. The Pilgrim is crippled, as it is forced to engage at a range it cannot survive at.
My rather lengthy 2p.
|
Natalie Jax
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 17:15:00 -
[74]
I agree with much of the above poster's analysis. The Pilgrim is forced to fight at such close range that it's risky business at best. It does make the ship rather dissimilar to its peers. I don't think the drones need the adjustment, as even restricted to Mediums the Pilgrim has a decent amount of DPS.
The other three Recons get much more of a choice when it comes to "fight or flight" once an engagement begins. The Arazu starts the fight well out of opponent warp scram range, the Rapier will invariably be much faster than its opponent, and the Falcon is most likely unlocked and free to zip away.
Not the Pilgrim. Once the fight begins the ship is much more difficult to remove from battle, especially if its making use of both bonuses. To use both bonuses the ship is just an unlucky MWD pulse away from being webbed, where it's death is ensured.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 17:20:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Natalie Jax
I agree with much of the above poster's analysis. The Pilgrim is forced to fight at such close range that it's risky business at best. It does make the ship rather dissimilar to its peers. I don't think the drones need the adjustment, as even restricted to Mediums the Pilgrim has a decent amount of DPS.
The other three Recons get much more of a choice when it comes to "fight or flight" once an engagement begins. The Arazu starts the fight well out of opponent warp scram range, the Rapier will invariably be much faster than its opponent, and the Falcon is most likely unlocked and free to zip away.
Not the Pilgrim. Once the fight begins the ship is much more difficult to remove from battle, especially if its making use of both bonuses. To use both bonuses the ship is just an unlucky MWD pulse away from being webbed, where it's death is ensured.
Well put. While too often we focus on can ship A kill ship B, we can forget that a ships ability to survive (even if that means running away) is as much of an aspect of its design.
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 18:06:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Edited by: Feng Schui on 25/10/2007 09:45:40
ran through 21 cap booster 400's, with just my MAR going, the 2x Balmer TD's, warp disruptor, and 1 nos. but of course, the PROPHECY i was fighting, was able to shoot throughout the fight, and repair, and web, and scramble.
seriously, what the **** it this ****? I may as well be flying a god damn arbitrator again.
Don't worry about dieing to Kaileen, damned best Proph pilot in the game bar none. However he agrees with me that the Pilly is broke. Said he deliberatly emptied his own cap and just injected enough to run guns and DC (passive hardeners) and used his enormous HP+resists advantage on you. He runs a 1600mm plate, 2x EANM II, 1x DC II, MAR II tak with some nano pumps. Coupled with the resist bonus on the Proph he has like 20k armor HP with Ex (lowest) resist at something like 65-70%. Max comp skills (lvl5). When I met him he almost killed my 800dps Myrm, no joke. That proph has claimed many lives of people underestimating him.
That said Pilgrim definatly has issues, which Kaileen admitted when describing the fight to me on Vent.
--
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 18:07:00 -
[77]
Something very special happened in the last 15+ posts.
It became obvious, that you can not compare each race's recon ships. You end up in EWAR discussions each time. Problem is not the EWAR, it is a Curse's and Pilgrim's ability to fill specific roles.
By now we got it several times:
Both simply do not fill their roles. Not at all.
It is even worse:
1. The Curse offers one viable base setup: the Nano setup, enabling it to solo. A setup, which is far away from its role. Still viable, works and is able to kill.
2. The Pilgrim is not viable at all - in no single setup.
As a sidenote on Pilgrim dps:
- The absolute maximum in damage output in T2 on a Pilgrim as it is now is 518 dps with no tank at all. Here drones make up 315 dps which can be killed.
- The absolute maximum with 50MBit bandwidth is 441 dps without any tank whatsoever. Here 238 dps are drones which can be killed.
- In a viable setup with tank, the Pilgrim currently offers 448 dps, with subpar tank and 371 dps with 50 MBit. What do I mean with subpar tank? 339 reinforced dps tank in a dual repper setup with rigs. In this dp scenario, a Pilgrim can not use NOS neither Neutralizers.
- In a NOS/Neut setup, a Pilgrim dps are now 315 dps and soon 238 dps with 50MBit bandwidth.
Just to compare these figures properly:
- An Arbitrator does 508 dps maximum without tank, while also running one medium neutralizer or NOS.
- With the 50MBit bandwidth, the Arbitrator is at 431 dps maximum without tank.
- The rest of the figures is similar....
Those figures would be ok, if a Pilgrim were able to totally disable other ships (since Pilgrim has no tank with those dps).
In all due respect those figures are not decent at all.
__
- click here - |
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 18:45:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Something very special happened in the last 15+ posts.
It became obvious, that you can not compare each race's recon ships. You end up in EWAR discussions each time. Problem is not the EWAR, it is a Curse's and Pilgrim's ability to fill specific roles.
Unfortunately, the discussions are, at the end of the day, one and the same. The Curse and Pilgrim are made by their ewar bonuses. If, to pick a random example, they had TD/RSD bonuses, we wouldn't be having this debate. The fact is, they have Nos/Neut bonuses, and the restrictions this places on them are at the heart of the issue. As I said, Tracking Disruptors are neither here nor there. Discussion of how to solve the crippling Nos/Neut issue and the ramifications of the way that it works now is the only way we're going to work out a viable solution for the Amarrian recons.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 18:55:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Aramendel
Quote:
About missiles: Precision Cruise eg do close to 92% damage (of 386.2) on a Curse with MWD off. Fury or T1 make app. 60% damage (at 474.4 resp. 412.5 base damage at max skill). FoF Cruise make app. 60% damage (at 386.7 base damage at max skill).
Firstly, copy-paste:
Damp specced ships do not have the same speed potential as the curse. FoFs are about as dangerous to it than Precs for the curse.
Nevermind ECM ships.
Feel free to ignore it again.
Secondly, do you *really* think that the damage difference between precs and FoFs makes any practical difference here? If you do:
Doesn't matter if it is shot by precs or FoF, in both cases the curse has to pull out AFAP or go boom.
Maximum skills assumed:
FoF Cruise = 60% * damage= 0.6*386.7 = 232.03 < 355,304 = 0.92*386.2 = 90% * damage = Precision Cruise
Including reload times:
FoF Cruise damage <<<<<< Precision Cruise damage
Dear Aramendel,
there is no need to believe or not. In fact it is obvious, that I know EFT by heart. Except I actually fly these setups and used them before the NOS nerf. You could actually tank FoF Cruise missiles in a Pilgrim shot by a Raven, but not a Raven with Precision missiles.
It is debatable if a Pilgrim should be able to solo a Raven. In my opinion a Raven, which is ratting solo in a belt in 0.0 should die to each - at least average - Pilgrim pilot.
Anyways: I ask you most kindly to keep some manners and leave your LOLs to yourself or other threads.
---
That said: You are right, that tracking disruptors should be more effective versus their specialized targets than dampeners and jammers. But: dampeners are already 100% effective if you can keep range. That is exactly the reason, why the NOS/Neut/Damp/Nano-Curse is a viable solo setup. The currently proposed changes change nothing here, simply as the targetting range reduction is sufficient to keep the ground. 100% effective is 100% effective you can not top it. And dampeners still affect missile boats too, but tracking disruptors dont.
You would need to completly revamp all ECM to offer decent ground:
1. it wont happen
2. it would take diversity from the game
I do like and enjoy the differences in this game. Back to topic: that is why I ask for a Curse and a Pilgrim which are no solo pwn machines, but which can and actually do fill their role.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 19:02:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Mortis Tyrathlion
Originally by: Hydrogen
Something very special happened in the last 15+ posts.
It became obvious, that you can not compare each race's recon ships. You end up in EWAR discussions each time. Problem is not the EWAR, it is a Curse's and Pilgrim's ability to fill specific roles.
Unfortunately, the discussions are, at the end of the day, one and the same. The Curse and Pilgrim are made by their ewar bonuses. If, to pick a random example, they had TD/RSD bonuses, we wouldn't be having this debate. The fact is, they have Nos/Neut bonuses, and the restrictions this places on them are at the heart of the issue. As I said, Tracking Disruptors are neither here nor there. Discussion of how to solve the crippling Nos/Neut issue and the ramifications of the way that it works now is the only way we're going to work out a viable solution for the Amarrian recons.
Nice thing is that we all agree in the end :)
"Crippling NOS/Neut issues" is the major point. I can live with tracking disruptors, as long as I do not need to use them as they are now ;) But keep in mind: the change to drone bandwidth will even further cripple both ships, even if the NOS/Neut issue is solved.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 20:56:00 -
[81]
Edited by: Aramendel on 26/10/2007 20:59:06
Originally by: Hydrogen
Maximum skills assumed:
FoF Cruise = 60% * damage= 0.6*386.7 = 232.03 < 355,304 = 0.92*386.2 = 90% * damage = Precision Cruise
Including reload times:
FoF Cruise damage <<<<<< Precision Cruise damage
And yet again you juts mantralinke repeat what you already said and utterly ignored what I wrote.
Copy-paste:
Damp specced ships do not have the same speed potential as the curse. FoFs are about as dangerous to it than Precs for the curse.
Nevermind ECM ships.
This is your fallacy, which you repeat and repeat and repeat. You assume that TDs somehow put amarr recons in a disadvantage towards missile ships compared to the other recons. They don't.
And as a sidenote your numbers are wrong:
Prec cruise max damage is 357.5.
The damage reduction with lvl4 GMP is 35% for FoFs and 2.5% for precs and with lvl 5 30.7% with FoFs and 0% with precs.
This gives us with max skills 268 for FoFs vs 357.5 with precs.
This is the reason why I know the game by heart and not EFT. I rather rely on ingame info and my own calculations. Because I know they are right (unless I make an error that is ).
Quote:
You could actually tank FoF Cruise missiles in a Pilgrim shot by a Raven, but not a Raven with Precision missiles.
It is debatable if a Pilgrim should be able to solo a Raven. In my opinion a Raven, which is ratting solo in a belt in 0.0 should die to each - at least average - Pilgrim pilot.
Fristly, the pilgrim is not the curse.
While the pilgrim can (barely and only if you ignore BS drone damage) tank FoFs the curse cannot.
Max skills FoFs deal 292 dps on a 3 damagemod raven, feel free to give me a curse setup without faction or t2 rigs which can tank this on its weakest resistance. But try to get the numbers right this time.
Then there is the fact that no other force recon can tank FoFs, they have to disengage just as surely as the pilgrim will when shot as with.
Quote:
Anyways: I ask you most kindly to keep some manners and leave your LOLs to yourself or other threads.
I will when you do not try to sell your opinion as fact. When I read something I find rediculous I will respond in an appropriate manner - by laughing.
Quote:
That said: You are right, that tracking disruptors should be more effective versus their specialized targets than dampeners and jammers. But: dampeners are already 100% effective if you can keep range. That is exactly the reason, why the NOS/Neut/Damp/Nano-Curse is a viable solo setup. The currently proposed changes change nothing here, simply as the targetting range reduction is sufficient to keep the ground.
100% effective is 100% effective you can not top it. And dampeners still affect missile boats too, but tracking disruptors dont.
Would you consider a module which needs 8 of it to have a particular effect as effective as a module which can achieve the same effect with one of it?
No?
You would need on the curse 3 damps to have a similar effect as 2 TDs with my script suggestion.
They do not have the same efficiency.
And as already said for a curse it makes no difference if it gets attacked by FoF or prec cruise, it cannot tank either.
Originally by: Hydrogen
By now we got it several times:
Both simply do not fill their roles. Not at all.
Actually the only person who claimed that the curse cannot fill its role is you. But you said it several times, I give that to you.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:16:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Aramendel
Prec cruise max damage is 357.5.
You are right here, thanks for putting it right.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:24:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Aramendel
Actually the only person who claimed that the curse cannot fill its role is you. But you said it several times, I give that to you.
Ok, so if you you think the Curse fills its role, please explain which role and how?
or more clear:
1. Does the Curse currently fullfill a role (except the already mentioned Nano-Curse solo)? If so which?
2. Does the Pilgrim currently fullfill a role? If so which?
Since you disagree, please tell.
__
- click here - |
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 21:57:00 -
[84]
TBH the role CCP gave to the Amarr recons didn't work, so us players came up with better fittings to compete. For this reason players find themselves using nano+damp Curse and ecm burst+damp Pilgrim.
Maybe if TDs didn't suck fat monkey balls compared to damps/ecm, the Amarr recons would fill their original role better. What would you rather have... the ability to disable a ship completely or just affect it's hit ratio? Which I might add, has absolutely no effect on missiles, drones, other ew, nos/neuts.
What's worse is that the Pilgrim is forced into web range to use it's nos/neut bonus. After you fit the required mods (mwd, web, scram, injector), you're left with ONE mid for a single TD... and it isn't going to make much difference when you're webbed.
The bonuses on the Pilgrim are basically working against each other. At least with the Huggin/Rapier the painter bonus compliments the web bonus nicely... though painters still suck, but that's not the point.
How to fix it though? Well the range bonus would help. The TDs would be more effective if you weren't webbed. It would also help to be able to outrun drones and some missiles (or at least reduce the damage taken by them via speed).
TDs still need something though. What that is, I don't know. But compared to damps and ecm they aren't that great.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:25:00 -
[85]
Ok right now we are at the following points:
1. Tracking disruptors need to be similarly effective like jammers and dampeners aleternatively
2. NOS/Neut needs to be reworked for Pilgrim and/or Curse alternatively
3. Curse and Pilgrim ship stats need to be reworked as in eg. grid, resist, slot layout, cargo bay,... (my suggestions) alternatively
4. Curse is fine since there is a viable nano/damp/neut setup, but Pilgrim needs to be reworked.
anything I missed?
My personal perception of the discussion:
ad 1. unlikely it is too great an impact and even after a long discussion we did not come up with a solution so far that works.
ad 2. an intense discussion. Somehow it appears that some players fear the "overpowered" Curse and Pilgrim, thus being extremly against any NOS/Neut change for Amarr Recons only. Others favor the Amarr Recon solo playstyle and would love to have it returned.
ad 3. there was close to no discussion about this option, except "LOL" or similar, since I made those suggestions  . Still I believe this is an option since it can be implemented easily and fast. Eg. cargo + 1 med slot + cap modification or a boost to armor/resist/grid/cap,... Any comments here?
ad 4. it appears that this opinion has no common consent. Some plain do not believe (including me) that nano/damp/neut Curse is a real role, when it is the only viable one. Others seem to be ok.
As a general impression: this thread lacks more Curse/Pilgrim pilots and their points of view.
__
- click here - |
oniplE
NED-Clan
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 22:52:00 -
[86]
A curse whine thread? What? They're awesome, wanna trade them for gallente recons? The amarr recons are pretty much the only reason why i would ever train amarr..
x |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 23:15:00 -
[87]
Originally by: oniplE
A curse whine thread? What? They're awesome, wanna trade them for gallente recons? The amarr recons are pretty much the only reason why i would ever train amarr..
Right now that woulda be a load of skill points in the trash bin ;)
You might not have realized that Amarr Recons changed completly the past few months from maybe even overpowered to crippled (agreed in the case of the Pilgrim, discussed in case of the Curse).
Maybe you got a constructive addition ;) ?
__
- click here - |
Yakov Draken
Minmatar
Tides Of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.26 23:34:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Yakov Draken on 26/10/2007 23:35:51
I guess I'm the ultimate noob cause I'm training my combat alt for a Curse right now.
The Curse has a very clear role that it does well - drain cap and do drone damage while sitting back outside Warp Disrupter range. Neutralising cap is a devestating weapon and the Curse is extremely good at the job. You don't have to target the primary - if they are a Drake with a passive tank you can cap out the oppositions tacklers, recons, laser/blaster boats. Sure there will be the odd gank where you are fairly redundant but that is a part of being a specialised weapon. That the Curse is effective solo as well as in a gang shows just how good it is.
The biggest question mark for me on future usage of the Curse is how the Sensor Damp nerf works in practice. If a mix of range and locking time damps works decently then life should still be rosy.
If you want to improve Amarr recons then you should focus on the one with problems - the Pilgrim.
|
oniplE
NED-Clan
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 00:43:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: oniplE
A curse whine thread? What? They're awesome, wanna trade them for gallente recons? The amarr recons are pretty much the only reason why i would ever train amarr..
Right now that woulda be a load of skill points in the trash bin ;)
You might not have realized that Amarr Recons changed completly the past few months from maybe even overpowered to crippled (agreed in the case of the Pilgrim, discussed in case of the Curse).
Maybe you got a constructive addition ;) ?
ok, perhaps instead of flying a curse you should fight against a curse and experience it from the other side.
I've been testing a lot of ship setups lately (mostly deimos) and the curse is the number 1 threat, hands down.
Sure it takes a lot of cap to sustain the offensive capabilities of the curse (neuts), but you should see what it does to the target.. my cap is cut in half instantly and 15 seconds later its completely gone.
With my cap injector i can keep the repper going, but there's no way i'll catch the curse cuz i dont have the speed, nor do i have enough cap for the mwd.
I like tanking my deimos, im not so much into the damage dealing, so i can usually tank hacs and commandships until i run out of capboosters, but i can garantuee it will be over within 20 seconds if a curse shows up.
With the nosnerf its less of a solopwnmobile, but recons are meant to be gang ships, thats why all of the recons have crap damage output, but they all have the ability to tip the scale in gang fights, including the amarr recons.
x |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 02:48:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 27/10/2007 02:52:26
Originally by: oniplE
With the nosnerf its less of a solopwnmobile, but recons are meant to be gang ships, thats why all of the recons have crap damage output, but they all have the ability to tip the scale in gang fights, including the amarr recons.
Well then I suggest you learn about your opponent. An armor tanked, slow blaster or rail Deimos is the worst possible fitting to fight a Curse.
Try your Deimos with a speed tank or try a Nano-Ishtar. You wont even realize your cap is being drained, simply because, when you could need it, the Curse is already gone.
A blaster Deimos with 2 damage mods has 643 dps in T2 fitting. With a speed tank you just close in: Your hybrid alpha and your drone alpha already rip the shield off the Curse. By then it becomes ugly, since you need something along the line of 9 seconds to drop the Curses armor. Since now the Curses repper kicks in, you need 3 seconds more to see a blinking pod of a Curse pilot. That is somethign along the line of 15 seconds total which you need to drop the Curse. In case of a Nano-Ishtar I doubt if you would see your armor scratched even...
Check your fittings - this is no mystery, but common knowledge.
Edit-On a sidenote: A Deimos with 2 damage mods and the rest of lows and rigs for speed, goes at 4,178 m/s - a Curse at 3,847 m/s (max in T2 fitting). Both without implants. If a Curse outruns you, then his setup is pimped, implant and/or faction/deadspace wise. Pointless for you to complain here.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Crazy Tasty
Beyond Divinity Inc
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 05:42:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Hydrogen
4. Curse is fine since there is a viable nano/damp/neut setup, but Pilgrim needs to be reworked.
This. Curse can be armor tanked, and use TD's, but you have to pick your targets. With a nano/damp setup you have the greatest range of targets possible, not unlike other ships in the game, disregarding ship bonuses to get the full extent of the ship.
The only issue that needs to be addressed at all is the Pilgrim, its extremely limited in its current state and needs a look by the Devs.
|
Caius LiviusCerso
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 06:29:00 -
[92]
Thanx for work, its good, I hoe CCP reads it eventualy.
|
oniplE
NED-Clan
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 08:57:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Edited by: Hydrogen on 27/10/2007 02:52:26
Originally by: oniplE
With the nosnerf its less of a solopwnmobile, but recons are meant to be gang ships, thats why all of the recons have crap damage output, but they all have the ability to tip the scale in gang fights, including the amarr recons.
Well then I suggest you learn about your opponent. An armor tanked, slow blaster or rail Deimos is the worst possible fitting to fight a Curse.
Try your Deimos with a speed tank or try a Nano-Ishtar. You wont even realize your cap is being drained, simply because, when you could need it, the Curse is already gone.
A blaster Deimos with 2 damage mods has 643 dps in T2 fitting. With a speed tank you just close in: Your hybrid alpha and your drone alpha already rip the shield off the Curse. By then it becomes ugly, since you need something along the line of 9 seconds to drop the Curses armor. Since now the Curses repper kicks in, you need 3 seconds more to see a blinking pod of a Curse pilot. That is somethign along the line of 15 seconds total which you need to drop the Curse. In case of a Nano-Ishtar I doubt if you would see your armor scratched even...
Check your fittings - this is no mystery, but common knowledge.
Edit-On a sidenote: A Deimos with 2 damage mods and the rest of lows and rigs for speed, goes at 4,178 m/s - a Curse at 3,847 m/s (max in T2 fitting). Both without implants. If a Curse outruns you, then his setup is pimped, implant and/or faction/deadspace wise. Pointless for you to complain here.
Rail deimos: rare
speed tanked deimos : rare
Obviously every idiot can come up with a setup that can kill a curse, its just that your setup will be completely useless against other ships. If its speedtanked it will be paperthin, and unlike the curse its weapons will only start doing damage to the opponent once its near 5k range. It will melt to small gangs in seconds.
Anyway, you are obviously biased and clueness, there is no point in "complaining" here idd cuz its obviously filled with curse fanboys screaming about a ship that used to be a solopwnmobile and now is just a good ship.
x |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:05:00 -
[94]
Originally by: oniplE
Originally by: Hydrogen
Anyway, you are obviously biased and clueness, there is no point in "complaining" here idd cuz its obviously filled with curse fanboys screaming about a ship that used to be a solopwnmobile and now is just a good ship.
Every try killing stuff with a pilgrim? I think not.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:42:00 -
[95]
Quote:
Anyway, you are obviously biased and clueness, there is no point in "complaining" here idd cuz its obviously filled with carrier fanboys screaming about a ship that used to be a solopwnmobile and now is just a good ship.
With a small adjustment your view could be applied elsewhere me thinks....
C.
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:42:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Hydrogen
@Aramendel - I made a mistake. I thought a serious discussion is possible with you, by just ignoring your drama queen attitude.
So we are trying the "injured party" act now?
You are the one who was constantly ignoring what I was writing, with me having to repeat points 2-3 times until you finally aknowledged or even responded to them.
Ignoring the other side is no discussion, it is a monologue.
Quote:
http://users.utu.fi/sipesa/eve/index.php?a=topic&threadID=572346 - Tell me, when you stop to change your opinion like Paris Hilton her undies.
Because having a somehwat different opinion over 2 months ago is "changing your opinion like Paris Hilton her undies"? Yes, right.
Actually, it isn't really that different. With the right setups you can counter the nos changes very well with it without turning it into a 5 cap recharge module or permaboosting abomination.
I would still class the curse as overall worst combat recon, but not by much. The soon-to-be damp nerf will reduce the efficienccy differences between it and the gal & minnie recons even further.
The problem with it is not the ship itself, it is its EW. If TDs could relyably disable ALL kinds of turrets the curse would be just fine since this would counter the med slot used by the injector now because it could then use 2 TDs to get the effect of 3 damps. With a even somewhat better performance vs turrets, almost the same performance vs missiles and a somewhat worse performance vs enemy EW.
|
oniplE
NED-Clan
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 09:53:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Cailais
Quote:
Anyway, you are obviously biased and clueness, there is no point in "complaining" here idd cuz its obviously filled with carrier fanboys screaming about a ship that used to be a solopwnmobile and now is just a good ship.
With a small adjustment your view could be applied elsewhere me thinks....
C.
Which isnt really an argument for anything related to this subject..
x |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 10:44:00 -
[98]
Originally by: oniplE
Originally by: Cailais
Quote:
Anyway, you are obviously biased and clueness, there is no point in "complaining" here idd cuz its obviously filled with carrier fanboys screaming about a ship that used to be a solopwnmobile and now is just a good ship.
With a small adjustment your view could be applied elsewhere me thinks....
C.
Which isnt really an argument for anything related to this subject..
Well please look it up again on what I wrote. A blaster Deimos, not a rail Deimos. TBH I do not find a Blaster Deimos a rare occurence at all.
You are perfectly right with the paper-thin tank of a Nano-Deimos. Exactly the same issue is worse for the Curse, as it got less speed potential as the Deimos even.
Yet again: A 1vs1 rail armor tanked Deimos is one of the most favorable targets for a Curse. You are highly cap dependant and tracking disruptors or dampeners deactivate your guns usability by close to 100%. An armor blaster Deimos has the same issues, when it is unable to close in, to get into range - guns are disabled at close to 100%.
Face the truth: Your setup being pwned is not a Curse issue, but a Nano issue. A Nano-Ishtar, in a "Curse" setup can do the exact same to you, except it would be faster in ripping your armor tanked Deimos (no matter if rails or blasters) apart.
__
- click here - |
Tappits
Caldari
Do Or Die And Live Or Try
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 11:42:00 -
[99]
I am a Caldari Pilot and I think Amarr need help
Get rid of the nos nerf on the Pilgrim Curse and Bhaalgorn
Let the amarr race have some fun for a change.
Expecting some one to completely change race is inconceivable.
I am English L5 but their nerft so I am going to train Canadian L5 because theyĘre better WTF.
CCP have gone mad the past few years
The only people that say ships or mods are overpowered is because they were solo in some low sec or 0.0 system and got poped.
This is a mmo get some friends to help you
I am Caldari so cannot solo PvP I donĘt start asking for high slot Disrupters and Webbers ffs I get some one to help me and then we both have fun (thatĘs why we play, for fun)
Give them the nos.
-I suck at pvp but that does not stop me from poping your pod :) |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 12:25:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Aramendel
Originally by: Hydrogen
@Aramendel - I made a mistake. I thought a serious discussion is possible with you, by just ignoring your drama queen attitude.
So we are trying the "injured party" act now?
I like you too ;)
__
- click here - |
|
|
Mou'adib
Gallente
Ethical Dilemma
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 12:35:00 -
[101]
both ships are freaking fine. stop complaining. i fly both. i love both. you all suck
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 13:47:00 -
[102]
Well I use to fly the pilgrim and on rare occasions I would fly a curse. The problem is I rarely have a opportunity to solo, just happens to be that the corp I'm in I am always involved in massive battles, thatĘs something the amarr recons suffer strongly in. I preferred the pilgrim over the curse. I was very attractive to the pilgrim even though the curse was known to be a much better ship. I love the fact how it was a close range ship, a do or die with no flee bonus at all. Also it was such a challenge to fly in large battles and it performed better than the curse cause well it could cloak.
Before nos nerf the pilgrim was fine, yes it had the worst ew bonus and you had to become a very skilful pilot to fly them in both gangs and solo The slot layout and nos bonus just seemed right. I had always used a neut and nos combo. However since nos nerf the pilgrim is completely useless mainly due to cap issues, tanking problems and the inability to drain the targets cap down to 0. Though you can fit your ship for very strict and certain situations and it can perform brilliant. One of the set-ups that was brought to me involved a purely no dps, heavy tank set-up that relied on breaking the targets lock. But the set up was to tackle a ship and wait for support. Problem is Gal, Caldari recons do that but better.
I have tried tirelessly to come up with a set-up that would let the pilgrim perform like it once could. Though I think I have worked out a fitting that would let the pilgrim perform well, the problem is thatĘs again its only can be used in strict situations and still wont be the good old same pilgrim.
Not to mention that the 100pg increase was brought in to let the pilgrim to fit a cap injector. Cap injectors cost 150pg and takes up a precious mid slot.
The whole point of recons is that I can be used in all situations. Though some recons perform better that others, all can do their part. This was never the case for the amarr recons. It was a solo recon and anything but that, it was very average. Bigger the gang the more useless it had become.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 13:55:00 -
[103]
Now for the comment on the Deimos. I think oniplE made the comment. You say that the curse gives you the biggest threat? Well of course it would. Pilgrims are used in a very strict environment and the curse just has more flexibility with damps and speed. Your ship relies on cap with everything it does, it needs tracking and optimal to hit, something the amarr recons have bonus to. If anything the amarr recons are designed to kill the deimos and I would be very comfortable despite the nos nerf to take my pilgrim against your deimos.
However, you can counter the amarr recons, eg speed fit or cap injector or both. As long as you can get in range for your blasters and have enough cap through your injector you can burn through the curse. But as you said, then you will become useless in other situations. Well now you can feel what the amarr recon pilots feels like especially the pilgrim pilots. It can only be used in a very precise environment. You may say thatĘs how recons all should operate, but yet all other races can perform greatly in more varied situations.
A basic fitted Deimos can perform well in a lot of situations and a specific fitting can perform amazingly in stricter environments. Though the pilgrim/curse is design to get the upper hand on the Deimos, along with the zealot, eagle, geddon, thron, and other simular ships, it also struggles tremendously against drone, missile and minmie boats.
I have tried so hard to get CCP to notice how badly the pilgrim performs now, I have made a few threads and have been a strong contributor to other threads. However here is the best thread to date. It delivers strong points, though some I disagree in, but at least the heart is in the right place and it should be bumped till there is a change.
|
ciapek
Amarr
Dark Centuri Inc.
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 14:56:00 -
[104]
good job there finally some1 took time to put it here i agree that amarr recons just sux, as amarr recon pilot i think they lost to much since nos nerf ans since that they pretty usseless.
my recon history: since i fly them ive like 20ish kills and 2 pilgrim loses that was prenerf, pretty good ratio we can say buy most kills were from ganks just few solo mostly cruisers, i died 2 times once in gang 2nd time vs BS
my solution for amarr recons, give them pre nos nerf ability of nos use and case is close, since noses were primary weapon we lost all with nerf, give it back just to 2 those ships and we are done on subjct.
neuts wow look ay cure/pilgim cap ammount and recharge time !!!!!! forget about using mwd or tank or even ew - nos was savior
and drones ? 5 t2 meds what damage they do ? 200 dps raw so its like anything special here ?
i still have 4 amarr recons but i dont use to much those, why ? whats the point ? almost died to sabre in it, even neuts/nos combo wont win, or eithther nano and shield tank ( weak tank no ew) or ew and armor tank ( pretty weak and slow)
ppl whined about curse ooverpowered before nerf cause it was good solo pwn mobile ( but still no role ship or decent gang support ship) now vaga is i-win ship no1 crying about it, probably getting more kills than curses ever did, gallente damp works great, solo or in gang, same caldari even after neft either solo or in gang can disable 2-3 targets ( who else can do it ? ) minmatar, web bonus sweet, make web working like nos doeas and you will c 1000 posts about that.
im saving recons for day some1 with brain will make them FORCE COMBAT and FORCE RECON ships back, cause they lost thier force and/or combat strenght
amarr sux anyway, even leftover were taken away, if nothing change i swear the god my all skills i learn only to specialize in amarr ships r wasted and ill cross train anything else. that would be a shame
|
madaluap
Gallente
Mercenary Forces
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 15:13:00 -
[105]
Curse is a very decent recon. Very nice ship.
Why not give the pilgrim a dual range bonus? I doesnt have BS sized drain on its neuts/nos, but it can use them from 60 km range.
Seems like a decent fix. 
_________________________________________________
Breetime
A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 18:04:00 -
[106]
Originally by: madaluap
Curse is a very decent recon. Very nice ship.
Why not give the pilgrim a dual range bonus? I doesnt have BS sized drain on its neuts/nos, but it can use them from 60 km range.
Seems like a decent fix.
TBH from my perception it would still lack tank.
__
- click here - |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 19:43:00 -
[107]
Yes, the problem with the Pilgrim right now is that it cannot tank and neut at the same time. Range bonus would just result in nanoability. It needs a bonus to neut cap use.
--
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.27 23:35:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Corwain
Yes, the problem with the Pilgrim right now is that it cannot tank and neut at the same time. Range bonus would just result in nanoability. It needs a bonus to neut cap use.
Sounds very reasonable.
C.
*signature removed - please email us to find out why (include a link) - Jacques([email protected])
- sig designer - eve mail
Low Sec Idea |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.28 11:17:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 28/10/2007 11:18:36
Edited by: Hydrogen on 28/10/2007 11:17:29
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Corwain
Yes, the problem with the Pilgrim right now is that it cannot tank and neut at the same time. Range bonus would just result in nanoability. It needs a bonus to neut cap use.
Sounds very reasonable.
TBH a better tank, another mid and keeping current dps with increased drone bay on Pilgrim would fix that too. Why?
1. tank - obviously to survive in close quarter combat. At least the same resist as Curse would fix that.
2. current dps - 315 dps is the maximum in a reasonable Neut/NOS setup. It can not even be modified by modules or implants. 150m3 drone bay with 75MBit, thus having a full wing spare with different damage type or speed or EW would be reasonable.
3. another mid - to keep range on normal ships you need at least AB, scrambler, webber, cap injector, leaving only 1 slot for EW, which is somehow pointless (drones still hit you, missiles still hit you at 100%, blasters would rip the Pilgrim still apart, lasers and Proj would be reduced in effect). Besides that, jammers on Pilgrim are least effective and dampeners are pointless after the change in close combat. Resulting in a must use tracking disruptors.
With those changes we still look at 315 dps maximum on the Pilgrim, with the tank of the target reduced in effectiveness (NOS/Neut vs cap injector). The Pilgrim would have to keep the target in range, sustain its own cap, have its drones survive, hoping the target mismanages its own cap (injector) and hoping the target has no friends closeby (315 dps take their time to bring one down).
Hardly overpowered but doable.
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.28 20:06:00 -
[110]
Still nothing from any developers?? Maybe I should fly a carrier...
Wether its a buff to nos/neut range, the ability to fit and run neuts with a MAR or what ever, its up to debate: what I do know is my pilgrim isnt popping much on anything atm.
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.28 23:37:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Cailais
Still nothing from any developers?? Maybe I should fly a carrier...
Wether its a buff to nos/neut range, the ability to fit and run neuts with a MAR or what ever, its up to debate: what I do know is my pilgrim isnt popping much on anything atm.
C.
Yah, except Id prefer if CCP does not make another Nano-fotm of the Pilgrim...
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 02:31:00 -
[112]
Im probably one of the few pilgrim pilots here that doesnt want to see this ship become another range recon. This is why I was attracted to the ship in the first place. Close combat, do or die. It was such a high to fly. However without getting anymore than about 3 cycles of nos thats like 12secs before the targets cap is below yours is kinda wrong.
Again ccp gives the pilgrim an extra 100pg for a 150pg module and doesnt even add an extra mid slot. Cant believe no one mentions this
|
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 03:07:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Im probably one of the few pilgrim pilots here that doesnt want to see this ship become another range recon. This is why I was attracted to the ship in the first place. Close combat, do or die. It was such a high to fly. However without getting anymore than about 3 cycles of nos thats like 12secs before the targets cap is below yours is kinda wrong.
Again ccp gives the pilgrim an extra 100pg for a 150pg module and doesnt even add an extra mid slot. Cant believe no one mentions this
Pretty much ditto my feelings exactly. I don't want another nanoship, I want the Pilgrim to work as intended without:
1. Capping itself out
2. Fielding no offense (ewar)
3. Fielding no defense
--
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 09:57:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Corwain
Originally by: Depp Knight
Im probably one of the few pilgrim pilots here that doesnt want to see this ship become another range recon. This is why I was attracted to the ship in the first place. Close combat, do or die. It was such a high to fly. However without getting anymore than about 3 cycles of nos thats like 12secs before the targets cap is below yours is kinda wrong.
Again ccp gives the pilgrim an extra 100pg for a 150pg module and doesnt even add an extra mid slot. Cant believe no one mentions this
Pretty much ditto my feelings exactly. I don't want another nanoship, I want the Pilgrim to work as intended without:
1. Capping itself out
2. Fielding no offense (ewar)
3. Fielding no defense
Exactly. The pilgrim was real fun to fly even though it would often be a 'close run thing'. Perhaps its the hull that needs a boost? The Arbitrator with a superior cap regen might indirectly boost the Pilgrims ability to survive up close?
With the Black Ops ships coming out Id really like to be able to use my pilgrim in a far more effective role. Because its sucha niche ship, with so few pilots I worry that ccp wil just dump it in the 'meh we'll fix it later...' bin.
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:13:00 -
[115]
It's a crying shame really. I pretty much devoted myself to the Pilgrim until recently. Hardly worthwhile in large gangs, it really only had a role in small gangs and solo, which is ok...one or the other is fair enough. Since the last patch it lost a good part of its capability in the latter. What I would like to know is why did the developers do this to the Pilgrim? Was it just collateral damage from the whining about Nos Domis and screw the effort it would take to protect it from the nerf?
I don't know how many other Pilgrim pilots used sensor damps instead of tracking disruptors because of the limitations of disruptors, and given its only offensive weapons are drones, this coming patch is potentially another double wammy to a ship that's already been gutted. What gives?
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:24:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Phaedruss
I don't know how many other Pilgrim pilots used sensor damps instead of tracking disruptors
Probably most of them, mainly because damps are currently more than a bit overpowered, and much more general-use than TDs. It's not problem with TDs being bad (quite the opposite), but that damps are too good in comparison.
Now damps are being nerfed at least somewhat, but apparently so are TDs(?). We'll see what happens. I think TDs right now are pretty nicely balanced (good effect, but situational), it's the damps (and only the damps) that need a nerf. Oh well.
If you want to talk "worst EW type", talk to the Minmatar. They'll educate you in the wonderful world of target painters . Tracking disrupts aren't the worst (just the second-worst, heh).
About the ships: Curse is currently ok-ish imho... it used to be maybe a bit overpowered, now it's not. I'm not wild about the fact that you have to nano the ship to make it really useful, though.
Pilgrim has problems, agreed. It can't tank well enough for the range it's expected to fight in. It needs... something. Maybe several somethings.
|
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:44:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Originally by: Phaedruss
I don't know how many other Pilgrim pilots used sensor damps instead of tracking disruptors
Probably most of them, mainly because damps are currently more than a bit overpowered, and much more general-use than TDs. It's not problem with TDs being bad (quite the opposite), but that damps are too good in comparison.
Erm, actually the 2 damps+ECM burst was a very niche fitting for the Pilgrim, very few Pilgrim pilots don't fit TDs are the have to operate at very close ranges where damps are ineffective as you will lock at almost the same time as an opponent and are too close to stay out of lock range. Not to mention damps take 3 to really be effective, hard to fit on the Pilgrim with its limited mids.
--
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:46:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Corwain
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Originally by: Phaedruss
I don't know how many other Pilgrim pilots used sensor damps instead of tracking disruptors
Probably most of them, mainly because damps are currently more than a bit overpowered, and much more general-use than TDs. It's not problem with TDs being bad (quite the opposite), but that damps are too good in comparison.
Erm, actually the 2 damps+ECM burst was a very niche fitting for the Pilgrim, very few Pilgrim pilots don't fit TDs are the have to operate at very close ranges where damps are ineffective as you will lock at almost the same time as an opponent and are too close to stay out of lock range. Not to mention damps take 3 to really be effective, hard to fit on the Pilgrim with its limited mids.
Ah, brainfart, was thinking of the Curse there for a sec. Yeah, TDs are more common in Pilgrims I'd guess.
|
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 14:48:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Ah, brainfart, was thinking of the Curse there for a sec. Yeah, TDs are more common in Pilgrims I'd guess.
Yeah, I've never used TDs on a Curse myself, although I haven't flown it much like I did my Pilgrim.
--
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 17:20:00 -
[120]
Amarr recons are ship hangar decoration...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
|
|
Blosphere
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 17:53:00 -
[121]
Please bring the old pilgrim back :|
--
|
KillmAll187
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 17:57:00 -
[122]
****Pre Patch****
The problem with the Curse, was that with the Nano setup (everyone agrees this is most common, yes?) was that it was un-killable 1v1 with a good pilot at the controls. The best case for a Curse target would be to make it run. C'mon, how many BS sized nos? And people whine about the Dominix that struggles to fit 3 heavy nos.
Fast forward to today, the solo pwnmobile part has been fixed, but now the Curse really isn't any different than a regular Arbitrator. I don't know how you fix a Curse without making it stupidly strong vs anything that relies on cap. If you have ever fought a Curse you will know what I mean. I guess somehow make it impossible for the curse to go 3k/s. Then I don't care if it can nuke my capacitor in under 30 seconds.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 18:45:00 -
[123]
Originally by: KillmAll187
****Pre Patch****
The problem with the Curse, was that with the Nano setup (everyone agrees this is most common, yes?) was that it was un-killable 1v1 with a good pilot at the controls. The best case for a Curse target would be to make it run. C'mon, how many BS sized nos? And people whine about the Dominix that struggles to fit 3 heavy nos.
Fast forward to today, the solo pwnmobile part has been fixed, but now the Curse really isn't any different than a regular Arbitrator. I don't know how you fix a Curse without making it stupidly strong vs anything that relies on cap. If you have ever fought a Curse you will know what I mean. I guess somehow make it impossible for the curse to go 3k/s. Then I don't care if it can nuke my capacitor in under 30 seconds.
Arguabley the Curse remains an effective ship, not amazing but it can still be very effective in certain situations. The ability for it to carry 15 drones (on test) is a big bonus for this ship.
The pilgrim however cant rely upon holding off at range to deal damage as it must get within web range to utilise its neut/nos (simply holding at range and its dps is pretty poor: you would indeed be better of with an Arbitrator).
If the pilgrim is to be able to hold its own within web range then it needs either a very much superior tank, or a far more efficient nos/neut in order to allow it to attempt to run an armor repair module. Alternatively it is given a range bonus to nos/neut so it can perform in a similar fashion to the classic 'nano-curse'.
My personal preference is to reduce its base cap recharge time probably by something like 30 - 50%.
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 21:40:00 -
[124]
As mentioned by some pilots before: The Curse would be pretty balanced, if it were given a 20-30% better CapRecharge, making it possible to run at least 2 Neutralizer without a CapInjector.
The Pilgrim however is a real problem, as all pilots would agree, that a NOS/Neut-Range-Bonus wouldn't cut it on that ship. So we've to give it something else for doing it's job decently, like the mentioned Neutralizer-Activation-Reduction. 7,5% per LvL would cut it I think, when I go through the numbers.
As TrackingDisruptors will get screwed like the Damps with Trinity (Rev III) I'd rather like to see the TD-Bonus on the Amarr-Recons changed to 5% Resistances for the Curse and 5% Armor HP on the Pilgrim as well.
With that I could live, and it would'nt make them overpowered from my POV, but give them the ability to be a Combat-Ship instead of a EW-Ship, which they never were.
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 21:54:00 -
[125]
My personal favorite for the Pilgrim is the classical stealth assassin (I take the approach of UO stealth assassin/DAOC shadowblades/DAOC infiltrators,...).
Let me elaborate on this, first on the corresponding niche/target:
1. ships soloing in general resp. someone who strayed from the group
2. esspecially PvE, but maybe also PvP
3. ships of any size
What are a stealth assassins drawbacks:
1. light armor/no armor
2. stealth is slow, thus targets must either be stationary PvEing (belts/anomalies), Sniping (PvP) or simply being afk for approach
3. other stealth assassins have an option/possibility to find a stealth assassin (keyword tracking in other MMORPGS)
4. uncloak/decloak: less the skill of the stealth assassin, the more likely a target uncloaks a stealther by chance the close the stealther is. At maximum skill a stealther is almost impossible to decloak if he does not stand directly on target.
5. a special position is needed for highest possible effect (to launch a critical hit)
6. long range anti-stealther-stealthers
What are a stealth assassins strength:
1. close to always hits first out of cloak - close to zero delay from uncloak to hit (shock tactic)
2. extremly high alpha hit or ability to disable target for some time (up to 10 seconds)
3. Option to apply DoT (Damage over Time resp. life drain) - poison in UO, Bleeding in DAOC, poison spell in SB,...
4. extremly agile to evade being hit
At least that is how other MMORPGs balanced this role. Main goal was almost always to punish solo play or farming. Players regulated the farming themselves. When there were too many stealth assassins, players started to create anti-stealth-assassin assassins.
In general I believe this is a viable niche for EvE too. It would also apply a challenging assett to the EvE gaming experience and improve CCP's stand on PvP. There should be no safe PvEing outside empire. Risk vs reward - but this relation is out of whack in EvE. Why?
1. we know a farmer closeby in a system, farming belts on regular.
2. there are only 4 belts in system, so once we tried it alone - only one of us. Result: he had stabs on and warped to SS, cloaking.
3. having learned we return a few days later and rally 10 men at gate with frigs and cruisers. We jump in all at once and at least 3 scramble points warp to each belt at once. Result: even though we had no delay, he warped to SS and cloaked.
4. only chance if at all would be to log off and hope to get him in time. TBH: logon/logoff tactic should not be a viable game tactic as the only option to get someone.
This is only one of several examples. That said, what would be needed or could be done to bring some balance to risk vs reward and how could it look like. Another suggestion to Pilgrim - the stealth assassin:
i. can target immediatly after decloaking initiation (app. 5 secs until cloak wears off, so 5 seconds advantage for targetting for the stealther)
1. close to always hits first out of cloak - close to zero delay from uncloak to hit (shock tactic)
2. "Pilgrim device"/Pilgrim ECM burst - all target modules are offline for 10 seconds and then 100% functional again.
3. DoT already exists in form of NOS/Neut
4. "extremly agile to evade being hit" - this could be achieved by applying high resist to Pilgrim, extremly low sig radius, low armor and only allow 1-2 low slots
What happens? The Pilgrim would be extremly vulnerable, but always succeed, if the target didnt assume a Pilgrim's presence.
Those are not ready-out-of the-box changes, but a suggestion on another completly different change for an existant niche, which isnt filled. But again: this scenario highly relies on the target not knowing a Pilgrim's presence, thus using a Pilgrim's cloak requires the Pilgrim pilot to vanish from local or to appear like a friend (blue '+').
What is the point in being sneaky, when everyone knows that someone is there, who is not a friend?
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 22:14:00 -
[126]
I would have to say no to all of those changes to be honest.
One of the reasons that assassins where so popular / hard hitters in other games (I played a shadowblade, 3 of them actually, in DAOC - Bors server - Hazred & Shah); is that you could not change classes. Ex: A stealther was only good at pvp. In pve, you're lucky if you can get a group.
In eve, I can fly a pilgrim, raven, etc.. depending on the circumstances. However, I do believe that all recons should have the following abilities:
1) Target while cloaked, and ship scanners / cargo scanners can be used. No other modules. If you use any other type of modules, you will automatically uncloaked.
- This will give an "alpha strike from stealthed" attack, as well as give the recons a niche role: Intel gathering.
2) Ability to run their weapon systems indefinately (Nos - Neuts - TD's for pilgrim, Hybrids - Damps - Warp Jammers for Arazu, etc..) naturally, assuming all relevant skills are level 5.
- This gives the ships incentive to actually use the modules they are supposed to, as well as incentive for ship specialization.
3) Local: This is a game problem, perhaps move Local to constellation?
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.10.29 22:41:00 -
[127]
Edited by: Grytok on 29/10/2007 22:42:25
One ggod point made.
The recalibration (Targeting-Delay) on Force-Recons and Covert Ops has to be eliminated. The BlackOps get this feature as well, as the Stealth Bombers has it allready.
Can't think of any reason, why it would be bad to have it removed.
The Pilgrim would still have to launch it's drones, which creates a delay allready.
Also the Rapier would be more effective against Vagabonds or other speedy ships, if it could lock without the delay.
.
|
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 07:09:00 -
[128]
I don't see any need to give the Pilgrim a new role or some new bonuses. It was a fine ship for what it did before it became collateral damage in the last patch. Just reverse the damage that was done to it and leave it alone
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 09:17:00 -
[129]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 30/10/2007 09:17:37
Originally by: Phaedruss
I don't see any need to give the Pilgrim a new role or some new bonuses. It was a fine ship for what it did before it became collateral damage in the last patch. Just reverse the damage that was done to it and leave it alone
Actually I have no clue, why CCP does not do it. Also keep in mind, that current EvE warfare changes slowly:
1. targets have higher resists
2. MWD (speed) is standard by now
3. Cap injector is standard in PvP (at least from my perception).
4. It is apparently planned to reduce Pilgrim bandwidth, so it can field only 5 med or 2 heavy drones.
Basically, even in a prepatch Pilgrim, a Pilgrim has its problems in today's warfare. Together with the suggested drone bandwidth change I do not consider a prenerf Pilgrim to perform well...
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 11:35:00 -
[130]
I find it quite astonishing that so many people of the forums about the pilgrim truly believe that is fine. You will find that close to all of those who believe this have never flown one and look at the statical numbers and suggest that the nerfing is no where near as bad as some may seem.
Those who had flown in and still try to will realise that the pilgrim is totally lost. Role is now obsolete to any other cloaking recons out there, because what ever the pilgrim can do, others can do better in nearly every situation available.
With TD nerf just like most modules how is the ship even in the game. What is left of it.
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 12:08:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Those who had flown in and still try to will realise that the pilgrim is totally lost. Role is now obsolete to any other cloaking recons out there, because what ever the pilgrim can do, others can do better in nearly every situation available.
With TD nerf just like most modules how is the ship even in the game. What is left of it.
By now I got the impression, that some weird things happen on this forum:
1. People who never or rarely flew an Amarr Recon oppose any change to those, saying they are fine.
2. People who do use the Nano-Curse claim the Curse is fine and thus the Pilgrim too.
3. People who fell victim to Amarr Recon in the past (most likely before NOS nerf) claim that the Pilgrim and Curse are fine too.
4. ...
Recons are perceived as a threat, as those offer abilities, which disable most nao-fotms.
That said, I do not believe that most posters really perceive Amarr Recons and Pilgrim in special as fine. They simply do not want a change, most likely due to lack of understanding of game mechanics.
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 13:19:00 -
[132]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Depp Knight
Those who had flown in and still try to will realise that the pilgrim is totally lost. Role is now obsolete to any other cloaking recons out there, because what ever the pilgrim can do, others can do better in nearly every situation available.
With TD nerf just like most modules how is the ship even in the game. What is left of it.
By now I got the impression, that some weird things happen on this forum:
1. People who never or rarely flew an Amarr Recon oppose any change to those, saying they are fine.
2. People who do use the Nano-Curse claim the Curse is fine and thus the Pilgrim too.
3. People who fell victim to Amarr Recon in the past (most likely before NOS nerf) claim that the Pilgrim and Curse are fine too.
4. ...
Recons are perceived as a threat, as those offer abilities, which disable most nao-fotms.
That said, I do not believe that most posters really perceive Amarr Recons and Pilgrim in special as fine. They simply do not want a change, most likely due to lack of understanding of game mechanics.
you forgot one.
4) People see the stuff that Pilgrims kill, and assume that the opponent is not a new player and knows what he is doing, and the Pilgrim should have died. Hence, it is actually overpowered.
Yea, ok, I killed a Raven solo. People fail to realize:
1) He is 3 months old
2) He was using EM torpedoes
3) He did not recall his drones at all
4) Etc.. etc..
I think these are the kills which will ultimately lead to the Pilgrim's demise. Does this mean the Pilgrim is "overpowered" Hell no, considering I could STILL kill these pilots (and have done so) in a freaking T1 cruiser or frigate.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 14:24:00 -
[133]
Originally by: Feng Schui
I think these are the kills which will ultimately lead to the Pilgrim's demise. Does this mean the Pilgrim is "overpowered" Hell no, considering I could STILL kill these pilots (and have done so) in a freaking T1 cruiser or frigate.
Like I mentioned before: I strongly believe the Pilgrim should be the solo-predator. It was before the NOS-nerf. Not overpowered but well-suited to get the job done, like eg. jumping on ratting Ravens, while those try to tank an average 3 bs spawn.
Now put back the Pilgrim to its old NOS-functionality and remove it from local when cloaked, therby also putting an end to solo ISK-farmers.
__
- click here - |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 14:44:00 -
[134]
This week I have:
- Flown my Curse back to Empire.
- Flown my Pilgrim back to Empire.
- Hung my Curse and Pilgrim up on the wall in my Empire hangar.
- Flown back out to 0.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 15:01:00 -
[135]
Someone noticed the dev blog on Carriers? CCP is going back to the drawing board and stopped the Carrier changes for now.
In case of the Pilgrim, well...
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 15:17:00 -
[136]
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=625436
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 15:20:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Feng Schui
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=625436
nice one
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 15:35:00 -
[138]
I tried, heh;
If there are any rooms for improvement, leave a note =) I've been trying to edit and update the post as I go along.
If it gets everyone's stamp of approval, maybe it'll be another Khanid MK2 =)
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 17:13:00 -
[139]
Originally by: Feng Schui
I tried, heh;
If there are any rooms for improvement, leave a note =) I've been trying to edit and update the post as I go along.
If it gets everyone's stamp of approval, maybe it'll be another Khanid MK2 =)
You offered some valid points. I am just afraid CCP does not know at all on how broken some design lines are :/
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 17:29:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Feng Schui
I tried, heh;
If there are any rooms for improvement, leave a note =) I've been trying to edit and update the post as I go along.
If it gets everyone's stamp of approval, maybe it'll be another Khanid MK2 =)
You offered some valid points. I am just afraid CCP does not know at all on how broken some design lines are :/
tbh I think the pilgrim issue is being ignored, in the hope that it will just 'go away' because ccp do not want solo viable ships. This design trend has been evident for some time and typically supported by those that claim that EVE is a MMO - and therefore you should not be able to act independently. This is a shame as there should be plenty of opportunity for the individual to achieve sucess within a MMO environment.
The next expansion is only weeks away and I don't forsee any help coming to the pilgrim, its a sad loss to the game.
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
|
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 17:40:00 -
[141]
we can always keep trying to bring something to ccp's attention 
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 20:40:00 -
[142]
Actually it is exactly what CCP wanted before. The Carrier thread shows also that CCP is not off to "destroy" complete skillpoint trees of players. Either it is low priority or they are not aware on what happens.
Persistency always helps.
__
- click here - |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.10.30 22:33:00 -
[143]
I'm looking forward to one day remove my Amarr recon ships off of my decorative hangar wall...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 00:11:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
I'm looking forward to one day remove my Amarr recon ships off of my decorative hangar wall...
I was stupid enough to try it and lost horribly....
__
- click here - |
shinsushi
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 00:12:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Madla Mafia
I'm looking forward to one day remove my Amarr recon ships off of my decorative hangar wall...
I was stupid enough to try it and lost horribly....
At least you can replace it for like 50% the cost of a different recon.
☺☻☺☻☺
SO how do you get me to stop posting? Bump this thread Until devs answer |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 11:08:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Madla Mafia
I'm looking forward to one day remove my Amarr recon ships off of my decorative hangar wall...
I was stupid enough to try it and lost horribly....
Yeah, that point where you convince yourself that it cant be that bad, and that maybe this fitting will work....and then..'pop'.
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 13:05:00 -
[147]
Still awaiting a Dev response on this issue.
--
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 15:37:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Corwain
Still awaiting a Dev response on this issue.
TBH it is not an issue. Putting Curse aside, I found consens of all serious posters so far, that the Pilgrim is plain broken.
This matches exactly my ingame experience.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 09:20:00 -
[149]
3rd page - are Pilgrim pilots finally really the minority?
__
- click here - |
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 09:53:00 -
[150]
Originally by: Hydrogen
3rd page - are Pilgrim pilots finally really the minority?
I think they've probably always been the minority, it's just accelerating now that the ship has been gutted.
|
|
|
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 10:21:00 -
[151]
As most here have noted, the Curse is still a good ship, though no longer an 1-win button and requires a lot more pilot skill and micromanagement of cap.
The Pilgrim is weak. It needs more grid, for starters, and maybe something else besides.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 11:03:00 -
[152]
Edited by: Cailais on 01/11/2007 11:05:39
Originally by: Hydrogen
3rd page - are Pilgrim pilots finally really the minority?
Let me check! Well according to E-ON magazine issue 003 there where (at its time of publication) 307 Pilgrims in active service, selling at a market value of 141,040,000ISK.
Hmm how times have changed.
ineve.net shows 1388 trained pilgrim pilots out of a survey of some 50k capsuleers.
Odd then that while demand has presumabley gone up (there are more pilots), the price has *cough* fallen like a stone...
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 11:49:00 -
[153]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 01/11/2007 11:49:13
Originally by: Cailais
Edited by: Cailais on 01/11/2007 11:05:39
Originally by: Hydrogen
3rd page - are Pilgrim pilots finally really the minority?
Let me check! Well according to E-ON magazine issue 003 there where (at its time of publication) 307 Pilgrims in active service, selling at a market value of 141,040,000ISK.
ineve.net shows 1388 trained pilgrim pilots out of a survey of some 50k capsuleers.
Odd then that while demand has presumabley gone up (there are more pilots), the price has *cough* fallen like a stone...
So your point is?
Pilgrim pilots accept by now, that they are lost? I can not really believe that this is the attitude on how CCP wants to solve things :)
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 13:17:00 -
[154]
I don't think the Pilgrim and/or the Curse are totally screwed.
The Curse is still a good ship, but with some drawbacks now, as you have to use Neutralizers and NOS in micromanagement to engage targets, bigger then a T1-cruiser, but fo rgangs they can be fitted extremely good for Cap-destroying.
The Pilgrim is not really that good anymore, when it comes to Solo- Small-Gang PvP as it does not have the range, to do this job well with the NOS-changes that were made.
The NOS-change makes it near impossible to sustain the tank of the Pilgrim and use the Neutralizers to weaken the targets Cap at the same time. I'ts DPS on the other hand is still superior in comparison to the other Force-Recons.
5x Hammerhead II's with max Drone-Skills and the 50% Damage-Bonus from Amarr-Cruiser LvL 5, resulting in 230 DPS.
But you have to go close (< 12km) instead of keeping +30km like the others, which is the problem of the Pilgrim.
So as a solution the Pilgrim should be given NOS/Neut Range Bonus, what I'd rather dislike, or a better Capacitor (i.e. 20% better CapRecharge) to perform in it's role, as a sneaky Tackler.
And get rid of the targeting-delay for Force Recons and Covert Ops allready!
.
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 13:28:00 -
[155]
Pilgrim is dead to me. And the Curse is like an ugly child. You don't wanna be near it, but you kinda feel obligated too.
Come on CCP, bring them back to life!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Haniblecter Teg
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 13:38:00 -
[156]
Amarr recon's are going to start ruling.
Main reason is, Damps are getting nerfed.
So, Lachesis and Arazu are going to fallout, and tracking disrupters (remeber, that other bonus the curse gets?) is probably going to come into favor.
So, relax, lets see what trinity has in store for amarr recons.
-----------------
Friends Forever
Kill.
BoB.
Dead. |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 13:50:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
Amarr recon's are going to start ruling.
Main reason is, Damps are getting nerfed.
So, Lachesis and Arazu are going to fallout, and tracking disrupters (remeber, that other bonus the curse gets?) is probably going to come into favor.
So, relax, lets see what trinity has in store for amarr recons.
Nope! TDs are getting strength nerfs and scripts too. Sorry.
--
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 14:57:00 -
[158]
As long as damps and jammers affect turrets and launchers (and more) at reasonable chances, the TDs will be subpar.
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 19:01:00 -
[159]
bump
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 21:26:00 -
[160]
Yeah, both td's and damps are getting nerfed, leaving the Amarr recons exactly where CCP wants them...in the trash.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 23:54:00 -
[161]
It is just - TDs are way less effective than jammers and dampeners. That is exactly why the NOS-strength made up for it on Pilgrim. With NOS-nerf Pilgrim is still plain broken.
What bothers me is that CCP does not seem to read their board anymore.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 08:38:00 -
[162]
Well had a look on Sisi, hoping somethign changed. Of course it did: the 50MBit bandwidth is still in effect.
As a result: a broken ship is being nerfed. What is next? Increasing Neutralizer power consumption? Sorry, that is laughable.
__
- click here - |
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 08:51:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Well had a look on Sisi, hoping somethign changed. Of course it did: the 50MBit bandwidth is still in effect.
As a result: a broken ship is being nerfed. What is next? Increasing Neutralizer power consumption? Sorry, that is laughable.
I never bothered using TDs anyway because they were so limited in use given the prevalence of missile and drone boats around. I found that by maximizing damp skills, using damp rigs and using best named damp modules, the Pilgrim was still useable in solo scenarios, tho very much a pain in the ass to manage the cap. Given the magnitude of the Damp nerf tho, I just can't find a reason to fly the Pilgrim at all anymore. Believe me, tracking disruptor nerf and the drone nerf aren't the only things nailing the coffin shut on the Pilgrim on SISI at the moment.
|
Maud
Oberon Incorporated
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 09:30:00 -
[164]
'the curse still is a good ship'
yes it is in its current form.
Tho the pilgrim became unviable after the first nerf.
however considering the epic amount of nerfing hitting this class it sure won't be.
Nos Nerf - live
drone bandwidth Nerf - on SISI
Tracking Disruptor Nerf - on SISI
The curse is unviable in this state and like its stealthy brother will cease tobe used.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 10:05:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Maud
'the curse still is a good ship'
Sorry I tend to disagree, just because it needs to be more definite (imho):
'The Nano/damp-Curse still is a good ship'
Any chance you can agree to that formula :) ?
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 12:19:00 -
[166]
well, i think its official, after testing the pilgrim on sisi, i might just give up on it :\
congrats ccp.
|
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 12:23:00 -
[167]
i hav massivly unempressed with the performance of both the curse and pilgrim after the nos change, with damps tds and drones getting it too.... im just glad i fly other races recons or id be extremly unhappy, tho how long till minm/cald get a major recon nerf i cant tell
all the guys saying "adapt or shut up", simply cant be amarr recon pilots, nuff' sed.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 15:18:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Feng Schui
well, i think its official, after testing the pilgrim on sisi, i might just give up on it :\
congrats ccp.
yeah, I came to the self same conclusion. On the plus side we can now cross train to fly the Falcon - it got a boost. 
Once more I sit through sisi down time, hoping against hope that when I log on the pilgrim will not be a sad little ship anymore......
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
eLLioTT wave
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 15:24:00 -
[169]
Dev's please change your "no posting in Amarr threads" policy!
We know you're reading, but this policy is stupid. Hydro and the other contributors have put a lot of thought into this, at least acknowledge their efforts and that there is a problem with these ships.
Please.
-eLLioTT |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 17:34:00 -
[170]
Curiosity killed the cat...
__
- click here - |
|
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 18:19:00 -
[171]
Another day passes, another sisi patch: still no change ffs.
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
OOOSOOO
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 19:33:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Waaaah! Waaaah! I...I..I... wanna better ship.
Eat a ****.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 20:02:00 -
[173]
Originally by: OOOSOOO
Originally by: Hydrogen
Waaaah! Waaaah! I...I..I... wanna better ship.
Eat a ****.
cake?
Thx for the free bump
C.
Piratise Low Sec! or Eve on Hard Mode (idea) |
Poco Curante
Blueprint Haus
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 01:44:00 -
[174]
At what point does any Amarr ship ever become a compelling fleet member.
Never.
|
eLLioTT wave
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 08:59:00 -
[175]
Originally by: Poco Curante
At what point does any Amarr ship ever become a compelling fleet member.
Never.
huh? Abaddon is best fleet ship imho, Geddon average but still okay. Curse used to make for awesome support fleet. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 11:20:00 -
[176]
Tbh, CCP's attitude is somehow weird. Amarr Recon Pilots were quite patient after the NOS nerf. In all other threads the point about both is communicated clearly, not offensive. Reasonably - quite contrary to other threads.
Now when a Carrier change was announced, the reaction was constant and less reasonable - if at all. In the latter case quite an immediate reraction - here: no reaction at all. Not a word, not a change on Sisi, plain nothing.
Is it really, that CCP prefers whining masses over reasonable players?
I mean c'mon if CCP believes different, nothing stops them from stating Amarr Recons esspecially Pilgrim is fine. That would be at least a clear statement - instead: nothing at all.
__
- click here - |
pandymen
Caldari
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation
space weaponry and trade
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 11:44:00 -
[177]
Today we had a pilgrim gatecamping in FD-MLJ for quite some time racking up some kills on a few bcs and battleships. They are hardly borked atm.
He couldn't stop swearing in local when 2 domis actually killed him. Does that tell you anything about how the pilgrim actually performs?
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 11:55:00 -
[178]
Originally by: pandymen
Today we had a pilgrim gatecamping in FD-MLJ for quite some time racking up some kills on a few bcs and battleships. They are hardly borked atm.
He couldn't stop swearing in local when 2 domis actually killed him. Does that tell you anything about how the pilgrim actually performs?
Not really, no because we dont know how his target were fitted, the experience of the players, their skills or a host of other details. Nor is the player your example gives operating with the new EW modules & scripts.
So your example is rather mute. Sure we can find examples of any ship getting kills - few ships simply can't, but the pilgrim is consistently at the wrong end of a nerf stick.
Does the pilgrim need omgwtf boosts? No, it needs some attention to make it carry out its role. The Falcon has been given a helping hand: why not the pilgrim?
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 12:21:00 -
[179]
Originally by: pandymen
Today we had a pilgrim gatecamping in FD-MLJ for quite some time racking up some kills on a few bcs and battleships. They are hardly borked atm.
He couldn't stop swearing in local when 2 domis actually killed him. Does that tell you anything about how the pilgrim actually performs?
That's an impressive feat for a Pilgrim (solo camping?) on a gate and as mentioned would probably say more about the pilot and his/her skills. However, I'd be interested in seeing the killmails. Any links or names you could give us?
|
Verton
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 18:28:00 -
[180]
Bump.
The Pilgrim needs some serious love.
EANM nerf = Ouch!
NOS nerf = OMG! WTF?
Two nerfs on one ship!
/*Verton*/
|
|
|
Tench
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 21:29:00 -
[181]
As a new player (4m sp) I was really excited at the idea of the force recons - I have to say with all the feedback from players on these ships it's put me off training up for them at all.
Real shame as I think I would have really enjoyed them =(
To make them effectively keep someone drained - as they can't do it using NOS anymore - it should be subsidised with greater cap recharge or increase in effectiveness of cap boosters or make it so neutralisers use less cap or that neuts are even more effective on these ships.
I mean if it's obvious to me as a noob..kinda worrying that it hasn't been obvious to CCP.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.03 22:44:00 -
[182]
Originally by: Tench
As a new player (4m sp) I was really excited at the idea of the force recons - I have to say with all the feedback from players on these ships it's put me off training up for them at all.
Real shame as I think I would have really enjoyed them =(
To make them effectively keep someone drained - as they can't do it using NOS anymore - it should be subsidised with greater cap recharge or increase in effectiveness of cap boosters or make it so neutralisers use less cap or that neuts are even more effective on these ships.
I mean if it's obvious to me as a noob..kinda worrying that it hasn't been obvious to CCP.
To add to it: for older players it is even worse, like eg. I dedicated more than 50% of my sp to force recons....
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 02:08:00 -
[183]
Can we get a sticky? It'll save us bumping this thread. Or stickey the two threads on the same subject in 'game development'?
- OR can we get some attention payed to the pilgrim?
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
fgreedryu
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 03:26:00 -
[184]
Hydrogen, I agree with you 100%,but please aslo be forthright and explain why you feel so passionatly about the curse/pilgrim. I do belive you have the bpo for the pilgrim, and have had it for sometime.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 06:02:00 -
[185]
Poor pilgrim, the TD scripts has just sunk the ship to even lower level (can it get any lower?) Now I need to decide if I want to to decrease their tracking or range on turret ships only.
Even damp nerf hasnt really nerfed the gal recons to bad. Why? Simply that those ships fit more than 1 damp. Poor pilgrim only gets to fit 1 TP and a nerf tp at that.
|
The ArchWarder
Dragons Of Redemption
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 06:33:00 -
[186]
I got recon to level 5 for the pilgrim alone.
Please dont make that time go to waste ( will not jump on Train-another-race bandwaggon )
/signed
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 09:33:00 -
[187]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 04/11/2007 09:33:07
Originally by: fgreedryu
Hydrogen, I agree with you 100%,but please aslo be forthright and explain why you feel so passionatly about the curse/pilgrim. I do belive you have the bpo for the pilgrim, and have had it for sometime.
That assumption is not nice at all. But ok, I will tell you why I am so passionate:
1. The whole sensation of MMORPG really started for me with stealth assassins: http://gul.50g.com (yes I was young and my English was very very bad)
2. From then to DAOC (prenerf Shadowblades forever)
3. with some stops to EvE, where suddenly: the Pilgrim enabled one to be when I started: stealth assassin. Was I excited? Sure was! I regret I couldnot rename Hydrogen to Horus Heresy. Thus I dedicated my whole training to Pilgrim. Actually I guess I am the only Amarr, who is flying Amar, who had Missiles maxxed before he could use Tachyon II, just to be effective with Curse. All that after Recon 5,....
Am I dedicated and apssionate about Pilgrim? Hell, sure am. Pilgrim never needed a change, except vanishing from local, when cloaked. Stealth nerf, tracking,.... makes lil me cry....
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 11:13:00 -
[188]
Originally by: fgreedryu
Hydrogen, I agree with you 100%,but please aslo be forthright and explain why you feel so passionatly about the curse/pilgrim. I do belive you have the bpo for the pilgrim, and have had it for sometime.
If Hydrogen has, then good on him - just because you can make a profit from a ship shouldnt prevent you from extolling its virtues or lack of them.
If the pilgrim was an excellent ship, then sure your implication that hydrogens thread is only motivated by greed might hold some merit - but the pilgrim isn't an excellent ship, moreover its rapidly becoming a very bad ship, and thats pretty apparent to any pilgrim owner.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
achoura
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 12:11:00 -
[189]
Note to op: This thread better suited to the GD forum, find a nice admin to move it for you.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 12:11:00 -
[190]
With such a minority of pilots that fly this ship how long if ever do you think ccp will revisits this bull**** nerf? This thread was made the same day as a Eos nerf thread. This has 7 pages compared to the eos thread of 13. Not to mention all the other eos related threads. And that nerf is on sisi alone not on tranquillity and not to mention the pilgrim has been like this for a few months and the same people seem to be posting in this thread.
And the eos nerf is nothing compared to the pilgrim
|
|
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 13:08:00 -
[191]
I've been pushing my Recon skills on Sisi to be able to test-fly the Curse and Pilgrim a bit, but when the only fits you can come up with on EFT that look viable demand fitting against race, bonuses or both, something's very wrong. Getting Pilgrim cap sustainable without a booster was certainly interesting, especially with the passive shield tank... but this is a fracking Amarr ship, you shouldn't be shield tanking it just so you've got the lows for CPRs... -_- Now it has even more substandard damage. For crying out loud, the Pilgrim and Curse can only use drones for damage, what does CCP think the highs are used for? Have a cookie, the neuts. Every other recon gets a damage boost, however small, over the T1, most noticeably in Combat Recon, but Curse and Pilgrim get none. Substandard damage, substandard fitting and very substandard ewar. Yay.
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.04 18:58:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Depp Knight
With such a minority of pilots that fly this ship how long if ever do you think ccp will revisits this bull**** nerf? This thread was made the same day as a Eos nerf thread. This has 7 pages compared to the eos thread of 13. Not to mention all the other eos related threads. And that nerf is on sisi alone not on tranquillity and not to mention the pilgrim has been like this for a few months and the same people seem to be posting in this thread.
And the eos nerf is nothing compared to the pilgrim
The pilgrim won't get changed Depp. If it was going to be changed they would have made the alteration when the Falcon was boosted.
As you rightly point out the pilgrim is a minority ship, while the eos has been a staple pvp ship for ages: the pilgrim will jsut be forgoten as no one in balancing cares.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Laboratory Chick
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 01:43:00 -
[193]
Excellent points by Hydrogen here. Was planning to train a Curse/Pilgrim eventually. I'm still going to in the hopes that somebody who can do something about this will.
/Bumpedy
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 01:44:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Cailais
The pilgrim won't get changed Depp. If it was going to be changed they would have made the alteration when the Falcon was boosted.
As you rightly point out the pilgrim is a minority ship, while the eos has been a staple pvp ship for ages: the pilgrim will jsut be forgoten as no one in balancing cares.
C.
Actually that is exactly why it needs the boost. The Pilgrim enables totally different playstyles when viable. No other ship offers similar playstyles - removing those from game is actually ... well.
Variety is making a game good. Removing variety thus can not be CCPs goal.
What bothers me is Black Ops ships. Those got bonusses, which are plain stupid. No target delay? WTF? Learn cloaking 5 and change cloaking 5 to "no target delay" on cov ops. WHY in hell make no target delay a ship bonus? There is a device. There is a skill. If you feel uncomfortable in changing cloaking skill, then add a skill "Cov Ops cloaking" which at level 5 makes it a "no target delay" and dont forget to remove those ships from local as long as they are cloaked.
Black Ops ships are thrown on market and a lot of newbs with only basic skills can use them already to their fullest extent. WHY BUST THE PILOTS WHO TRAINED CLOAKING 5? This is a serious flaw in the whole new ship concept.
Make it right or get a designer who looks for consistency and balance. Common sense sure helps too. So as a result: when those people are looking at Pilgrim, they need to fail, simply as they dont understand the ship, its former abilities and its potential.
__
- click here - |
Kuzya Morozov
Gallente
Beets and Gravy Syndicate
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 02:40:00 -
[195]
Naaaah.
--------------------------
"There's always a bigger blob."
-Qui-Gon Jinn |
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 03:34:00 -
[196]
my friends the falcon has been boosted to 20% jam strength for ecm per level, up from 10
die pilgrim die!
so which will you use my friends? The tracking script or the range script? Seeing as its a close range ship the nerf to range is ****y anyhow!
R.E.C.O.N. is recruiting
|
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 09:07:00 -
[197]
Edited by: Garia666 on 05/11/2007 09:08:42
Sigh.. ccp cant you force some of your employees to fly amarr.. and stick with it..
Anyway guys what could be a decent solution?
mabe up the drone bay to use 5 heavy drones?
Or give the possibility to empty someones cap with this ship..
because now its ridicules..
Or actualy let the ship fly how its intended? try to keep a tank running and use neutralizers.. even with boosters it doesnt work..
->My Vids<- |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 10:18:00 -
[198]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 05/11/2007 10:21:37
Originally by: Garia666
Anyway guys what could be a decent solution?
1. Remove the NOS nerf for Pilgrim/Curse only and
2. make Covert Ops vanish from local (cloaking 4), Pilgrim vanish from local (cloaking lvl 5), when cov ops cloak is on and
3. make Black Ops ships use the cloaking skill instead of giving a "no target delay" - bring the cov ops - recon - black ops ships inline to each other.
4. EDIT: dare not touch the Pilgrim drone bandwidth of 75MBit - it cant kill **** if you reduce it to 50MBit!!
Perfect change - no harm done, but consistent.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 13:10:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver
my friends the falcon has been boosted to 20% jam strength for ecm per level, up from 10
die pilgrim die!
so which will you use my friends? The tracking script or the range script? Seeing as its a close range ship the nerf to range is ****y anyhow!
Ermm how many Pilgrims used Tracking Disruptors anyway?
__
- click here - |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 13:44:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Ermm how many Pilgrims used Tracking Disruptors anyway?
I used to fit 2, now I can only fit 1 since that extra mid has a cap injector in it now.
TDs are excellent for taking on turret ships. I'd like to see a pre-nerf Pilgrim kill a Blasterthron without TDs...
--
|
|
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 14:00:00 -
[201]
This topic should have ended with the first post, which should have been:
"@CCP: Amarr Recon - Current state: Broken!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 15:52:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Corwain
Originally by: Hydrogen
Ermm how many Pilgrims used Tracking Disruptors anyway?
I used to fit 2, now I can only fit 1 since that extra mid has a cap injector in it now.
TDs are excellent for taking on turret ships. I'd like to see a pre-nerf Pilgrim kill a Blasterthron without TDs...
Actually I avoided Blasterthrons since one beat me into the ground. So nice one - never really tried those. Preferred targets for me were Ravens :)
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 18:52:00 -
[203]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
This topic should have ended with the first post, which should have been:
"@CCP: Amarr Recon - Current state: Broken!"
Sounds right, but not constructive ¦^¦ - looking at current changes I get the impression, that those devs who are tweaking ship blance right now lack *some* understanding and/or experience with Amarr. Changes anmd tweaks appear to be ... inconsistent, somehow unmotivated, as if someone is following a grand scheme without looking at the game.
This is bad news.
__
- click here - |
McFly
Path of Light
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 19:58:00 -
[204]
I recently started flying the Pilgrim, I haven't gotten around to running a curse out to 0.0 yet. But anyway I used a setup from the Forums and started tweaking, I have pretty well balanced skills all around, not much of an amarr flyer normally but I fell in love with the crusader, heretic mkII, and now the recons. So this is my thought on the Pilgrim.
I started tweaking with the fitting, trying to find something that worked, and running two neuts TD and a nos while using a WDII and Fleeting Web I'm able to maintain the cap for about 7 cycles before I'm under 20%. The drones are almost worthless, but that's mainly because I don't have the skills for T2 Drones.
If I get into trouble around that 7th cycle if I hit my MARII I'm capped out. I did have to drop my MWD for a Med Cap Battery though. So when I can pick my fights (which is the principle behind force recons) I'm usually good, but if I need to make a run for it, the lack of the mwd is going to hurt, as well as trying to out run good tracking turrets like Autocannons.
The Ammarrian Recons aren't getting much love, and it's sad because they have the potential to be greatly useful ships in small gangs and fleets. I think the main reason they've been left off the table is that with the ability to destroy someone's cap, you're effectively disabling them, now add in a web, warp disrupter, and tracking distrupter, if this ship works with all of this at one time, you essentially have a solo pwnmobile able to fight all races, taking away thier cap, tank, turrets and ability to run.
A great ship, but balancing is needed to save it from being utterly useless (now) as well as allowing to become uber-powerful again.
R0adKill - 'We Brake For Nobody'
--my opinions do not reflect my corp nor my alliance-- |
Nhi'Khuna
e X i l e
Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 20:46:00 -
[205]
I've been flying both the Curse and the Pilgrim pretty exclusively pre and post nerf and honestly, I did notice a change in tactics but no change in the 'uber-ness' of these ships.
Amarr recons, IMHO are just as deadly as they were, they just require the finesse that a recon pilot should be using with a ship such as this.
Just remember that you needn't put all of your highs into nos/neuts, the curse in particular is MUCH more viable if you go with 2 x heavy missiles, 2 x best named neuts and 1 nos.
you will of course need a cap booster in your mids, which honestly is fine. If you ever have issues with being shot at just move out, let them lose their lock (all the while your drones are eating them) and come on back into that uber nos/neut range.
If you are solo-ing don't bite off more than you can chew. Honestly, once I get my transversal up there isn't much that hits me.
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 20:54:00 -
[206]
Edited by: Mortis Tyrathlion on 05/11/2007 20:55:50
Mmmm... I concur, after my first Pilgrim test-flight, it's not as broken as the stats might suggest. Took on a Zealot that attacked me while warping out (damned lack of Cloaking IV on sisi ) and would have won, if it weren't FFA1 and some Golem hotshot hadn't started pelting me with cruise missiles. He kept having to stop firing, which combined with TDs meant I was taking very little damage after the first few volleys. Cap wasn't too bad either with me pulsing the neuts. Of course, I didn't need the hardners...
Plus, the TD nerf isn't as bad as you might think. Switching scripts is instant, and although it's not as good as before, you've still got a lot of flexibility. I personally see Tracking as being more useful than Range, except maybe on blastboats...
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 23:36:00 -
[207]
Originally by: Nhi'Khuna
I've been flying both the Curse and the Pilgrim pretty exclusively pre and post nerf and honestly, I did notice a change in tactics but no change in the 'uber-ness' of these ships.
Amarr recons, IMHO are just as deadly as they were, they just require the finesse that a recon pilot should be using with a ship such as this.
Just remember that you needn't put all of your highs into nos/neuts, the curse in particular is MUCH more viable if you go with 2 x heavy missiles, 2 x best named neuts and 1 nos.
you will of course need a cap booster in your mids, which honestly is fine. If you ever have issues with being shot at just move out, let them lose their lock (all the while your drones are eating them) and come on back into that uber nos/neut range.
If you are solo-ing don't bite off more than you can chew. Honestly, once I get my transversal up there isn't much that hits me.
*sigh* I am sorry Nhi, but please read full thread before posting this way.
To clarify:
A short look at Nhi'Khuna's kills shows the following picture:
1. No solo kill in a Curse or Pilgrim at all.
2. Killed by a Raven in a solo encounter 1vs1 of Pilgrim vs Raven.
3. Her Curse is a Nano-Curse and always in gang.
Nothing wrong except:
1. When you fly in gangs try a Sacrilege and you will help your gang a lot more than a Curse or Pilgrim (*gasp*) in gang.
2. Solo Pilgrim vs Raven a Pilgrim should win, but it simply can not. Something your KB prooves too (ok except when Raven is too stupid)
3. Nano Curse is the only really viable setup and you can actually *breaking news* even solo in it, which you did not do.
Yes, I am a little bit sarcastic, when answering your post. Simply as your post did not help at all for the problem that is:
I. Nano-Curse is the only really viable current setup for a Curse and it doesnt even excel there.
II. Pilgrim is broken, simple as that.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.05 23:47:00 -
[208]
Originally by: Mortis Tyrathlion
Edited by: Mortis Tyrathlion on 05/11/2007 20:55:50
Mmmm... I concur, after my first Pilgrim test-flight, it's not as broken as the stats might suggest. Took on a Zealot that attacked me while warping out (damned lack of Cloaking IV on sisi ) and would have won, if it weren't FFA1 and some Golem hotshot hadn't started pelting me with cruise missiles. He kept having to stop firing, which combined with TDs meant I was taking very little damage after the first few volleys. Cap wasn't too bad either with me pulsing the neuts. Of course, I didn't need the hardners...
Plus, the TD nerf isn't as bad as you might think. Switching scripts is instant, and although it's not as good as before, you've still got a lot of flexibility. I personally see Tracking as being more useful than Range, except maybe on blastboats...
Do a real test versus skilled pilots and I show you the problem easily:
1. versus a skilled blaster pilot on Sisi
2. versus my Zealot on Sisi
Would you guys just have a look at the actual problem instead of gloating and behaving as if you are uber PvPers???? Cmon got issues? This thread is a ****load of work and you want to tell me you know it all better after some testing with a n00b on Sisi?
1. Use TDs in both setups versus a skilled pilot in blasterboat or zealot. Result? Other has cap injector and will approach and reduce trans speed. The one with most cap charges will win or if the Curse or Pilgrim makes a mistake. The Zealot doing a mistake looses some armor. The Pilgrim/Curse pulsing/injecting wrong is dead extremly fast. Also if the Zealot or Blasterboat is doing bad, it leaves; the Pilgrim can not leave (ok except when you got stabs, which could bne discussed as a viable setup ;) ).
2. Comparing TD's with jammers and dampeners even after nerf shows still a great gap. *breaking news* using TD's actually does somethign to other ships. Then go out, use a Nano Curse, fit dampeners with lock range scripts, orbit at 23km and kill the idiot who is scrambled. Breaking news: no risk for you but dead opponent, almost no matter which ship. Show me somethign like that in a Pilgrim or with TD's.
__
- click here - |
Dah' Khanid
Conisor Excavations Syndicate
Chaos Incarnate.
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 00:44:00 -
[209]
This is a very nice and constructive post, devs, take a look at this. I agree with you on most point, and the points that i don't agree with, well, discussing and arguing over amarr isn't gonna help anyone since most people can see there is a problem in fundamental areas of pvp for them :(
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 06:33:00 -
[210]
Considering how long this thread has been up and in its majority constructive and informative to read, considering that the response by the powers that be was (at least close to) zero, it could as well be locked. I don't think much will happen, tbh.
Why? Just look at it from the point of view of CCP. Amarr ships are probably the least flown in total of all races (definitely there are less all-in-all than Caldari AFAIK). I'd wager that by current status the Amarr race might have the fewest active players (Minmatar might be competing). So why react to issues of the minority (aka Amarr pilots flying Amarr ships)? Especially if it deals with a "subclass" of that minority, which is recon pilots. Very obviously you do not have the connections/arguing power/attention that for example certain capital pilots might enjoy... or so it seems.  In fact, by this reasoning, CCP is acting very efficiently minding where the major customer interests do lie.
Having had to decide myself to train up to which class of Amarr Tech-2 ships, I'm more than glad to having decided against the CovOps-Recon training string. I took a look at the Pilgrim pre-nerf already, as I like to plan ahead, but decided I didn't have to make the decision for or against it. Now I don't have to any more. Not worth it for only the mediocre (compared to other recons) Curse...
Sure, that might change at some undetermined point in the future. But seeing the Arbitrator becoming "rebalanced" and partly incapacitated, which is the "base ship" for both recons... I don't see the trend turning back anytime soon. So at the moment for me as someone having to decide to take a closer look at Tech-2 ships and being an Amarr player, recons rule out themselves. Or rather become ruled out by their performance or lack of it.
Anyone bothered to do a calculation already on how many SPs you needed to train to fly an Amarr recon well and what else you could have trained for with the same amount?
|
|
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 06:59:00 -
[211]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Mortis Tyrathlion
Edited by: Mortis Tyrathlion on 05/11/2007 20:55:50
Mmmm... I concur, after my first Pilgrim test-flight, it's not as broken as the stats might suggest. Took on a Zealot that attacked me while warping out (damned lack of Cloaking IV on sisi ) and would have won, if it weren't FFA1 and some Golem hotshot hadn't started pelting me with cruise missiles. He kept having to stop firing, which combined with TDs meant I was taking very little damage after the first few volleys. Cap wasn't too bad either with me pulsing the neuts. Of course, I didn't need the hardners...
Plus, the TD nerf isn't as bad as you might think. Switching scripts is instant, and although it's not as good as before, you've still got a lot of flexibility. I personally see Tracking as being more useful than Range, except maybe on blastboats...
Do a real test versus skilled pilots and I show you the problem easily:
1. versus a skilled blaster pilot on Sisi
2. versus my Zealot on Sisi
Would you guys just have a look at the actual problem instead of gloating and behaving as if you are uber PvPers???? Cmon got issues? This thread is a ****load of work and you want to tell me you know it all better after some testing with a n00b on Sisi?
1. Use TDs in both setups versus a skilled pilot in blasterboat or zealot. Result? Other has cap injector and will approach and reduce trans speed. The one with most cap charges will win or if the Curse or Pilgrim makes a mistake. The Zealot doing a mistake looses some armor. The Pilgrim/Curse pulsing/injecting wrong is dead extremly fast. Also if the Zealot or Blasterboat is doing bad, it leaves; the Pilgrim can not leave (ok except when you got stabs, which could bne discussed as a viable setup ;) ).
2. Comparing TD's with jammers and dampeners even after nerf shows still a great gap. *breaking news* using TD's actually does somethign to other ships. Then go out, use a Nano Curse, fit dampeners with lock range scripts, orbit at 23km and kill the idiot who is scrambled. Breaking news: no risk for you but dead opponent, almost no matter which ship. Show me somethign like that in a Pilgrim or with TD's.
Hey, easy boy! I didn't say there was nothing wrong with it, just that it wasn't as bad as I thought, seeing as I was heavily looking at just the bonuses. I can at least see potential for the ship, but I can also see what happens when something pounces on it instead of vice-versa. I certainly think the ship needs to be changed, especially considering that the zealot was something of an ideal situation, not having the hardeners draining my cap and dealing with an energy-intensive ship. I've flown blasterboats enough to know what would happen if it got an edge over Pilgrim.
|
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 08:25:00 -
[212]
Just one page to go 2 beat the eos... i know we can do it.. !
post more valid comments plz..
->My Vids<- |
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 08:32:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Considering how long this thread has been up and in its majority constructive and informative to read, considering that the response by the powers that be was (at least close to) zero, it could as well be locked. I don't think much will happen, tbh.
Why? Just look at it from the point of view of CCP. Amarr ships are probably the least flown in total of all races (definitely there are less all-in-all than Caldari AFAIK). I'd wager that by current status the Amarr race might have the fewest active players (Minmatar might be competing). So why react to issues of the minority (aka Amarr pilots flying Amarr ships)? Especially if it deals with a "subclass" of that minority, which is recon pilots. Very obviously you do not have the connections/arguing power/attention that for example certain capital pilots might enjoy... or so it seems. In fact, by this reasoning, CCP is acting very efficiently minding where the major customer interests do lie.
Having had to decide myself to train up to which class of Amarr Tech-2 ships, I'm more than glad to having decided against the CovOps-Recon training string. I took a look at the Pilgrim pre-nerf already, as I like to plan ahead, but decided I didn't have to make the decision for or against it. Now I don't have to any more. Not worth it for only the mediocre (compared to other recons) Curse...
Sure, that might change at some undetermined point in the future. But seeing the Arbitrator becoming "rebalanced" and partly incapacitated, which is the "base ship" for both recons... I don't see the trend turning back anytime soon. So at the moment for me as someone having to decide to take a closer look at Tech-2 ships and being an Amarr player, recons rule out themselves. Or rather become ruled out by their performance or lack of it.
Anyone bothered to do a calculation already on how many SPs you needed to train to fly an Amarr recon well and what else you could have trained for with the same amount?
Thats my problem.. when i picked my character in 2003 i made an commitment.. i am an ammar only player.. And over the years i became a decent one.. however in commperison with other races it was actualy an bad choise.. i have to say tough that in the early days an geddon with heatsinks was the best ship to have..
People where so scared :) but sad to say these days are over..
mabe the paladin will compensate.. but it such an expensive ship.. its no fun losing it..
->My Vids<- |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 08:45:00 -
[214]
Originally by: Mortis Tyrathlion
Hey, easy boy! I didn't say there was nothing wrong with it, just that it wasn't as bad as I thought, seeing as I was heavily looking at just the bonuses. I can at least see potential for the ship, but I can also see what happens when something pounces on it instead of vice-versa. I certainly think the ship needs to be changed, especially considering that the zealot was something of an ideal situation, not having the hardeners draining my cap and dealing with an energy-intensive ship. I've flown blasterboats enough to know what would happen if it got an edge over Pilgrim.
Heya ;) your answer sounded very much like: "Hey, it is all ok". Sorry I got that wrong apparently - my fault. I hope no harm done.
- the ships have potential esspecially their roles
- currently the trend is even going down with the TD and drone bandwidth change.
Somehow I just look on Sisi daily and my jaw drops, that CCP is serious on applying these changes (50MBit, TD change) without tweaking both ships. Also... silence by CCP to these issues - more like: "Hey it is all ok". Maybe (only maybe) I tend to overreact to posts sounding as if all is ok and Hydrogen is just a drama-queen (ok, that also ;) ).
__
- click here - |
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 08:56:00 -
[215]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Mortis Tyrathlion
Hey, easy boy! I didn't say there was nothing wrong with it, just that it wasn't as bad as I thought, seeing as I was heavily looking at just the bonuses. I can at least see potential for the ship, but I can also see what happens when something pounces on it instead of vice-versa. I certainly think the ship needs to be changed, especially considering that the zealot was something of an ideal situation, not having the hardeners draining my cap and dealing with an energy-intensive ship. I've flown blasterboats enough to know what would happen if it got an edge over Pilgrim.
Heya ;) your answer sounded very much like: "Hey, it is all ok". Sorry I got that wrong apparently - my fault. I hope no harm done.
- the ships have potential esspecially their roles
- currently the trend is even going down with the TD and drone bandwidth change.
Somehow I just look on Sisi daily and my jaw drops, that CCP is serious on applying these changes (50MBit, TD change) without tweaking both ships. Also... silence by CCP to these issues - more like: "Hey it is all ok". Maybe (only maybe) I tend to overreact to posts sounding as if all is ok and Hydrogen is just a drama-queen (ok, that also ;) ).
Nah your not a drama quen if it isnt for people like you nobody would even know whats going on.. there just a select group of players who actualy care about whats going on..
CCP would never know if they should rethink something with out poeple suggesting it..
ccp doesnt fly amarr them selfs.. so they dont know them selfs..
->My Vids<- |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 08:57:00 -
[216]
Well I changed the topic - tell me if you disagree. If it is ok with you, I leave it as it is now.
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 10:51:00 -
[217]
Gives me a great laugh, when I see people telling, that the Amarr-Recons are fine as they are
As stated in this thread so many times, they are not.
They are Drone-Boats -> Drones get nerfed: no Shield-Recharge when scooped/redeployed, Bandwith
They are NOS/Neut-Boats -> NOS got nerfed, which is good in general, but it killed the Pilgrim, as it cannot run Neuts like the Curse
They have bonus to TDs -> TDs get nerfed and they allready were useless against Missiles and Drones
As a general Note maybe: Noone want's to have a soloPWN-mobile and there should'nt be one.
Problem with the Pilgrim is, that it cannot perform it's role, as it has no range-bonus like all other Recons. So it's impossible to stay @ 30+km. This results in a close-combat-tactic, which is not achievable anymore with the NOSchanges, as it cannot run it's tank. 350m¦ Cargo = 10x 800er CapCharges = 220sec till death. With only Medium-Drones now, thats not enough to slowly chew away someone.
Problem with the Curse is, it's only viable in a speed-fit, which translates into ZERO tank.
It can permarun 3 Neutralizers without CapInjector if fitted for heavy Cap-Recharge, but this results in the lack of tank, speed or EW. So the Curse is somewhat good in a small gang until someone decides to fire at it.
Rapier/Huginn, Arazu/Lachesis, Falcon/Rook: These ships are very effective in using their EW as a general defense, as they can stay out of troubles with their ranged EW. They also do not need their High-Slots for their bonused modules, which makes them more flexible, like fitting a Remote-Rep, Smartbombs or even NOS.
So this is all about a little bit of tweaking, to bring the Amarr-Recons back on par, with the others.
There was given alot of suggestions allready in this thread, and some of them would really do the trick, without overpowering the ships.
*still waiting for Dev response, and the Oomph*
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 12:02:00 -
[218]
Originally by: Grytok
Gives me a great laugh, when I see people telling, that the Amarr-Recons are fine as they are
As stated in this thread so many times, they are not.
<snip>
Woot, thanks - decent summary of the thread so far :)
__
- click here - |
Lord Amentia
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 13:03:00 -
[219]
Nice thread and valid points. What bothers me and makes me feel uneasy?
There are changes applied due to whine-threads, which even lack arguments. Changes to ships, which were not even really broken, but which were subpar.
Here we got a thread with valid arguments, valid points, reasoning, a heated discussion but still mature. Nothing happens.
This is very disappointing.
It offers a questionable view on the developers in charge - the least said.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 13:40:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Garia666
Just one page to go 2 beat the eos... i know we can do it.. !
post more valid comments plz..
Imagine if that was possible. Eos nerf hasnt made it on TQ yet
|
|
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 15:33:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Heya ;) your answer sounded very much like: "Hey, it is all ok". Sorry I got that wrong apparently - my fault. I hope no harm done.
- the ships have potential esspecially their roles
- currently the trend is even going down with the TD and drone bandwidth change.
Somehow I just look on Sisi daily and my jaw drops, that CCP is serious on applying these changes (50MBit, TD change) without tweaking both ships. Also... silence by CCP to these issues - more like: "Hey it is all ok". Maybe (only maybe) I tend to overreact to posts sounding as if all is ok and Hydrogen is just a drama-queen (ok, that also ;) ).
No harm done
I'm playing around with a suggestion for the Game Development section which will no doubt stir up a hornet's nest (or at least, I hope it will. Nothing worse than zip response ) saying that the main problem with the Pilgrim is that it has a completely different mission profile to other Recons, purely because of the range problem, along with suggesting a new ship class to keep everyone happy. Your comments about assassins earlier on got me thinking about how they could be implemented without being unbalanced - because at least part of the problem is that the Pilgrim and Curse used to have a monopoly on the 'assassin' role, and they're kept down because no one else will have an equivalent. I'll put a link in here when I finish it, I'll be interested to see what you old vets think
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 15:49:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Hydrogen
[...]Also... silence by CCP to these issues - more like: "Hey it is all ok".[...]
Rather more like:
"He's dead, Jim!"
if you'd ask me. Except that they are not even marginally as talkative as a certain doctor was, these days.
Quote:
[...]- the ships have potential esspecially their roles[...]
Look at it realistically. With the impeding "rebalancing" of drones and TDs upcoming, aka "Amarr Recon Nerf Mk. 2" (just kidding, of course this is totally advantageous for Amarr...), the Curse will yet lose a bit more of its standing in its class, and the Pilgrim will even be harder to justify to fly. In effect, if you discount the cyno business, there's not much a Pilgrim will be able to do better than a plain CovOps frigate. For a much steeper price tag.
It basically will have the same chance in PvP as the Anathema, it will have no beef in PvE either. And if the only real application it works in is scouting cloaked, heck, as fugly as the Anathema looks, I still don't see most people dishing out the extra cash for a Pilgrim if they just want a plain scout who can cloak. Frankly, it won't make much difference if CCP just completely deleted the Pilgrim from EVE as it is now.
I still do not expect to happen much. IMHO the Amarr have the worst cruiser class across the board anyway in general. So it makes kind of sense to CCP, I guess, to make all Amarr ships based on cruisers also (among) the crappiest in their class in the long run. I don't think it's a mere coincidence the Arbitrator gets hit by the nerf bat, I don't think it's a mere coincidence Amarr are the only race to have a Tier-1 faction cruiser only, I don' think it's a mere coincidence the Devoter is probably the least desirable HI to come and I don't think it's a mere coincidence the probably best design based on a cruiser-hull for Amarr is the Khanid-built Sacrilege.
Well, Amarr may debatably have some of the best capitals, yeah, duh, start training capitals all you Amarr! Go figure...
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 19:37:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: Hydrogen
[...]Also... silence by CCP to these issues - more like: "Hey it is all ok".[...]
Rather more like:
"He's dead, Jim!"
<snip>
I hear ya. Again: my fault somehow was to pause EvE for some time, so I came back for the 7 last glory days of Amarr Recons. Still, since those came out, my training focused solely around Amarr Recons (like I said earlier - heavy missile spec 5 ftw with all missile base skills just for the Curse ;) - no kidding).
Persistency pays - that is how I look at it.
About this thread:
1. Either it is simply locked - if they do, then go figure about a capitulation against sane reasoning by CCP or
2. there is a definite dev answer or
3. something changes on Sisi and then on TQ. Something reasonable, not a throwaway grid increase for only one ship, which addressed no issue for real.
For that long, this thread stays and you are all invited to add your comments. And if it is only just because you see this thread on a daily basis ;)
__
- click here - |
Maglietto
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 22:06:00 -
[224]
Edited by: Maglietto on 06/11/2007 22:14:30
Well, what can i say...
As a strictly Amarr pilot i was thinking on in which way to improve my skills. I'm not really interested in PVE, so the choice was made to become skilled with frigates, ending up with Retribution/Vengeance ships, having all the skills at 5 and then to go not for HAC, but for the recon ships, Curse to be certain.
Curse, because as i've assumed it was the ship to make something with all those raving Vagabonds out there. The Curse, because Amarr HACs (Zealot for ex.) can't do much about those Vagas. And what i've faced on my hard way to the flashing fetish of the Curse. That Amarr have no recon ships anymore. Not a single one. Let's all fly Vagabonds and Navy Ravens.
One more... A half-year earrlier, i wish they put a sign for the players who come to EVE that says: Choose your race: Amarr, you would suck untill you get a battleship, Minmatar, you would suck after you'll get a battleship and so on..." ...but there were no such sign, really.
|
Nhi'Khuna
e X i l e
Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 23:10:00 -
[225]
Quote:
*sigh* I am sorry Nhi, but please read full thread before posting this way.
Wow Hydrogen, you came out guns a blazing. See here I was looking to provide some constructive criticism but then you came out looking to knock me out at the knees.
To clarify on your 'research'
That KB has only been up for a while and I haven't gone out soloing in my ships for a bit
The Raven kill was my own damned fault, I had that guy into structure and if I hadn't been a fool and turned off my sensor disruptors than I would have been cap sustainable long enough to pop him. Bad piloting, not a bad ship.
Yup, I nano my curse, isn't that what she's designed for? Honestly. With as many mids as it has why wouldn't one be thinking of speed and sheilds? Is this a bad thing?
I think you are confusing sarcasm with patronizing... Neither of which win you any arguements mate.
Solo'd plenty of times in the past with both ships, successfully. Care for a demonstration?
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.06 23:46:00 -
[226]
Originally by: Nhi'Khuna
Quote:
*sigh* I am sorry Nhi, but please read full thread before posting this way.
Wow Hydrogen, you came out guns a blazing. See here I was looking to provide some constructive criticism but then you came out looking to knock me out at the knees.
To clarify on your 'research'
That KB has only been up for a while and I haven't gone out soloing in my ships for a bit
The Raven kill was my own damned fault, I had that guy into structure and if I hadn't been a fool and turned off my sensor disruptors than I would have been cap sustainable long enough to pop him. Bad piloting, not a bad ship.
Yup, I nano my curse, isn't that what she's designed for? Honestly. With as many mids as it has why wouldn't one be thinking of speed and sheilds? Is this a bad thing?
I think you are confusing sarcasm with patronizing... Neither of which win you any arguements mate.
Solo'd plenty of times in the past with both ships, successfully. Care for a demonstration?
Nice answer - read the thread it is all answered there. Esspecially on shield tanks, Nano,...
The remark: "Pilgrim is fine, I can kill stuff - nothing wrong" (that is what you sound like) is either dumb, a blatant lie, ignorant or you got the super-setup and tactic which someone did not find yet besides you.
You hint on the latter one - after you have shown you didnt read the thread, basically saying: you are all newbs here. Read your first post again and yes: "came out guns blazing" is correct.
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 01:32:00 -
[227]
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 01:34:07
Please don't engage each other, as this thread is one of the few really constructive ones so far.
The Curse, as stated many times allready has not so much problems, as you can speed-fit it etc. and sure you can go for juicy targets with it, when the target is not expecting to face a nano-Curse.
Also like allready said it's usefull in Gangs, as an active tank-destroyer, even without CapInjector.
The question remains, if it's really necessary to speedfit a ship, which is not ment to do this.
The Pilgrim however just don't have a range-advantage, which results in it's inefectiveness, compared to the other Force-Recons -> can't speedtank, can't EW-tank, while engaging.
Furthermore TrackingDisruptors are not that kind of EW you'd like to bring into a Gang-Fight with the Pilgrim, as it's useless vs. drones and missiles. So the Pilgrim is clearly no Gang-Support-Ship -> has to find another role, which just is'nt achievable in it's current state.
*sorry for repeating the facts, again and again*
.
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 10:03:00 -
[228]
Originally by: Grytok
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 01:34:07
Please don't engage each other, as this thread is one of the few really constructive ones so far.
The Curse, as stated many times allready has not so much problems, as you can speed-fit it etc. and sure you can go for juicy targets with it, when the target is not expecting to face a nano-Curse.
Also like allready said it's usefull in Gangs, as an active tank-destroyer, even without CapInjector.
The question remains, if it's really necessary to speedfit a ship, which is not ment to do this.
The Pilgrim however just don't have a range-advantage, which results in it's inefectiveness, compared to the other Force-Recons -> can't speedtank, can't EW-tank, while engaging.
Furthermore TrackingDisruptors are not that kind of EW you'd like to bring into a Gang-Fight with the Pilgrim, as it's useless vs. drones and missiles. So the Pilgrim is clearly no Gang-Support-Ship -> has to find another role, which just is'nt achievable in it's current state.
*sorry for repeating the facts, again and again*
Im quite disappointed that ccp decided to apply scripts to TDs - they already had a significant disadvantage by being useless vs missiles, drones, and also neuts, webs and scrams: all potential attacks that the ecm jammer and sensor dampner could effect.
The combined impact of both the changes to TDs and to Nos makes the pilgrim a much poorer solo ship, and irrelevant in gang warfare.
However, fear not for I have found a use for it! Fit some stabs, a couple of cargo expanders and you can use it as a small cloaking hauler \o/ .
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 10:27:00 -
[229]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 07/11/2007 10:34:53
Edited by: Hydrogen on 07/11/2007 10:27:50
While having a nap, I just thought on what and why a Pilgrim would need it. So on a more constructive side to point out possible changes:
Role:
- Special role: Cyno-maker
- Solo Role: "Stealth-Assassin"
- Fleet Role: Scout and skirmish warfare
Design Comments:
- The Pilgrim by design is a fighting vessel with superb cloaking.
- Cloaking and EWAR (esspecially NOS/Neut) combined with fighting abilities are a powerful combination and need to be balanced.
- This design is a pure PvP design.
The "Pilgrim father" design:
Name: Pilgrim Father
Hull: Arbitrator
Role: Power Recon Ship
Power recon ships are the successfull merge of covert ops frigates and Heavy Assault ships. Strong armor, powerfull electronic warfare abilities paired with top-notch cloaking technology and the ability to set up cynosaural fields for incoming Capital ships make the Pilgrim father a huge assett to any fleet.
Since the failed design by Carthum Conglomerate, Viziam continued the Pilgrim design line and merged state of the art technology with the Pilgrim's original design.
Developer: Viziam
As if in response to Khanid Innovation's shield-intensive designs, Viziam have for their starship design opted to neglect shield systems in favor of the strongest armor plating in cruiser history.
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% reduction to duration/activation time of modules requiring Astrometrics per level and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Neutralizer transfer amount and capacitor consumption and -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level
Role Bonus: 200-unit reduction in liquid ozone consumption for cynosural field generation and 50% reduction in cynosural field duration. Invisible in local when cloaked.
armor hitpoints: 1800 armor
60 armor em damage resistance
70 armor explosive damage resistance
53.125 armor kinetic damage resistance
35 armor thermal damage resistance
5 low slots
5 med slots
4 high slots
1050 powergrid output
350 cpu output
1 launcher hardpoints
0 turret hardpoints
150m3 drone capacity
80m3 drone bandwidth
43 km maximum targeting range
---
Hold your breath and read on:
- The Pilgrim father design is definitly versatile. Three major setup lines are feasible: Probe/Cyno Tackler, Probe/Solo Hunter, Skirmisher.
- When fitting the Pilgrim father design you will realize, that the additonal probe launcher - if used - heavily hurts the whole setup.
- Long range abilities do not exist at all. Any mid range ship or sensor dampener ship kills a Pilgrim without risk.
- When looking for versatility in a setup, the Pilgrim father must sacrifice low slots for fitting mods. And even then maximum skills are a must and not obligatory for a decent setup.
- The Pilgrim father is - when entering close combat - doomed to finish, no matter the result.
- The launcher hardpoint offers a chance to use Defender missiles, which plain suck, but could offer a needed edge vs. missile boats.
Bottom line: solo targets need a fast reaction to avoid a Pilgrim father. Also a cap booster is obligatory to be able to survive the Pilgrim father. Alternatively killing the drones renders the Pilgrim Father helpless.
__
- click here - |
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 11:40:00 -
[230]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Edited by: Hydrogen on 07/11/2007 10:47:06
While having a nap, I just thought on what and why a Pilgrim would need it. So on a more constructive side to point out possible changes:
<snip>
Thief!
Ok, not really But like I said, I've been putting together something similar, but it looks like we've gone about it in very different ways. Got some time to work on it now, then I'll put it up to see what you think...
|
|
|
moumou78
Soulbound.
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 12:34:00 -
[231]
Plz fix the Pilgrim it really doesn't fit anywhere right now, and with the coming EWAR nerfs I dont see it getting any better.
\signed
moumou |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 12:37:00 -
[232]
Originally by: moumou78
Plz fix the Pilgrim it really doesn't fit anywhere right now, and with the coming EWAR nerfs I dont see it getting any better.
\signed
moumou
May I add that it is getting way worse with the new EWAR and drone changes for the Pilgrim.
broken ship + nerf = extinction
Without doing anything, there is no point at all to not delete the Pilgrim. Actually it would be fair to offer all pilots a one-time 100% recycling of their Pilgrim. At least it would show humor on CCPs side...
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 13:29:00 -
[233]
I still think that there is hope for the Pilgrim with a few little tweaks to it's stats.
1. double the bonus to TDs from 5% to 10% Tracking Disruptor Effeciveness
2. make it a "Cap-Monster" by giving it 20% better CapRecharge-Rate
3. get rid of the targeting-delay after decloaking
This would help allready to some extend imho.
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 13:53:00 -
[234]
Originally by: Grytok
I still think that there is hope for the Pilgrim with a few little tweaks to it's stats.
1. double the bonus to TDs from 5% to 10% Tracking Disruptor Effeciveness
2. make it a "Cap-Monster" by giving it 20% better CapRecharge-Rate
3. get rid of the targeting-delay after decloaking
This would help allready to some extend imho.
Actually - all discussion on EWAR aside - the tracking disruptor was meant to offer some sort of "EWAR-tank" for the Pilgrim, while the Pilgrim chews slowly through its target. At least that is how I interpret CCP's setup.
This idea is a huge fail - plain and simple. I doubt you can do the Pilgrim any good with this bonus. In case of the Curse it is totally different. Curse can fit Defenders (discussable, but can), Curse can be faster than most missiles and TD's help against turrets. Here a TD can help - for a Pilgrim I consider TD's by now a huge fail in any tweak.
Or where am I wrong?
__
- click here - |
Indigo Johnson
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 14:15:00 -
[235]
Edited by: Indigo Johnson on 07/11/2007 14:16:21
Im sorry I didn't read all of that or this thread.
If you complaining about the lack of punch the curse/pilgrim has now wrt to cap denial try using a medium injector with cap 200 or 400 (at the most) with a rack of neuts. Really doesn't work all that badly.
Overall though, with the new electronic frigs coming out, recons niche is going to be "slightly" watered down.
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 14:29:00 -
[236]
Originally by: Indigo Johnson
Edited by: Indigo Johnson on 07/11/2007 14:16:21
Im sorry I didn't read all of that or this thread.
If you complaining about the lack of punch the curse/pilgrim has now wrt to cap denial try using a medium injector with cap 200 or 400 (at the most) with a rack of neuts. Really doesn't work all that badly.
Overall though, with the new electronic frigs coming out, recons niche is going to be "slightly" watered down.
Making the Amarr recons even more worthless!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 15:03:00 -
[237]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Grytok
snip
Actually - all discussion on EWAR aside - the tracking disruptor was meant to offer some sort of "EWAR-tank" for the Pilgrim, while the Pilgrim chews slowly through its target. At least that is how I interpret CCP's setup.
This idea is a huge fail - plain and simple. I doubt you can do the Pilgrim any good with this bonus. In case of the Curse it is totally different. Curse can fit Defenders (discussable, but can), Curse can be faster than most missiles and TD's help against turrets. Here a TD can help - for a Pilgrim I consider TD's by now a huge fail in any tweak.
Or where am I wrong?
Of course you are right, that TDs on a Pilgrim are nothing worthwile, if you look at it as a solo-ship, which is the only thing the Pilgrim can do actually, as it's no support at all for gangs.
It's the bonus from the Arbitrator however and I don't see CCP changing this unfortunately.
If CCP is willing to change this, well, then I suppose to change the bonus to a 5% Resistance-Bonus to stay inline with other Amarr-Ship-Boni, while changing the stats, like I supposed or to come up with something really usefull and give it a bonus like 5% Energy Neutralizer Activation.
.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 15:14:00 -
[238]
i thought the boost was 100 grid.
also who are you kidding making the max targetting range 48 km?
one good thing would be built in high resistance to ecm and damps for the pilgrim. or any reocon.
R.E.C.O.N. is recruiting
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 15:26:00 -
[239]
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 15:29:58
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 07/11/2007 15:17:27
You are wrong in the sense that Recons are not designed as solo ships but as gang support ships, much like any other ship actually. Tracking disrupts are not only a tank for you, but for all your friends too.
Caldari Recon - kills directed offense, retains speed and warp, defense and automatic offense like f.o.f. or drones.
Gallente - kills long ranged directed offense, kills warp, retains speed, defense and automatic offense. Retains close range offense and EW.
Minmatar - kills speed and helps tracking. Retains offense, warp and defense.
AMARR: Kills speed, cap dependent offense, active defense, EW, sometimes warp or jump. Considerably degrades every offense except missiles and drones. Switches off everything that needs cap.
For medium neuts to kill capacity quickly enough, especially if the target has a cap booster or is larger, it needs a neut amount bonus. The Pilgrim can therefore not switch to a range bonus, because a single med booster will retain the target's cap for as long it has units. The Pilgrim is an electronic warfare ship, it does not have much of a tank and needs to neuter the target quickly. Still the Pilgrim has a good tank compared to other recons, not the least by killing the target's capacity and therefore dps and tank. If the Pilgrim doesn't fit an active tank, it will not cap out quickly. 1600mm plate, small booster, AB, 3 med neuts all fits. Egress rigs will prevent quick cap out. Use implants. Use your cloak. Use your neutralizers, and forget nos.
Capless weapons are a counter to cap warfare. ACs are a counter to range disruption. Lamenting that Amarr recons are vulnerable to missiles is like lamenting that the Arazu must be able to solo a Vagabond. You have a fixation on soloing. They are NOT solo ships. Use them that way at your own risk.
You have no clue what Recon-Ships do in gangs, do you?
Arazu disables 1-2 targets with it's damps, if your gang-mates can engage above 25km. Scramrange helps here too.
Rapier disables 1-2 targets with it's webs, if you're in a proper setup gang, i.e. Speedships. Target Painter.. well, not so uber.
Falcon disables 2 targets easily with it's ECM, totally independent, from what your gangmates are flying.
Pilgrim disables maximum 1 target, if living long enough, by nuking it's cap, but has no ranged defence making it a sitting duck waiting to be called primary. Tracking Disruptors are useless against missiles and drones and do not affect Blasters or Autocannons very much, as you need no tracking or range while shooting a webbed target from 2km distance.
So it's pretty obvious here, that the Pilgrim is the only ship not having anything to add to a gang.
Not a gang-supporter? It has to be a solo-ship!
.
|
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 15:43:00 -
[240]
Originally by: Grytok
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 15:29:58
Originally by: Ruciza
Edited by: Ruciza on 07/11/2007 15:17:27
You are wrong in the sense that Recons are not designed as solo ships but as gang support ships, much like any other ship actually. Tracking disrupts are not only a tank for you, but for all your friends too.
Caldari Recon - kills directed offense, retains speed and warp, defense and automatic offense like f.o.f. or drones.
Gallente - kills long ranged directed offense, kills warp, retains speed, defense and automatic offense. Retains close range offense and EW.
Minmatar - kills speed and helps tracking. Retains offense, warp and defense.
AMARR: Kills speed, cap dependent offense, active defense, EW, sometimes warp or jump. Considerably degrades every offense except missiles and drones. Switches off everything that needs cap.
For medium neuts to kill capacity quickly enough, especially if the target has a cap booster or is larger, it needs a neut amount bonus. The Pilgrim can therefore not switch to a range bonus, because a single med booster will retain the target's cap for as long it has units. The Pilgrim is an electronic warfare ship, it does not have much of a tank and needs to neuter the target quickly. Still the Pilgrim has a good tank compared to other recons, not the least by killing the target's capacity and therefore dps and tank. If the Pilgrim doesn't fit an active tank, it will not cap out quickly. 1600mm plate, small booster, AB, 3 med neuts all fits. Egress rigs will prevent quick cap out. Use implants. Use your cloak. Use your neutralizers, and forget nos.
Capless weapons are a counter to cap warfare. ACs are a counter to range disruption. Lamenting that Amarr recons are vulnerable to missiles is like lamenting that the Arazu must be able to solo a Vagabond. You have a fixation on soloing. They are NOT solo ships. Use them that way at your own risk.
You have no clue what Recon-Ships do in gangs, do you?
Arazu disables 1-2 targets with it's damps, if your gang-mates can engage above 25km. Scramrange helps here too.
Rapier disables 1-2 targets with it's webs, if you're in a proper setup gang, i.e. Speedships. Target Painter.. well, not so uber.
Falcon disables 2 targets easily with it's ECM, totally independent, from what your gangmates are flying.
Pilgrim disables maximum 1 target, if living long enough, by nuking it's cap, but has no ranged defence making it a sitting duck waiting to be called primary. Tracking Disruptors are useless against missiles and drones and do not affect Blasters or Autocannons very much, as you need no tracking or range while shooting a webbed target from 2km distance.
So it's pretty obvious here, that the Pilgrim is the only ship not having anything to add to a gang.
Not a gang-supporter? It has to be a solo-ship!
amen
->My Vids<- |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 16:07:00 -
[241]
Originally by: Ruciza
You are wrong in the sense that Recons are not designed as solo ships but as gang support ships, much like any other ship actually. Tracking disrupts are not only a tank for you, but for all your friends too.
<snip>
Comparing EWAR unfortunately leads nowhere, as you suddenly need to discuss EWAR and solve those issues before looking at Amarr Recons.
If you had a look at the complete thread, you will realize, that the Pilgrim is a solo ship and as such broken.
Suggested it should be a gang/fleet ship, then it plain lacks needed gang support features. As such it lacks most importantly: RANGE.
No matter how you look at it - in solo and gang it is plain broken.
My suggestion: forget about EWAR issues, forget about,... but look at a Pilgrim's role and give the Pilgrim what it needs to fill the role.
Sidenote: your attitude in posting is not nice at all. Here comes why...
Originally by: Ruciza
Capless weapons are a counter to cap warfare. ACs are a counter to range disruption. Lamenting that Amarr recons are vulnerable to missiles is like lamenting that the Arazu must be able to solo a Vagabond. You have a fixation on soloing. They are NOT solo ships. Use them that way at your own risk.
1. you completly forgot (said it the nice way) that you can counter TD with playstyle. Not a module, not a specific ship, just by playstyle.
2. Amarr Recons are not only vulnerable to missiles, but also to blasters, lasers, rails,... any of those (see 1st). If you are in doubt, just have a look at the TD effectiveness chart in the EWAR thread.
3. You plain say: "You have a fixation on soloing" - accusation first in my direction.
Do us both a favor: learn to read the thread and please bring arguments. I gladly correct what is wrong, but your claims are plain pointless.
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:18:00 -
[242]
Im wondering, what if the recon bonus was changed from..
"20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount"
to this...
15% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer efficiency.
So both the curse and pilgrim increase the amount of cap drained by 15% per level, whilst also reducing the modules activation cost by 15% per level.
Any thoughts?
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:23:00 -
[243]
Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver
i thought the boost was 100 grid.
also who are you kidding making the max targetting range 48 km?
one good thing would be built in high resistance to ecm and damps for the pilgrim. or any reocon.
I wrote that post out of my head, without research. So if it was 100 grid - my fault.
About the range: the Pilgrim does not need more range. Look at the stats of my suggestion. Then look at what you can do - requires imho a load of skills (EvE-skills) and player skills to use, but... if you can you got a reason to *droool*
Like I said - give it time and think about it and you will realize that my suggestion offers loads of weaknesses but also incredible strong points.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:26:00 -
[244]
Originally by: Cailais
Im wondering, what if the recon bonus was changed from..
"20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount"
to this...
15% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer efficiency.
So both the curse and pilgrim increase the amount of cap drained by 15% per level, whilst also reducing the modules activation cost by 15% per level.
Any thoughts?
C.
You did not mention range when saying "efficiency". If one would only tweak NOS/Neut, then range is an issue for the Pilgrim. In case of the current Curse and its NOS/Neut range, this would imho fix the Curse completly. Maybe - not sure yet though - the Curse still could need some tweaks to its grid (like 100 more or so) and a thorough look at its cap.
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:33:00 -
[245]
Name: Pilgrim
Hull: Arbitrator
Role: Force Recon Ship
Force recon ships are the cruiser-class equivalent of covert ops frigates. While not as resilient as combat recon ships, they are nonetheless able to do their job as reconnaissance vessels very effectively, due in no small part to their ability to interface with covert ops cloaking devices and set up covert cynosural fields for incoming Black Ops Battleships.
Developer: Carthum Conglomerate
Carthum ships are the very embodiment of the Amarrian warfare philosophy. Possessing sturdy armor and advanced weapon systems, they provide a nice mix of offense and defense. On the other hand, their electronic and shield systems tend to be rather limited.
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 25% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount and -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level
Role Bonus: 75% reduction to Energy Emissions Capacitor use and 50% reduction to Turret Destabilization capacitor use.
Note: can fit covert cynosural field generators
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:35:00 -
[246]
Name: Curse
Hull: Arbitrator
Role: Combat Recon Ship
Built to represent the last word in electronic warfare, combat recon ships have onboard facilities designed to maximize the effectiveness of electronic countermeasure modules of all kinds. Filling a role next to their class counterpart, the heavy assault ship, combat recon ships are the state of the art when it comes to anti-support support. They are also devastating adversaries in smaller skirmishes, possessing strong defensive capabilities in addition to their electronic superiority.
Developer: Khanid Innovation
In addition to robust electronics systems, the Khanid Kingdom's ships possess advanced armor alloys capable of withstanding a great deal of punishment. Generally eschewing the use of turrets, they tend to gear their vessels more towards close-range missile combat.
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 25% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 17:42:00 -
[247]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 07/11/2007 17:44:13
or even, a seperate module?
Energy Nosferatu
Description:
Neutralizes a portion of the energy in the target ship's capacitor. Can only be fit on the Amarr recon.
Attributes:
Activation time / duration: 12 seconds
Energy Neutralized: 120 energy
Energy Transferred: 60 energy
Range: 15km
Fittings:
CPU: 10,000 tf
Powergrid: 150mw
edit:
OR a skill:
Advanced Energy Emissions: Advanced understanding with Energy Emission Systems.
Rank 6 skill
15% reduction in energy emissions capacitor use per level.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 18:13:00 -
[248]
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 18:15:24
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 18:14:50
Edited by: Grytok on 07/11/2007 18:13:57
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount and -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level.
Attribute Tweak: 20% better Capacitor Recharge Rate
Curse:
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level.
Attribute Tweak: 20% better Capacitor Recharge Rate
Done, without making them FOTM.
EDITs: Colours and misspelling
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 19:01:00 -
[249]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 07/11/2007 19:01:51
Originally by: Feng Schui
Name: Pilgrim
Hull: Arbitrator
Role: Force Recon Ship
<snip>
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 25% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount and -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level
Role Bonus: 75% reduction to Energy Emissions Capacitor use and 50% reduction to Turret Destabilization capacitor use.
Note: can fit covert cynosural field generators
Some remarks:
1. I do like your basic idea here.
2. It imho needs the reduced Liquid Ozone Consumption.
3. Cargo bay is still an issue. A Capacitor booster is in most cases not needed, but not obsolete either.
4. Adding a general 75% reduction to Neut use for the ship makes it imho too easy. I would prefer a 15% reduction to Neut cap use per Recon level here.
5. Tracking disruptor cap use - similar to 4. Id prefer a 10% per Recon level.
6. The playstyle "fuel your tank" with enemy's tank is still obosolete which imho is a pitty.
7. Current problems with TDs are stille xistant with this change.
My five cent, as I truly believe that having high skills shouldnt be punished by adding important skills as ship imminent boni. But those tweaks are anyways flavors and minor tweaks :)
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 19:05:00 -
[250]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Name: Curse
Hull: Arbitrator
Role: Combat Recon Ship
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 25% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level
My five cent:
1. From what I see, the Nano-Curse would still be the only viable setup. I do believe that this indicates a still at least semi-broken design...
2. Add to 1. it lacks versatility and it lacks still grid as it needs a cap booster. Due to the cap booster a mid slot is still missing.
3. In addition to 1. the self-fueling hield tank is not possible which is a pitty - as it was an itneresting and totally new playstyle.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 19:07:00 -
[251]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Edited by: Feng Schui on 07/11/2007 17:44:13
or even, a seperate module?
Energy Nosferatu
Description:
Neutralizes a portion of the energy in the target ship's capacitor. Can only be fit on the Amarr recon.
Attributes:
Activation time / duration: 12 seconds
Energy Neutralized: 120 energy
Energy Transferred: 60 energy
Range: 15km
Fittings:
CPU: 10,000 tf
Powergrid: 150mw
edit:
OR a skill:
Advanced Energy Emissions: Advanced understanding with Energy Emission Systems.
Rank 6 skill
15% reduction in energy emissions capacitor use per level.
The module:
- creating an Amarr Recon only module would for sure upset people and tbh it sounds like patchwork (sorry for saying that openly *g*)
- the skill would wreak havoc. Like the Neut Domi will start to rise as FOTM and it will rule like no tomorrow. An even more fearsome ship than ever before.
Just my five cents. Please tell where I am wrong.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 19:33:00 -
[252]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 07/11/2007 19:33:35
Originally by: Grytok
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount and -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level.
Attribute Tweak: 20% better Capacitor Recharge Rate
Curse:
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level.
Attribute Tweak: 20% better Capacitor Recharge Rate
Done, without making them FOTM.
EDITs: Colours and misspelling
With your tweaks you achieved the following:
1. The 5-low-slot Pilgrim now finally can use its 5th low-slot to its advantage (compared to Curse). Nice tweak and tbh it fits my personal taste ;) .
2. The Pilgrim is not longer that heavily dependant on a cap booster.
3. Pilgrim has a higher survivability which it direly needed.
4. The Curse can take advantage of the igher cap recharge.
Critique/suggestions
a. Capacitor change for Pilgrim: it still needs one cap booster according first calculations... Seems as if the 20% cap increase is not enough and/or doesnt solve the cap issue at all. My suggestion: use the above mentioned "efficiency" instead of the capacitor recharge change. Thus with each recon level, the Neuts on a Pilgrim need less cap. In the end a Neut uses only like 25% of the cap per cycle than it does now.
b. Pilgrim survivability: Besides the resist increase I would suggest a signature radius reduction. Why? A Pilgrim has a more than 10% higher sig radius than a Sacrilege. Where the Sacrilege has way more armor hp and even better resists. Imho a Pilgrim sig radius should be max 110m3, maybe even less when tweaking the armor resists. It just happened now that I noticed that 140m3 for Sacrilege and 156m3 for Pilgrim is a *sorry* plain stupid difference. Totally out of whack and should be considered a typo in regards to the 156m3 for Pilgrim.
c. Pilgrim still lacks cargo bay (cap boosters might still be needed)
d. Same as c. for Curse - cargo bay to small
e. The Nano-Curse is still the superior choice. In fact your tweak increased a Nano-Curses viability but didnt add versatiltiy to the game. I strongly believe that versatility is needed.
f. Drone bay is still an issue when next patch comes in.
g. There is still a mid slot issue - one mid slot missing.
My five cents, please dont hit me ;)
ATM I ask myself, how many dps a NOS and a Neutralizer has. It is an interesting question, difficult to find out, but definitly worth to answer... I guess I will sit down and calculate it if I can.... or anyone else already did?
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 19:36:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Some remarks:
1. I do like your basic idea here.
2. It imho needs the reduced Liquid Ozone Consumption.
I'm not sure it would need the liquid ozone reduction, since I'm of the mind there are alot of better options for popping a cyno rather than using a recon.
Quote:
3. Cargo bay is still an issue. A Capacitor booster is in most cases not needed, but not obsolete either.
4. Adding a general 75% reduction to Neut use for the ship makes it imho too easy. I would prefer a 15% reduction to Neut cap use per Recon level here.
With a 75% reduction, as well as with energy emissions 5, a cap booster wouldn't be needed, however this option still requires some skill to play, since you'll need to manage your cap, the opponents cap, your ewar, and your tank.
Quote:
5. Tracking disruptor cap use - similar to 4. Id prefer a 10% per Recon level.
6. The playstyle "fuel your tank" with enemy's tank is still obosolete which imho is a pitty.
this actual change, is apart of my whole stealth ship changes. It doesn't really make sense w/o the changes to the other ships (all of the force recons got a cap reduction to their "primary defense" modules - ewar / speed (speed in the case of the rapier)
Quote:
7. Current problems with TDs are still existant with this change.
the 25% bonus would counter the nerf, but you still would only be able to use 1 script per TD
Quote:
(EDIT: 8. The upcoming drone bandwidth change is not addressed here :( )
I've always fought with 5 mediums, 5 lights.. as such, I'm actually decently pleased with the drone bandwidth.
Originally by: Curse stuff from Hydro
stuff
I flew a curse post-nerf, and its still overpowered with sensor damps. However, with the TD bonus - 125% bonus to TD - the curse will need to choose his fights a bit better, since damps on a curse will be crap.
Originally by: Module / skill stuff from Hyrdo
stuff
just giving some options however, those would be the very last option.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.07 23:58:00 -
[254]
Originally by: Feng Schui
<snip>
just giving some options however, those would be the very last option.
In answer to your points:
1. about liquid ozone reduction I am plain unsure on future roles. Also I got no clue what some Capital pilots would say if the Pilgrim didnt have it anymore.
2. 75% ship ability to cap use of Neuts = 15% cap use reduction for Neuts per Recon level at Recon 5. Please keep in mind, that the Pilgrim is no Cap-wonder - repper,... use cap too. TBH I didnt do the maths, so I dont know for sure.
3. 50% ship bonus to TD cap use = 10% per Recon level less cap use at Recon 5
4. drone bandwidth - I actually dont know, how you use your Pilgrim and for which purpose. To me it is a sudden drop by 80 dps. Considering it was/is 304 dps total for me, this is a huge drop by 26% +. And 304 dps by drones which can be shot down is not impressing at all, but still close to the 315dps maximum for current Pilgrim.
5. You flew a Curse post nerf... *sigh* please stop it. You flew a Nano-Curse, the only viable setup for a Curse. The Nano-Curse might be overpowered, the Curse as such is not.
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 00:48:00 -
[255]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 08/11/2007 00:48:15
Originally by: Hydrogen
In answer to your points:
1. about liquid ozone reduction I am plain unsure on future roles. Also I got no clue what some Capital pilots would say if the Pilgrim didnt have it anymore.
Capital Ship Pilot: "Recons could launch cynos?" =p
Quote:
2. 75% ship ability to cap use of Neuts = 15% cap use reduction for Neuts per Recon level at Recon 5. Please keep in mind, that the Pilgrim is no Cap-wonder - repper,... use cap too. TBH I didnt do the maths, so I dont know for sure.
3. 50% ship bonus to TD cap use = 10% per Recon level less cap use at Recon 5
These would be straight role bonuses, whether recon 1 or recon 5. For the neuts, keep in mind also the energy emission skill = 5% per level. So it would have a 100% reduction of cap use with those.
Quote:
4. drone bandwidth - I actually dont know, how you use your Pilgrim and for which purpose. To me it is a sudden drop by 80 dps. Considering it was/is 304 dps total for me, this is a huge drop by 26% +. And 304 dps by drones which can be shot down is not impressing at all, but still close to the 315dps maximum for current Pilgrim.
5 mediums, 5 lights. Its actually good against people that realize that a pilgrim's sole dps is drones.
Quote:
5. You flew a Curse post nerf... *sigh* please stop it. You flew a Nano-Curse, the only viable setup for a Curse. The Nano-Curse might be overpowered, the Curse as such is not.
Yea, it was a fotm nano-damp curse, I admit that. Also the reason I have a distaste of them =p Took on a Myrmidon and Geddon.. I won. I really should have lost. But of course, take into account pilot skills as well. <-- disclaimer
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 01:58:00 -
[256]
Edited by: Grytok on 08/11/2007 02:03:13
Edited by: Grytok on 08/11/2007 02:02:11
Edited by: Grytok on 08/11/2007 02:00:18
The suggested 75% bonus for Neutralizers would actually be a little bit too much I think, because you allready get 25% by the Skill Energy Emission Systems. So maybe 5% per Recon Ship LvL instead would be just right.
But giving the Pilgrim an additional Bonus cries for additional Boni for all the other Force Recons as well, if you get rid of the Cyno-Gen Bonus. TBH, nobody uses Force Recons to build cynos anyways these days, so it's a wasted bonus imho nowadays.
So maybe we can go with it like this...
New Pilgrim
Amarr Cruiser: 5% to Armor Resistances and 10% to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship: 20% to Neut/NOS transfer amount and 5% to Neutralizer activation cost per level.
Role Bonus: 99% reduction in CPU needs for Covert Ops Cloaking devices and 100% reduction for targeting delay.
*Notice the new Role Bonus where you only get 99% to Covert Ops Cloaking Device instead 100% with ReconShip LvL 5? I think that this should level it somehow with the targeting delay bonus added.*
-----------------------------------
New Curse
Amarr Cruiser: 10% to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship: 20% to Neut/NOS transfer amount and 40% to Neut/NOS range per level.
! Change Curse slotlayout to: 5 High / 5 Med / 5 Low !
-----------------------------------
The Pilgrim would be able to sustain it's Modules without CapInjector somehow, as the Neuts would take only 50% Cap, if trained up to LvL 5 and it could tank quiet good.
The Curse would be given versatility by changing the slotlayout either to run a proper Armor-tank and use TDs, or to speed-tank, but without the option, to speed-passive-shield-tank, while using TDs.
It would have issues with sustaining it's capacitor somehow, but thats the diversity in full-gank vs. tank-mode.
EDIT: Both ships still would not be uber, as they get their whack with the Bandwith, only allowing for 5 Medium Drones. Also as Drones can be shot down and not scooped/redeployed anymore effectively, they're very vulnerable in their DPS.
EDIT: Textwall and spelling
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 10:08:00 -
[257]
Originally by: Grytok
New Pilgrim
Amarr Cruiser: 5% to Armor Resistances and 10% to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship: 20% to Neut/NOS transfer amount and 5% to Neutralizer activation cost per level.
Role Bonus: 99% reduction in CPU needs for Covert Ops Cloaking devices and 100% reduction for targeting delay.
*Notice the new Role Bonus where you only get 99% to Covert Ops Cloaking Device instead 100% with ReconShip LvL 5? I think that this should level it somehow with the targeting delay bonus added.*
-----------------------------------
New Curse
Amarr Cruiser: 10% to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship: 20% to Neut/NOS transfer amount and 40% to Neut/NOS range per level.
! Change Curse slotlayout to: 5 High / 5 Med / 5 Low !
I do not like to say it, but your suggestions sound pretty balanced.
Let me tell you what it is I do not like or feel uneasy with:
1. I am unsure on the Pilgrim's survivability still with the 5% armor bonus. Granted it is higher, but the Pilgrim is plain not right in its base stats. Having high armor hp and neglected shields it plain should already have higher base resists. Making a bonus for something which the ship should already have (already lacks a high slot) doesnt sound right. I did not do the maths, so this is an assumption and general feeling only.
2. Some people hate me for always adding it. Esspecially a Pilgrim should vanish from local when cloaked. Actually Id take "vanish from local" over "no target delay" anytime. With the "vanish from local" instead "no target delay" I would *drool* when CCP implemented your suggestion.
3 The Curse - phewwwwww tough one. You would kill shield tanked Curses (which are somehow still viable). On the other hand the Curse is Khanid and not at all inline with Khanid design currently (more so with your change). Additionally NOS/Neut is a Curse's prime weapon and the Curse has HUGE fitting problems when starting to fit 3 or more and actually use them. Also Curse has general fitting problems. It does not "feel" right at all.
Curse sidenote:
A Nano-Curse is so dangerous as speed, damps and NOS/Neut range/drain complement each other so nicely. Both just fit very well together. Esspecially when other Nano ships close in to the Nano-Curse.
If - and only if - the dampener change really ensures, that a Nano-Neut-Damp-Curse doesnt work (by taking away the Damp part) your change could be nice, except: the Curse lacks 95 grid exactly. 95 grid is exactly what is needed to fit a base setup with a full neut rack, MARII and MWD II with max fitting skills. Changes to tank to dual-rep or plated would then require to drop Neuts for Missile slots.
On another sidenote: it feels bad to have a Khanid ship without missile bonus. Somehow a mix should be viable with like 3 heavy missile launchers (with a bonus) and 2 Neuts. Or a 4 missile launcher/1Neut combo with huge tank and TDs,... DPS of Heavy Missile Launcher (only real viable missile launchers for Curse due to range) are pitiful atm.
Keeping all that in mind, I would prefer a tweaked Curse like that:
New Curse
Amarr Cruiser: 10% to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% to Heavy Missile Launcher ROF.
Recon Ship: 20% to Neut/NOS transfer amount and 40% to Neut/NOS range per level.
! Change Curse slotlayout to: 5 High / 5 Med / 5 Low !
+95 grid
75MBit drone bandwidth
__
- click here - |
Holly Chance
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 11:41:00 -
[258]
Unfortunately, any changes which will allow the Curse and Pilgrim to be solo ships will almost certainly not be implemented. Recon ships are meant to be stealthy gang ewar support, nothing more. If you take a look at the capabilities of the other races' Recons, the Curse and Pilgrim are the only ones that could ever effectively solo. Sure they have a more offensive type of ewar, but CCP will not return them to the old days, regardless of the logic put forward. The only way we're going to get a Curse-equivalent again is if a new ship type is introduced - which like I said, I've been playing with. I've actually got the base stats and bonuses sorted out, but after looking over them again, I realise quite how obscenely powerful they are... back to the drawing board for a while -_-
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 11:42:00 -
[259]
Grah, that was me...
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 12:17:00 -
[260]
On a small side-note, it would really be interesting to get some figures about the usage/sales of different EWAR types in the next economic blog. I'm willing to wager that TDs have among the lowest sales and will degrade further with the EWAR "modifications". If the situation weren't as it unfortunately is, that e.g. the Curse fares much better ATM using the EWAR modules of another race instead of its own ones, thus effectively ignoring the "awesome" bonus it gets on TDs... Rather obscene, tbh, like the need to eventually fit projectile turrets to an Amarr ship because with lasers it simply doesn't work like it should.
Assuming the devs don't want to change anything considering the basic Amarr Recon design. Why not simply boost the TDs instead of the Caldari ECM then? It still would leave the Curse hard-pressed to solo, as it will still be vulnerable to missiles+web, it would still leave the Pilgrim quite vulnerable due to tanking issues. But... at least it would give those ships back more of a useful role in gangs/fleets. Even 10% to TD effectiveness/level thus does not have to be the tip of the iceberg...
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 12:24:00 -
[261]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 08/11/2007 12:25:52
Originally by: Holly Chance
Unfortunately, any changes which will allow the Curse and Pilgrim to be solo ships will almost certainly not be implemented.
Then the Pilgrim will stay broken or needs a total revamp. Also "solo" as you use it is overrated. Nowadays a Curse runnign around solo dies a fast death (except Nano-Curse which will change now anyways). Faster than a Hac. These changes make it playable in gangs. With damp change, the solo I-win button Nano-Damp-NOS/Neut Curse is dead - which is imho a good thing.
Originally by: Holly Chance
Recon ships are meant to be stealthy gang ewar support, nothing more. If you take a look at the capabilities of the other races' Recons, the Curse and Pilgrim are the only ones that could ever effectively solo. Sure they have a more offensive type of ewar, but CCP will not return them to the old days, regardless of the logic put forward. The only way we're going to get a Curse-equivalent again is if a new ship type is introduced - which like I said, I've been playing with. I've actually got the base stats and bonuses sorted out, but after looking over them again, I realise quite how obscenely powerful they are... back to the drawing board for a while -_-
The Pilgrim can simply not be compared to other races force recons. I recommend actually reading this whole thread :) All that as Amarr EWAR cant be compared to other EWAR at all. Changing Pilgrim with gang support in mind, similar to other Recons, will make it a beast which pwns even more solo. This is simply due to the EWAR it has.
Example?
For gang support, the Pilgrim needs range, resulting in a NOS/Neut range increase. This will remove the range boundary in solo and make it a killer.
Alternatively one could remove drone bay and drastically icnrease NOS/Neut effectiveness. Nice gang support, but then you see 2 men gangs pwning each and everything. Eg Pilgrim and Sacrilege (Sac with Improved cloak).
Whatever you say about inline with others and solo: I still do believe that there must be a ship which punishes solo ratting in 0.0 by our Ravens and others. Pilgrim is well suited to do so if it vanishes from local.
__
- click here - |
Diomidis
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:10:00 -
[262]
I keep revisiting this thread...really nice input and suggestions by more than a few lads.
Some points:
1) When using numbers, % of ships used, total number of Amarr vs. other Races players etc, why Recons are and should be a "minority" while HAS and other T2 cruisers shouldn't?
Why the "few in numbers" Minmatar players get to play with a solo pwn mobile that can choose it's fights, outrun and/or speed tank anything stronger while pwning anything faster that it's not careful enough?
Vagas are fine, creating a class of their own, while someone could easily claim that they should be plain "anti-support" vessels, only being able to out-dps and brake frig class ships...
This "fleet support" thing is silly...fleet battles are enough boring as they are, and surely a BS thing...small gangs tho are fun, relay heavily on personal skills and tactics and help you improve and invent knew ways of pwing or at least surviving.
2) Nerfing everything isn't a solution, the Amarr Recons are broken in every aspect tho: dps, ewar, drones, speed...nothing is up to par according to their role. A ship that uses un-bonuced ewar and performs way better than it's specialized ewar modules plain suckz and should be enough to mobilize CCP for rethinking the way TDs work on these ships. The same goes for NOS/Neuts. I-win exploits in cap killing by other races led to nurfs that completely gimped Amarr Recons, and left the "cheaters" using the same tactics (like Domis) almost intact it this role.
Sorry for tiring u out with this long post...just my 2(xx) cents.
Help us fly more Recons as fighters...@*#$&(!@# support.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 14:38:00 -
[263]
Well, 65 days, 13 hours; and if nothing is done, I'll start training for the Rapier
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 18:46:00 -
[264]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Well, 65 days, 13 hours; and if nothing is done, I'll start training for the Rapier
Why that specific time?
__
- click here - |
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 20:26:00 -
[265]
certainly any of the more recent suggestions on ths page of the thread would be better than what ccp did.
R.E.C.O.N. is recruiting
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 22:05:00 -
[266]
Yeeehaa! Got a reply from the devs in GD - here it is:
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Originally by: Cailais
Noooooo! what about the pilgrim!!!!
/me sobs
C.
OK, really last reply here:
I fly the Curse and the Pilgrim myself. I think the Curse is a damn fine PVP ship (I'd show you some pretty cool killmails if I could). The Pilgrim however might need some loving, especially in regards to the range it's doomed to fight at. But on the other hand, you have to realize that all the similar recons for the other races (falcon, arazu and rapier) have next to no damage output and are pretty useless solo.
Pilgrim still does its role in small gangs / fleets.
I don't agree with Zulupark with regard to the pilgrims role in gangs/fleets on account of its range issues - but perhaps theres a dim light upon the horizon: dont trash your pilgrims just yet!
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 22:06:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver
certainly any of the more recent suggestions on ths page of the thread would be better than what ccp did.
It is not about what CCP did decide for those ships. It is plain that the consequences of the NOS nerf were app not that obvious. Just hoping to be able to bring it to their attention....
__
- click here - |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.11.08 22:50:00 -
[268]
Just dropping by to check out the current status of the Amarr recons - Still Broken - just what I thought...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 02:46:00 -
[269]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Feng Schui
Well, 65 days, 13 hours; and if nothing is done, I'll start training for the Rapier
Why that specific time?
Thats when these misc skills I've been meaning to train, and recon 5, are finished.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 09:30:00 -
[270]
Oha, actually I was thinking about retraining too, except...
1. fully specced for Amarr Recon
2. training new ship lines atm so no time to do.. :(
__
- click here - |
|
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 09:53:00 -
[271]
I'm screwed two times, as I'm Gallente/Amarr specced mainly in Recons and Drones
I guess I've to train up Gunnery now, as dishing out damage and tanking is all these new changes are heading to.
But how boring this will be?
I think we've made good points so far, in how the Amarr-Recons could be changed, to make them more usefull again.
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 10:04:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Grytok
<snip>
But how boring this will be?
I think we've made good points so far, in how the Amarr-Recons could be changed, to make them more usefull again.
Good points? C'mon we offered like 4 different flavors for each: Pilgrim and Curse. Also we listed almost all possible tweak points and discussed them intensively.
What I liked so far is the reasonnable discussion (ok except me ;) ). Seems most pilots are tired of nerfs and prefer a fitting nerf-resistant ship line, which is viable.
Good? Way more, I believe one can not expect a lot more.
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 10:12:00 -
[273]
Sorry, didn't want to underestimate our efforts
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 10:52:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Grytok
Sorry, didn't want to underestimate our efforts
Have at thee!
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 13:52:00 -
[275]
Had a look, no change so far...
__
- click here - |
haq aan
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.11.09 18:44:00 -
[276]
As a 2 years old Minmatar spec pilot,i ve never flown Amarian Recons. But as an objective point of view, Amarr Recons need to be looked at..again.
It is obvious they are broken right now.
I can only wish for a reasonable fix while keeping balance in mind.
Role bonus to cap usage/draining to avoid NOS nerf is the most constructive idea in this thread.
thank u,
haq aan
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 00:50:00 -
[277]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 10/11/2007 00:51:03
figured this should be at the top, again.
edit: 7900 views, 10 pages, and nothing, nada, zilch from ccp regarding any of the changes.
|
Anacrit Mc'Sinister
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 01:24:00 -
[278]
yes, broken, or better prase is not made to be great. they work fine if the are not solo...and im fine with that, if only they were in line with other recons, which are pretty good in solo combat.
SO i say leave amarr alone - nerf everyone elce
|
Charles Kuralt
Dr. Klahn's Army
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 07:09:00 -
[279]
Still one of the most well thought out, well presented, mature and civilized thread to ever be completely ignored by devs. There are so many good ideas and so many obvious points the total silence can only mean for some reason they hate Amarr recons.
Back to the top with it!
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 10:47:00 -
[280]
Originally by: Hydrogen
The Pilgrim can simply not be compared to other races force recons. I recommend actually reading this whole thread :) All that as Amarr EWAR cant be compared to other EWAR at all. Changing Pilgrim with gang support in mind, similar to other Recons, will make it a beast which pwns even more solo. This is simply due to the EWAR it has.
Example?
For gang support, the Pilgrim needs range, resulting in a NOS/Neut range increase. This will remove the range boundary in solo and make it a killer.
Alternatively one could remove drone bay and drastically icnrease NOS/Neut effectiveness. Nice gang support, but then you see 2 men gangs pwning each and everything. Eg Pilgrim and Sacrilege (Sac with Improved cloak).
Whatever you say about inline with others and solo: I still do believe that there must be a ship which punishes solo ratting in 0.0 by our Ravens and others. Pilgrim is well suited to do so if it vanishes from local.
So yes, as I said, give it a range boost =P As far as I can see, that's the only change we're likely to get. I don't buy that they can't be compared - but if that is the case, guess what? Based on the way things have been going recently nerf/boost-wise, it means that they won't get fixed.
Or maybe I'm just being cynical. Yes, that's probably it...
My point is that if there's going to be any solo-punishing ship, it'll have to be a new class, or it won't get implemented due to the screaming rage of everyone else that guess what, Amarr has a stealthy killing machine and they don't! I agree, something like a Pilgrim with the ability to vanish from local would be perfect. But it's not going to be the Pilgrim.
|
|
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 13:53:00 -
[281]
Originally by: Mortis Tyrathlion
Originally by: Hydrogen
The Pilgrim can simply not be compared to other races force recons. I recommend actually reading this whole thread :) All that as Amarr EWAR cant be compared to other EWAR at all. Changing Pilgrim with gang support in mind, similar to other Recons, will make it a beast which pwns even more solo. This is simply due to the EWAR it has.
Example?
For gang support, the Pilgrim needs range, resulting in a NOS/Neut range increase. This will remove the range boundary in solo and make it a killer.
Alternatively one could remove drone bay and drastically icnrease NOS/Neut effectiveness. Nice gang support, but then you see 2 men gangs pwning each and everything. Eg Pilgrim and Sacrilege (Sac with Improved cloak).
Whatever you say about inline with others and solo: I still do believe that there must be a ship which punishes solo ratting in 0.0 by our Ravens and others. Pilgrim is well suited to do so if it vanishes from local.
So yes, as I said, give it a range boost =P As far as I can see, that's the only change we're likely to get. I don't buy that they can't be compared - but if that is the case, guess what? Based on the way things have been going recently nerf/boost-wise, it means that they won't get fixed.
Or maybe I'm just being cynical. Yes, that's probably it...
My point is that if there's going to be any solo-punishing ship, it'll have to be a new class, or it won't get implemented due to the screaming rage of everyone else that guess what, Amarr has a stealthy killing machine and they don't! I agree, something like a Pilgrim with the ability to vanish from local would be perfect. But it's not going to be the Pilgrim.
Problem is, that this would require an additional bonus, as you can't take the amount-bonus away, which would gimp it even more. Or you'd have to get rid of a Cruiser-Bonus to implement this suggestion.
.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 14:27:00 -
[282]
Edited by: Grytok on 10/11/2007 14:27:17
To make a whole shot at the Force Recons, while giving the Pilgrim a buff, here are my suggestions.
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Netralizer amount and 10% reduction in Energy Neutralizer capacitor use per level.
Arazu:
Gallente Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to warp disruptor range and 10% reduction in Remote Sensor Dampener capacitor use per level.
Rapier:
MinMatar Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire and 7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 60% bonus to Stasis Webifier range and 5% reduction in Signature Radius per level.
Falcon:
Caldari Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Shield Resistances and 20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal range per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 10% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength and 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer capacitor use per level.
Role Bonus (for all): 99% reduction to Covert Ops Cloaking Device CPU need and 100% reduction in targeting delay after decloaking.
Leave building cynos to disposable Cyno-Alts, as this is allready how it's done. Nobody uses 150 Million ISK ships to build cynos anymore.
Pilgrims problem is solved to some degree, while the others get some love too.
.
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 15:18:00 -
[283]
Originally by: Grytok
Edited by: Grytok on 10/11/2007 14:27:17
To make a whole shot at the Force Recons, while giving the Pilgrim a buff, here are my suggestions.
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Netralizer amount and 10% reduction in Energy Neutralizer capacitor use per level.
Arazu:
Gallente Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to warp disruptor range and 10% reduction in Remote Sensor Dampener capacitor use per level.
Rapier:
MinMatar Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire and 7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 60% bonus to Stasis Webifier range and 5% reduction in Signature Radius per level.
Falcon:
Caldari Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Shield Resistances and 20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal range per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 10% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength and 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer capacitor use per level.
Role Bonus (for all): 99% reduction to Covert Ops Cloaking Device CPU need and 100% reduction in targeting delay after decloaking.
Leave building cynos to disposable Cyno-Alts, as this is allready how it's done. Nobody uses 150 Million ISK ships to build cynos anymore.
Pilgrims problem is solved to some degree, while the others get some love too.
Not a bad idea... I'd vote for that. Let's face it, anyone who needs a cyno field - ie. has capships - will almost certainly have the cash to pay for the fuel for it...
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.10 16:14:00 -
[284]
It's not only about the fuel.
Cynos can be spotted through the Map and are visible in overview, which gives the cyno-ship a very short lifespan.
Every organized Capital-Op will have a Cyno-Alt in a Kestrel to do that bloody job, or you'll send in a way more cheaper Covert Ops, to build the cyno, if the stealthy approach is necessary.
Why should I risk my 150 Million Force Recon?
Usually you drop the cyno at places, where there is combat going on, and there I'm pretty dead after opening the cyno 90% of the time, as it is mandatory to kill the Cynoship asap.
.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.11 17:25:00 -
[285]
I've made a new Thread especially for the new Role Bonus' for all Force Recons, to keep that out of this thread.
Force Recons - Role Bonus Change
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.11 19:50:00 -
[286]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 11/11/2007 19:51:24
Originally by: Grytok
I've made a new Thread especially for the new Role Bonus' for all Force Recons, to keep that out of this thread.
Force Recons - Role Bonus Change
Cool stuff. Like already shown, I got a somehow different vision, thus I am not a 100% fan of your suggestions, but:
1. they are thought out.
2. they work
3. they appear to be blanced
4. I lack the mention of modified ship bonus's, something which still needs tweaking (and if it is only the missing 95grid for Pilgrim).
PS: I would soo much be in love with CCP if they really made Pilgrim the solo stealth assassin, as I still believe it is what they invisioned it to be (and why I trained it). At least that is what it was (except vanish from local).
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.11 23:06:00 -
[287]
/me Awaits for a damn change. Couple of months now, no change plently of good ideas.
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.12 00:06:00 -
[288]
Well, having tested both the pilgrim and the curse on sisi Im feeling pretty despondent about the amarr recons.
Managed to drop onto a hurricane and apply a webbifier: surely a good chance? Nope. Barely scratched his shield, and then the pilgrim died a miserable death despite having 1600mm plate and a overheated MARII. My curse, well that didnt even last that long.
Its all pretty hopeless.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.12 12:26:00 -
[289]
bump
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.12 20:19:00 -
[290]
Originally by: Cailais
Well, having tested both the pilgrim and the curse on sisi Im feeling pretty despondent about the amarr recons.
Managed to drop onto a hurricane and apply a webbifier: surely a good chance? Nope. Barely scratched his shield, and then the pilgrim died a miserable death despite having 1600mm plate and a overheated MARII. My curse, well that didnt even last that long.
Its all pretty hopeless.
C.
Nahhhh, fast and easy death is by design (of current Pilgrim design). Makes you feel less miserable and makes it easier to decide for another ship ;)
__
- click here - |
|
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.12 21:11:00 -
[291]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Cailais
Well, having tested both the pilgrim and the curse on sisi Im feeling pretty despondent about the amarr recons.
Managed to drop onto a hurricane and apply a webbifier: surely a good chance? Nope. Barely scratched his shield, and then the pilgrim died a miserable death despite having 1600mm plate and a overheated MARII. My curse, well that didnt even last that long.
Its all pretty hopeless.
C.
Nahhhh, fast and easy death is by design (of current Pilgrim design). Makes you feel less miserable and makes it easier to decide for another ship ;)
Well, Ive finally completed the long road to command ships, Iwon't be buying anymore curse or pilgrims (I've just got one of each left now). Thinking of using my pilgrim as an exploration vessel - fitting cloak, scan probe launcher and maybe a hacking module. Not sue if it'll fit, but might do as a work horse for a bit.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 01:03:00 -
[292]
Still not a simple "We're looking into the issue" so far from CCP
C'mon CCP, we're really trying to comeforward with some well thought out ideas
.
|
Der Komissar
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 02:36:00 -
[293]
"They laugh and snicker from a far"
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 09:00:00 -
[294]
Originally by: Cailais
Well, Ive finally completed the long road to command ships, Iwon't be buying anymore curse or pilgrims (I've just got one of each left now). Thinking of using my pilgrim as an exploration vessel - fitting cloak, scan probe launcher and maybe a hacking module. Not sue if it'll fit, but might do as a work horse for a bit.
Actually: if you look at some suggestions of mine for Pilgrim changes, I suggested an Astrometrics bonus several times.
1. It would make the Pilgrim actually usefull as a semi-professional exploration vessel.
2. The Pilgrim could hunt down exploration sites and do those of sig strength 0.8 and higher. For lower sites it just lacks tank and firepower.
3. Amarr lack a low end scanning vessel in Frigate class. Thus only fair to offer a high end vessel by now.
At least one more role and an actual use for the Pilgrim...
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 11:18:00 -
[295]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Cailais
Well, Ive finally completed the long road to command ships, Iwon't be buying anymore curse or pilgrims (I've just got one of each left now). Thinking of using my pilgrim as an exploration vessel - fitting cloak, scan probe launcher and maybe a hacking module. Not sue if it'll fit, but might do as a work horse for a bit.
Actually: if you look at some suggestions of mine for Pilgrim changes, I suggested an Astrometrics bonus several times.
1. It would make the Pilgrim actually usefull as a semi-professional exploration vessel.
2. The Pilgrim could hunt down exploration sites and do those of sig strength 0.8 and higher. For lower sites it just lacks tank and firepower.
3. Amarr lack a low end scanning vessel in Frigate class. Thus only fair to offer a high end vessel by now.
At least one more role and an actual use for the Pilgrim...
Its certainly an option if ccp don't want the pilgrim as 'combat' orientated vessel (and appears they don't). If the current cost of the ship drops below the 20mil mark it could be worth using in this fashion -perhaps as a support ship to the cov ops anathema.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Kel Dario
Amarr
Blue Sky Inc
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 11:40:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Grytok
Edited by: Grytok on 10/11/2007 14:27:17
To make a whole shot at the Force Recons, while giving the Pilgrim a buff, here are my suggestions.
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Netralizer amount and 10% reduction in Energy Neutralizer capacitor use per level.
Arazu:
Gallente Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to warp disruptor range and 10% reduction in Remote Sensor Dampener capacitor use per level.
Rapier:
MinMatar Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire and 7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 60% bonus to Stasis Webifier range and 5% reduction in Signature Radius per level.
Falcon:
Caldari Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Shield Resistances and 20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal range per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 10% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength and 10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer capacitor use per level.
Role Bonus (for all): 99% reduction to Covert Ops Cloaking Device CPU need and 100% reduction in targeting delay after decloaking.
Leave building cynos to disposable Cyno-Alts, as this is allready how it's done. Nobody uses 150 Million ISK ships to build cynos anymore.
Pilgrims problem is solved to some degree, while the others get some love too.
/Signed :D
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 13:47:00 -
[297]
Originally by: Cailais
Its certainly an option if ccp don't want the pilgrim as 'combat' orientated vessel (and appears they don't). If the current cost of the ship drops below the 20mil mark it could be worth using in this fashion -perhaps as a support ship to the cov ops anathema.
So for this case it could be like:
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer amount and 10% reduction in Energy Neutralizer capacitor use per level.
Role bonus: -98% to -100% reduced CPU need for cloaking device per level and 10% reduction to duration/activation time of modules requiring Astrometrics per level
Therefore some usability in PvP and some in PvE
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 20:59:00 -
[298]
Originally by: Hydrogen
So for this case it could be like:
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer amount and 10% reduction in Energy Neutralizer capacitor use per level.
Role bonus: -98% to -100% reduced CPU need for cloaking device per level and 10% reduction to duration/activation time of modules requiring Astrometrics per level
Therefore some usability in PvP and some in PvE
Oha, not a single comment on this change?
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.13 21:40:00 -
[299]
Sorry mate, I'd still prefer to get the targeting-delay removed from the Force Recons
Faster ScanningTime is only needed for probing down ships on SS. For probing complexes, it's not needed tbh.
And when you've probed down a ship and got him fast enough, because of your suggested bonus, it will warp away, the very momnet you decloak, having a 5 second targeting-delay.
It's a silly dog trying to catch his tail, you know
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.14 10:20:00 -
[300]
Originally by: Grytok
Sorry mate, I'd still prefer to get the targeting-delay removed from the Force Recons
Faster ScanningTime is only needed for probing down ships on SS. For probing complexes, it's not needed tbh.
And when you've probed down a ship and got him fast enough, because of your suggested bonus, it will warp away, the very momnet you decloak, having a 5 second targeting-delay.
It's a silly dog trying to catch his tail, you know
I understand you, still would be better than it is now...
__
- click here - |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 10:22:00 -
[301]
Originally by: Grytok
Still not a simple "We're looking into the issue" so far from CCP
C'mon CCP, we're really trying to comeforward with some well thought out ideas
Irritating, that there is nothing as a reply... by CCP.
Maybe too much facts?
__
- click here - |
Chronos VIII
Amarr
Infinitus Odium
The Church.
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 10:59:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Hydrogen
So for this case it could be like:
Pilgrim:
Amarr Cruiser Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances and 10% bonus to Drone damage and hitpoints per level.
Recon Ship Bonus: 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer amount and 10% reduction in Energy Neutralizer capacitor use per level.
Role bonus: -98% to -100% reduced CPU need for cloaking device per level and 10% reduction to duration/activation time of modules requiring Astrometrics per level
Therefore some usability in PvP and some in PvE
Oha, not a single comment on this change?
Well I like the fact that you trying to change something and the amarr recons definitely need some love from ccp, but I think you are missing the point here. In my opinion, the main problem is that especially the pilgrim is forced to fight in web range, which is ridiculous considering its lack of tank ability. We all know that recons are paper-thin, so alot of experienced recon pilots fly their ships with extenders. This is compareable to the vaga. You stick 2 LSE and a speed tank on your ship. The pilgrim is very limited in its options. Fitting plates to it doesnt make any sense to me either. I mean yea, you have a buffer of like 4k health, but you are very slow, not very agile and your dps kinda sucks. So basically this is just a matter of time when your opponent kills you.
To be honest, I have no idea how to make the pilgrim sexy again with the current nos changes. Boosting/nerfing tracking disruptors doesnt help either in my opinion. A good start would be a range bonus, that allows you to fight outside web range.
5 heavy drones anyone? Oh nvm i forgot, we're talkin about amarr not gallente
Chronos
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 14:01:00 -
[303]
Originally by: Chronos VIII
Well I like the fact that you trying to change something and the amarr recons definitely need some love from ccp, but I think you are missing the point here. In my opinion, the main problem is that especially the pilgrim is forced to fight in web range, which is ridiculous considering its lack of tank ability. We all know that recons are paper-thin, so alot of experienced recon pilots fly their ships with extenders. This is compareable to the vaga. You stick 2 LSE and a speed tank on your ship. The pilgrim is very limited in its options. Fitting plates to it doesnt make any sense to me either. I mean yea, you have a buffer of like 4k health, but you are very slow, not very agile and your dps kinda sucks. So basically this is just a matter of time when your opponent kills you.
To be honest, I have no idea how to make the pilgrim sexy again with the current nos changes. Boosting/nerfing tracking disruptors doesnt help either in my opinion. A good start would be a range bonus, that allows you to fight outside web range.
5 heavy drones anyone? Oh nvm i forgot, we're talkin about amarr not gallente
Chronos
Well when you take the time, you will realize, that your points are already addressed. Pilgrim lacks versatility and tank and....
just too much what it lacks...
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 21:57:00 -
[304]
Still nothing from ccp?
The pilgrim and curse have been succesively hit by:
ECM nerf
Nano nerf
Nos nerf
Damp / TD nerf
CCP - what have you got against these ships??
Eos gets 'nerfed' mass whinings, and gets an extra low (sisi)
Carriers threatend with a nerf, mass whinings '5 hour meetings' to solve the problem.
Falcon, ECM gets a nerf, Falcon gets a boost to ECM.
Are curse and pilgrim pilots just a joke to ccp?
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.15 22:44:00 -
[305]
Originally by: Cailais
Still nothing from ccp?
The pilgrim and curse have been succesively hit by:
ECM nerf
Nano nerf
Nos nerf
Damp / TD nerf
CCP - what have you got against these ships??
Eos gets 'nerfed' mass whinings, and gets an extra low (sisi)
Carriers threatend with a nerf, mass whinings '5 hour meetings' to solve the problem.
Falcon, ECM gets a nerf, Falcon gets a boost to ECM.
Are curse and pilgrim pilots just a joke to ccp?
C.
Too much Amarr whining here and not in the General forum. Seems that gets more attention from the devs.
I still just want a freaking nos/neut range bonus on the Pilgrim. Having a TD bonus yet working in web range is an oxy-moron. Sure neuts go 12k, but now so do webs thanks to overheating. Plus all the other recons got their range. Why the hell not the Pilgrim? Discriminate against Amarr much? Eh CCP?
Ungimp the Pilgrim you lazy beer drinking vikings! 
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 03:19:00 -
[306]
Frustrating the least said. Also reading a dev saying that he scores nice kills in his Pilgrim thus it is fine...
Well I see decent kill mails with a HELIOS of DOOM. Does it make the Helios a fine PvP ship?`
Phear the Ibis of Doom.
__
- click here - |
Ashen Wraith
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 08:24:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Cailais
Still nothing from ccp?
The pilgrim and curse have been succesively hit by:
ECM nerf
Nano nerf
Nos nerf
Damp / TD nerf
CCP - what have you got against these ships??
Eos gets 'nerfed' mass whinings, and gets an extra low (sisi)
Carriers threatend with a nerf, mass whinings '5 hour meetings' to solve the problem.
Falcon, ECM gets a nerf, Falcon gets a boost to ECM.
Are curse and pilgrim pilots just a joke to ccp?
C.
/signed
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 10:16:00 -
[308]
As I read the forums way too much, I've came across a BoB-Thread and a thread about Fanfest, where Oveur made some jokes.
Nice to see that the Devs reply to real problems like "how much to drink at fanfest" or "why the war between BoB and Goons started".
At least make a joke about how the Pilgrim sucks atm, just to have that little yellow bar infront of this thread
Other then that nothing new in this case.
.
|
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 11:32:00 -
[309]
I don't know if you intended your post to come over this why but what struck me after reading it was that your main issue is this:
Fleet - dont bother you'll just die!
Solo - Nos nerf means I can't solo [everything] anymore!
While you didn't want comparisons drawn with other recons I suspect that every recon pilot would tell you that 'fleet = death' simply because there is so much firepower on the table _anything_ primaried is going to die in short order (and not enough E-War to get rid of it all)
As such your post decends basically into a complaint about not being able to solo [everything] anymore after attempting to justify why these ships aren't fit for fleet work.
In addition you mention fitting ECM at several points, did you really mean 'E-War' or are you suggesting a Amarr recons should be fitting ECM (a point I would disagree with)
I've never felt that recons were intended to be solo [pwn]ships (due to E-War sharing space with tackle, cap boosters and propulsion) and all about small gang work (although the Force Recons could participate in fleet combat given their ability to arrive cloaked and wait for an opportune moment to strike)
You state that the Amarr recons are still able to engage and destroy [solo] ships up to Battlecruiser size under certain circumstances but I would say that this is really not any different to the other recons or indeed any other ship type, specifically that Drones and FOF missiles will 'work around' ECM, Damps or Tracking Disruptors (and Painters dont really feature in this kind of discussion)
I'm not saying that Amarr Recons don't need 'something' to compensate for the Nos nerf I'm just saying that expecting them to return to their previous combat ability might be unbalancing as I suspect these ships were a instrumental for the Nos nerf in the first place (by way of comparison look how long its taken for Caldari to receive an ECM boost since the ECM nerf - i.e. next patch)
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Endica Enterprises
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 12:42:00 -
[310]
OK, first off, please don't hit me right away if my point of view is utterly flawed.
I have watched a lot of the discussions about Amarr in general and Amarr Recons in particular. I've seen a lot of 'the Curse/Pilgrim is totally useless now' threads and postings.
So I've become inquisitive and tried to come up with a decent Pilgrim fitting, to see if that ship really is as weak and useless as most say.
This is the result:
High Slots:
2x Medium Diminishing Power System Drain I
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Med Slots:
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Medium Capacitor Booster II (200)
Balmer Series Targeting Inhibitor I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Warp Disruptor II
Low Slots:
Medium Armor Repairer II
2x Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Thermic Membrane II
Damage Control II
Rigs:
2x Capacitor Control Circuit I
Now don't get me wrong and please don't shout at me. I personally don't fly Amarr Recons (yet), so I might miss something fundamental, but that setup looks quite solid to me.
Sure it's not 'uber', you have to pick your targets carefully and some opponents might be impossible to take down, but I don't think that's reason enough to call it worthless or weak.
It should be able to assassinate a lot of ships.
Therefore I'd be greatful if someone could point out major flaws and/or tell me why this ship wouldn't work, if possible in a decent and friendly manner.
You see, I can't agree to any boosts or changes as long as I think it's still a good ship. It shouldn't suddenl exceed the capabilities of comparable ships. As soon as I fully realize the need for a change, I'll gladly join the move and advocate boosts/changes.
___________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf'
Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
|
|
NoobALTS
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 13:12:00 -
[311]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 16/11/2007 12:59:49
OK, first off, please don't hit me right away if my point of view is utterly flawed.
I have watched a lot of the discussions about Amarr in general and Amarr Recons in particular. I've seen a lot of 'the Curse/Pilgrim is totally useless now' threads and postings.
So I've become inquisitive and tried to come up with a decent Pilgrim fitting, to see if that ship really is as weak and useless as most say.
This is the result:
High Slots:
2x Medium Diminishing Power System Drain I
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Med Slots:
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Medium Capacitor Booster II (200)
Balmer Series Targeting Inhibitor I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Warp Disruptor II
Low Slots:
Medium Armor Repairer II
2x Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Thermic Membrane II
Damage Control II
Rigs:
2x Capacitor Control Circuit I
Now don't get me wrong and please don't shout at me. I personally don't fly Amarr Recons (yet), so I might miss something fundamental, but that setup looks quite solid to me.
Sure it's not 'uber', you have to pick your targets carefully and some opponents might be impossible to take down, but I don't think that's reason enough to call it worthless or weak.
It should be able to assassinate a lot of ships.
Therefore I'd be greatful if someone could point out major flaws and/or tell me why this ship wouldn't work, if possible in a decent and friendly manner.
You see, I can't agree to any boosts or changes as long as I think it's still a good ship. They should definitely have something going for them, especially due to the missing 'safety distance', but they shouldn't suddenly exceed the capabilities of comparable ships. As soon as I fully realize the need for a change, I'll gladly join the move and advocate boosts/changes.
edit: Basically, most of what Sol Basso has written describes my thoughts.
The main thing is that PvP has changed. The pilgrim in that setup can only pounce upon its prey. The tracking disrupter means it will be attacking turret ships, and I guess ratting ravens. The thing is, the Pilgrim setup you show cannot speed tank a Ratting Raven, and will be in Web range of any other ship.
Here is an example. your pilgrim setup attacks a combat target. At Disrupter Range, it cannot use nos or neuts, so can only send drones to attack. The Target, if a battleship, an tank this easaly or kill your drones, perhaps even send his own drones on you as well. You would have get close enough to use nos/neut to kill the targets tank, so you can actually do damage to it. But even that is difficult because if the opponant has Web, then you are trapped as you cannot go faster to out-track turret fire if applicable.
The Tracking disrupter will not make any difference for non-turret ships and makes very almost no difference at Nos/neut range for most targets. TD's do not effect falloff so only races that rely on tons of cap, move slow, lack bug dronebays and have low number of mids and also have short falloffs would be applicable targets. I.E A Pilgrim is only good at killing Amarr ships as Amarr ships, apart from Sacreledge, suck currently.
This is why the pilgrim is obsolete now. There are better ships that beat the pilgrim in every single way for whatever role you plan for it.
|
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 14:37:00 -
[312]
Originally by: Chronos VIII
In my opinion, the main problem is that especially the pilgrim is forced to fight in web range, which is ridiculous considering its lack of tank ability. We all know that recons are paper-thin, so alot of experienced recon pilots fly their ships with extenders. This is compareable to the vaga. You stick 2 LSE and a speed tank on your ship. The pilgrim is very limited in its options. Fitting plates to it doesnt make any sense to me either. I mean yea, you have a buffer of like 4k health, but you are very slow, not very agile and your dps kinda sucks. So basically this is just a matter of time when your opponent kills you.
The Pilgrim has never been a FOTM speedtank, and I'd rather not see it come to that. The pilgrim used to work by webbing/scramming your opponent, sticking 2x tracking disruptors on him, and orbitting outside his optimal, or under his new tracking window. The Nos meant you'd use your targets cap to tun your tank, no cap needed to run the nos.
Now though you need to fit a cap booster, or a large cap battery which I have had great success with in the past week. This takes a mid away so you can't fit that 2nd balmer TD which means turret ships can much more easily eat you for lunch. After the TD nerf goes in I'll reconsider fitting TDs at all!
Now, even with cap rigs, and a cap battery/med injector you're not gonna have the cap to sustain a medium rep, ewar, and medium neuts. There's no use fitting nos as your targets cap will be lower than yours anyhow, thing is they can inject easy since nearly every ship have more cargo than a Pilgrim and they'll have cap and you won't. Pilgrim does like 200dps which almost any T1 cruiser can do, and some T2 frigates. You're not gonna be breaking any tanks without the neuts cept T1 cruisers.
As for the other recons, they are more viable in fleet because they CAN be speed and rangetanked. When we say the Pilgrim just dies in a fleet fight we're saying because it can't LSE+speektank like the rest of em everyone on the battlefield at nearly any time can have a go at it. The Rapier, Falcon, and Arazu can operate from extreme ranges where only snipers can hit em, and if they get primaried they can warp away if they can align in time, or MWD around so they don't get hit. Guess what, when the Pilgrim is primaried even the blasterboats can have a go at it, and unlike the other recons a primaried pilgrim will most definatly be in scram AND web range of SOMETHING unless it's not doing its job. The Pilgrim's lack of mobility clashes with its close range style that requires it to move from target to target, sometimes 30kms apart to keep doing its thing. Oh, and don't even get me started on trying to get drones to attack a single target in fleet. Half the time with the lag each drone will pick a ship so far out of range, or so fast they can't catch it anyways and refuse to obey new commands.
That's fine with me, TDs and nos aren't that useful in a fleet fight to begin with.
So, to review, Pilgrims cap consumption at least doubled (that's with small nos, it's quadrupled with med), and its cap income cut to nothing. Anyone noticing a problem here?
Pilgrim just needs some solution that allows it to be cap stable while still keeping a single BC size target at 0 cap and still tank long enough for its meager DPS to kill the opponent. Should be able to take some other PvP fitted T2 cruisers, especially turretships. Possibly even T1 BCs provided they're not drone or missileboats. As for PvE fits, T1 turreted battleships should be quite challenging but possible, well skilled Ravens not so much.
--
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:04:00 -
[313]
Originally by: Sol Basso
Fleet - dont bother you'll just die!
Solo - Nos nerf means I can't solo [everything] anymore!
1. You miss the important part between Fleet and solo: gangs. There are enough ships, which are a greater assett to a gang than Pilgrim or even Curse. Simple as that.
2. A Pilgrim is unable to solo a worthy opponent (worthy as in skilled). Again: the ability to kill unskilled pilots and/or poor setup is not a unique ability to the Pilgrim but applies to almsot any ship in EvE.
Keeping those points in mind, your whole post appears to be biased, lacks infomation or plain experience piloting those ships on your side.
Originally by: Sol Basso
While you didn't want comparisons drawn with other recons I suspect that every recon pilot would tell you that 'fleet = death' simply because there is so much firepower on the table _anything_ primaried is going to die in short order (and not enough E-War to get rid of it all)
Actually even in fleet all Recons offer more specific and efficient abilities than the Pilgrim. The Curse is still considered a threat and quite often primaried. The last point is the curse of the Curse but no design flaw.
Originally by: Sol Basso
As such your post decends basically into a complaint about not being able to solo [everything] anymore after attempting to justify why these ships aren't fit for fleet work.
I am sorry that is plain not true - a Pilgrim does not work in any scenario. But I do believe that an extremly well skilled Pilgrim pilot should be able to stand his ground versus any ship up to BC size. After all:
- the Pilgrim always engages close range on a: all or nothing basis. One mistake and it is dead. Risk vs. reward that is what EvE is about. By now a Pilgrim risks all and got no chance versus any skilled opponent.
Originally by: Sol Basso
In addition you mention fitting ECM at several points, did you really mean 'E-War' or are you suggesting a Amarr recons should be fitting ECM (a point I would disagree with)
EWAR = EWAR
EWAR <> ECM
EWAR to me includes NOS, TD, Neuts,...
Originally by: Sol Basso
I've never felt that recons were intended to be solo [pwn]ships (due to E-War sharing space with tackle, cap boosters and propulsion) and all about small gang work (although the Force Recons could participate in fleet combat given their ability to arrive cloaked and wait for an opportune moment to strike)
1. Pilgrim as Force Recon is the worst choice for fleets simply as it lacks range - plain pointless.
2. Lack nullifies any cloaking advantage.
3. Operating this way (cloaked approach, uncloak, attack) in fleets is in fact soloing again. Something where the Pilgrim definitly lacks like you agreed.
Originally by: Sol Basso
You state that the Amarr recons are still able to engage and destroy [solo] ships up to Battlecruiser size under certain circumstances but I would say that this is really not any different to the other recons or indeed any other ship type, specifically that Drones and FOF missiles will 'work around' ECM, Damps or Tracking Disruptors (and Painters dont really feature in this kind of discussion)
Well here comes the old point: its pointless to compare each race's Recon. Since you need to compare the whole EWAR of each race by then. Something where Amarr fail anyway. Also all Recons except Curse and Pilgrim fill an intended role - very well. Curse and Pilgrim not at all.
The Curse is at least able to kill, but face the truth: a damage Sacrilege (3 BCU with Rage) performs much better with higher survivability.
__
- click here - |
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:05:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Corwain
Pilgrim just needs some solution that allows it to be cap stable while still keeping a single BC size target at 0 cap and still tank long enough for its meager DPS to kill the opponent. Should be able to take some other PvP fitted T2 cruisers, especially turretships. Possibly even T1 BCs provided they're not drone or missileboats. As for PvE fits, T1 turreted battleships should be quite challenging but possible, well skilled Ravens not so much.
I don't agree or disagree with individual bits or the whole but I'm interested to know what this expectation of [solo] ability is based on? For example I dont see anything in the description that implies solo work and I dont see the Caldari recons capable of the above (as an exmaple - since they cant guarantee the opponent will be perma jammed and they wont be shield, armour or speed tanked) so I can only assume this is based on the Amarr recons previous [overpowered] capabilities?
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:14:00 -
[315]
Originally by: Sol Basso
I'm not saying that Amarr Recons don't need 'something' to compensate for the Nos nerf I'm just saying that expecting them to return to their previous combat ability might be unbalancing as I suspect these ships were a instrumental for the Nos nerf in the first place (by way of comparison look how long its taken for Caldari to receive an ECM boost since the ECM nerf - i.e. next patch)
Well since some insist.. start to compare ECM and Tracking Disruption. To counter ECM without a boost even, one needs a module. On specialized ships (Caldari) we are talking about killing your target dps at least 67% of the time. Even with a counter we are still at app. 45-50%.
Now look at tracking disruption: it applies to approximately 70% of the ships used in EvE. Of those 70% every single ship is able to counter Tracking Disruption without the use of a module. Simply navigation in space and tactics are needed to counter Tracking Disruption. This would still be ok if Pilgrim and Curse could actually dictate range. Breaking news: a Curse's speed tank is subpar to any other serious speed tank. Not to talk about the Curse which needs to stay in close range for his suicide.
So a Nano Curse is good when fighting non-Nano-tagets, where it can dictate range. Funnily the sensor dampeners after the next patch are still more efficient than using pre patch Tracking Disruptors. Any other Curse setup offers zero additional benefit to a gang or in solo. Zealot, Sacrilege, Harbinger, Prophecy (all in similar price range) offer way more benefit to a gang and unique abilities.
The phrase: "it can kill, thus it is good" is ignorant - the least said.
Pilgrim solo is suicide in any case. A Pilgrim in a gang is too much isk for too low a benefit.
__
- click here - |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:22:00 -
[316]
Edited by: Corwain on 16/11/2007 15:24:44
Originally by: Sol Basso
I dont see anything in the description that implies solo work and I dont see the Caldari recons capable of the above (as an exmaple - since they cant guarantee the opponent will be perma jammed and they wont be shield, armour or speed tanked)
So you're basing ships capabilities on their descriptions now?
Celestis: True to Gallente style the Celestis is especially deadly in close quarters combat due to its advanced targeting systems.
Thus I refute thee.
And secondly, I've had a well fitted PvP-brutix killed by a solo Rook. Perma jammed me, chipped at me til I ran out of cap charges...and this is with current ECM and bonuses, after the boost it will become much more common. Caldari recons can perma-jam multiple battleships at once...sure once in a blue moon they fail a cycle, but that's the nature of the beast with ECM being chance based. You've gotta die eventually.
--
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:35:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
OK, first off, please don't hit me right away if my point of view is utterly flawed.
You are not utterly flawed, you miss the major point.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
So I've become inquisitive and tried to come up with a decent Pilgrim fitting, to see if that ship really is as weak and useless as most say.
This is the result:
High Slots:
2x Medium Diminishing Power System Drain I
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
1. your high slots need named modules. Without you can not use this setup.
2. The NOS are worthless here due to the recent NOS change. To use those to full effect you would need to play jigsaw with your cap, which is unplayable.
3. You lack versatility here also.
Your high slots look good on paper but do not work in real.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Med Slots:
10MN MicroWarpdrive II
Medium Capacitor Booster II (200)
Balmer Series Targeting Inhibitor I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Warp Disruptor II
1. The Tracking Disruptor has an effect on unskilled players, but doesnt really increase your survivability. Versus skilled players the Tracking Disruptor is worthless.
2. You can not sustain your Cap even with the 2 NOS active.
3. You need the MWD most importantly to pass gate camps and to close in to targets after decloak. In a fight you need to stay in range due to your low range (12km and less). Thus in a fight a MWD is suicide due to the high signature radius.
4. Your MWD does not enable you to leave a fight at will. I fyou think different try it and feel the effect of your signature radius when you pulled the short end of the stick.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Low Slots:
Medium Armor Repairer II
2x Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Thermic Membrane II
Damage Control II
A weak tank. Here you chose a armor tank only low slot layout. At maximum skills this offers a 162 reinforced tank (EFT value). Or in practice, out in the real EvE universe: YOU DIE hellish fast. I would not even call this a tank. Granted 80%+ resist (except 71.9% on kin) looks good on paper but is worthless with 2250 armor and 152 m3 sig. Fly it and feel the frustration yourself.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Rigs:
2x Capacitor Control Circuit I
Now here comes the part, where your cap becomes sustainable. But wait: you need your rig slots for a viable PvP setup, while still having an issue to kill anything T2 below BS size?
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Now don't get me wrong and please don't shout at me. I personally don't fly Amarr Recons (yet), so I might miss something fundamental, but that setup looks quite solid to me.
I plain is not - the difference from paper to real play is huge. Playing them is fun at first still. Past that time when actually using them you will realize on how much those issues I listed in this answer and in the whole thread impact your game play.
__
- click here - |
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:35:00 -
[318]
Its a slow Friday afternoon so I'll indulge you
Originally by: Hydrogen
1. You miss the important part between Fleet and solo: gangs. There are enough ships, which are a greater assett to a gang than Pilgrim or even Curse. Simple as that.
2. A Pilgrim is unable to solo a worthy opponent (worthy as in skilled). Again: the ability to kill unskilled pilots and/or poor setup is not a unique ability to the Pilgrim but applies to almsot any ship in EvE.
Keeping those points in mind, your whole post appears to be biased, lacks infomation or plain experience piloting those ships on your side.
Its true I have never piloted either of these ship, my reply is based entirely on your original post, therefore any bias has arisen from how your original post came across.
Gangs were intentionally omitted as you discredit them as quickly as fleets (note at no point do I say this was unwarranted!) and then only concern yourself with solo ability.
Perhaps if pilot experience is something required to relate to your subject next time you can free yourself of all the groundwork you felt needed for people to understand the problem?
Originally by: Hydrogen
I am sorry that is plain not true - a Pilgrim does not work in any scenario. But I do believe that an extremly well skilled Pilgrim pilot should be able to stand his ground versus any ship up to BC size. After all:
- the Pilgrim always engages close range on a: all or nothing basis. One mistake and it is dead. Risk vs. reward that is what EvE is about. By now a Pilgrim risks all and got no chance versus any skilled opponent.
My opinion is simply that and therefore is probably neither right or wrong, I dont recall claiming that the ship worked in any scenario but your post only mentions solo work, at no point do you try and address the ships gang and fleet shortcomings (which is perhaps the main reason you post comes across the way it does)
Originally by: Hydrogen
EWAR = EWAR
EWAR <> ECM
EWAR to me includes NOS, TD, Neuts,...
Originally by: Hydrogen's original post
A Curse's tasks:
<snip>
- Solo/gang-nano ship: up to 7,348 km/s with a snake set and 10.8 km/s with a snake set and overheating are feasible. This while maintaining either ECM or a shield tank. Drones and missiles kill target.
So here you are actually suggesting the Curse is fitted with ECM?.....
Originally by: Hydrogen
1. Pilgrim as Force Recon is the worst choice for fleets simply as it lacks range - plain pointless.
2. Lack nullifies any cloaking advantage.
3. Operating this way (cloaked approach, uncloak, attack) in fleets is in fact soloing again. Something where the Pilgrim definitly lacks like you agreed.
Firstly I fail to see how operating in a fleet environment is suddenly considered soloing, secondly you discredit fleet and gang participation so quickly you dont stop to examine if these are the areas in which the ship needs to be adjusted
Originally by: Hydrogen
Well here comes the old point: its pointless to compare each race's Recon. Since you need to compare the whole EWAR of each race by then. Something where Amarr fail anyway. Also all Recons except Curse and Pilgrim fill an intended role - very well. Curse and Pilgrim not at all.
I would argue Minmatar feel slightly differently about Amarr having the worst E-War, I'm not arguing that the Amarr ships lack a role, I'm 'suggesting' solo may not be the direction likely to meet with sympathy from CCP
I'll try and summarise as completely as I can. I am open to the concept that Amarr recons need a boost, your analysis of their currents abilities appears to be accurate however I remain unconvinced that returning the ships ability to solo to their previous levels is balancing and perhaps amarr recon pilots need to consider that the ships boost may be more appropriate (or likely) in other areas (such as gang and fleet work)
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:43:00 -
[319]
Originally by: Sol Basso
I don't agree or disagree with individual bits or the whole but I'm interested to know what this expectation of [solo] ability is based on? For example I dont see anything in the description that implies solo work and I dont see the Caldari recons capable of the above (as an exmaple - since they cant guarantee the opponent will be perma jammed and they wont be shield, armour or speed tanked) so I can only assume this is based on the Amarr recons previous [overpowered] capabilities?
While you still drop in those [solo] and [overpowered] statements, it does not make your postings right. It is plain bad style when you are looking for a serious discussion.
1. Curse and Pilgrim filled a role before NOS nerf. Those roles included solo play to a fair amount.
2. Curse and Pilgrim do not fill a role by now. Mark me: I do not consider the Nano-Damp-Curse pwning a role. A point on which we can argue for sure.
All I am askin for is: the Pilgrim and the Curse need a role, which they can fill. A purpose, where they excel.
Granted this thread focused to some degree on soloing as a role due to several reasons:
1. Curse: its description - a HAC with EWAR. Well solo somehow feels right, but there is no need to focus on it. Maybe even change it. But right now solo is the single real role of a Curse. In a gang other ships offer more benefit to the gang than a Curse.
2. Pilgrim: the Pilgrim's doom to enter close combat and stay in close combat is clearly a solo role. It is: kill or die.
Mark me: to me it is ok if they got different roles, but they MUST be able to fill those.
__
- click here - |
Corwain
Gallente
Down In Flames
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:46:00 -
[320]
40km web ain't shabby EWar, and with the boost to torps TPs will again be useful. BTW are TPs getting scripts? When questioned why they are putting scripts to TDs CCPs brilliant reply was "It didn't make sense not to." OK, so why not put scripts to guns then that lets you suggest tracking or damage? Or armor reps that let you pick amount or frequency? or scrams that let you select range or strength? You can apply scripts to everything, but the reason you applied it to Damps was because they were overpowered. Were TDs overpowered?
Pilgrim used to fit 2 TDs standard. Pilgrim now loses a mid to at least 1 cap mod (injector, battery, etc), down to 1 TD. Now scripts, Pilgrim has 1/2 a TD. Just remove the TD bonus completely if you're gonna do us like that, sheesh!
--
|
|
|
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:46:00 -
[321]
Originally by: Corwain
Edited by: Corwain on 16/11/2007 15:24:44
Originally by: Sol Basso
I dont see anything in the description that implies solo work and I dont see the Caldari recons capable of the above (as an exmaple - since they cant guarantee the opponent will be perma jammed and they wont be shield, armour or speed tanked)
So you're basing ships capabilities on their descriptions now?
Celestis: True to Gallente style the Celestis is especially deadly in close quarters combat due to its advanced targeting systems.
Thus I refute thee.
And secondly, I've had a well fitted PvP-brutix killed by a solo Rook. Perma jammed me, chipped at me til I ran out of cap charges...and this is with current ECM and bonuses, after the boost it will become much more common. Caldari recons can perma-jam multiple battleships at once...sure once in a blue moon they fail a cycle, but that's the nature of the beast with ECM being chance based. You've gotta die eventually.
The immediate hostility in here when you fail to agree with whatever is present is simply staggering! Some of you just arent open to critique!
Perhaps you should push for the ship description to be changed instead then! (and the Celestis if you feel that way)
Please explain why the celestis fails to fit that description rather than simply stating it isnt so? with good skills and module (before ship bonus!) a damp can reduce target lock range ~50%, given the default optimal of the module
What were your drones doing while you were waiting for the Rook to kill you? (hint - max ECM fitted rooks have no tank other than default resists/stats they range tank and he can't do that if he needs to scramble you!).
Did you have ECCM/sensor backup fitted (if not you were not fitted for an encounter with an ECM ship and it sounds like a Blackbird would probably have killed you).
Was this a known enemy (i.e. war target)? (its unlikely the Rook had a full rack of Gallente jammers fitted unless he knew what/who he was hunting)
Oh and the Rook bonuses dont change in the next patch, only the Blackbird, Falcon and Scorpion so other than the additional low slot the Rook gets (which with stacking penalty on ECM amps will probably be used for a plate) the Rooks not getting any better!
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:48:00 -
[322]
Edited by: Cailais on 16/11/2007 15:50:06
Originally by: Sol Basso
Originally by: Corwain
Pilgrim just needs some solution that allows it to be cap stable while still keeping a single BC size target at 0 cap and still tank long enough for its meager DPS to kill the opponent. Should be able to take some other PvP fitted T2 cruisers, especially turretships. Possibly even T1 BCs provided they're not drone or missileboats. As for PvE fits, T1 turreted battleships should be quite challenging but possible, well skilled Ravens not so much.
I don't agree or disagree with individual bits or the whole but I'm interested to know what this expectation of [solo] ability is based on? For example I dont see anything in the description that implies solo work and I dont see the Caldari recons capable of the above (as an exmaple - since they cant guarantee the opponent will be perma jammed and they wont be shield, armour or speed tanked) so I can only assume this is based on the Amarr recons previous [overpowered] capabilities?
Was the pilgrim 'overpowered' pre-nos nerf? Was the nos nerf deliberately aimed at the amarr recons? Im not so sure. In my view the nos nerf was applied because every ship fitted them, from the ubiqutous nos-domi to hacs, bcs, bs etc etc. Nos was endemic (in fact you could argue the 'unique' aspects of the curse and pilgrim were'nt that unique).
Now during the pre-nos/ecm nerf era the pilgrim and curse were feared ships becuase of their ability to attack a lone target and (probably) win. Hence they aquired a 'solo pvp ship' tag.
The nos and ECM nerf reduced the popularity of the modules on a variety of ship fits (much like the damp nerf is likely to do). But the nerfs cut very deeply into the Amarr recons most pilots swapped from ECM to damps, and for a time the ships remained relatively viable. The nos nerf however really hit them v hard. Now damps and TDs will be nerfed down: and every pilgrim and curse pilot realises the ships end is nigh.
The curse which has the advantage of range and a little more dps (from missiles) might just about get along. But the pilgrim has no range, no real dps - it could kill because it could zero its targets cap and at the same time maintain its own.
Thus the pilgrim passes from the annals of pvp history.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:50:00 -
[323]
Originally by: Hydrogen
All I am askin for is: the Pilgrim and the Curse need a role, which they can fill. A purpose, where they excel..
But youre not/weren't you were asking to be able to solo [again]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Granted this thread focused to some degree on soloing as a role due to several reasons:
1. Curse: its description - a HAC with EWAR. Well solo somehow feels right, but there is no need to focus on it. Maybe even change it. But right now solo is the single real role of a Curse. In a gang other ships offer more benefit to the gang than a Curse.
2. Pilgrim: the Pilgrim's doom to enter close combat and stay in close combat is clearly a solo role. It is: kill or die.
Mark me: to me it is ok if they got different roles, but they MUST be able to fill those.
Solo _was_ the role and now clearly it isnt, all I'm suggesting is that, due to the Nos nerf, CCP may not be likely to go back there and perhaps would be more receptive to alternative boosts.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:52:00 -
[324]
Originally by: Sol Basso
Originally by: Hydrogen
EWAR = EWAR
EWAR <> ECM
EWAR to me includes NOS, TD, Neuts,...
Originally by: Hydrogen's original post
A Curse's tasks:
<snip>
- Solo/gang-nano ship: up to 7,348 km/s with a snake set and 10.8 km/s with a snake set and overheating are feasible. This while maintaining either ECM or a shield tank. Drones and missiles kill target.
So here you are actually suggesting the Curse is fitted with ECM?.....
Actually a typo - my wrong and thanks for pointing it out.
__
- click here - |
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:58:00 -
[325]
Originally by: Corwain
40km web ain't shabby EWar, and with the boost to torps TPs will again be useful. BTW are TPs getting scripts? When questioned why they are putting scripts to TDs CCPs brilliant reply was "It didn't make sense not to." OK, so why not put scripts to guns then that lets you suggest tracking or damage? Or armor reps that let you pick amount or frequency? or scrams that let you select range or strength? You can apply scripts to everything, but the reason you applied it to Damps was because they were overpowered. Were TDs overpowered?
Pilgrim used to fit 2 TDs standard. Pilgrim now loses a mid to at least 1 cap mod (injector, battery, etc), down to 1 TD. Now scripts, Pilgrim has 1/2 a TD. Just remove the TD bonus completely if you're gonna do us like that, sheesh!
Bear in mind scripts are being applied to modules that have 2 effects to force the pilot to pick one over the other or accept a lower (nerfed) balance, since painters IIRC only have 1 effect (increase sig) they almost certainly wont get scripts.
Furthermore while the web bonus on the matar recons is nice (wont argue that) webbing is not matar racial ewar (which is what the comparison called for) and be careful if you want to go down the 'non-racial' route because the minute you do Caldari get the short end of the stick as they only get ECM bonuses (not nos/neut, web or scram as the other races do)
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:59:00 -
[326]
Originally by: Sol Basso
I'll try and summarise as completely as I can. I am open to the concept that Amarr recons need a boost, your analysis of their currents abilities appears to be accurate however I remain unconvinced that returning the ships ability to solo to their previous levels is balancing and perhaps amarr recon pilots need to consider that the ships boost may be more appropriate (or likely) in other areas (such as gang and fleet work)
There is a lot of things I would like to add, where my most important points are of course my attitude:
1. EvE is in need of a balanced stealth assassin. This is also why I am focused on a [solo] role. True and you are right for pointing it out.
2. Solo was the role and the sole purpose of most players who started with Pilgrim and Curse before that bad Nano-Curse FOTM came in, which started the nerf. It is plain wrong that players (in my extreme more than 10 mill sp) invested skill points to fill this role only to face a nerf. My bad for centering more than a year training of my EvE time around the Pilgrim. Still such a heavy nerf is plain wrong - destroying a whoile line of playstyles too.
3. I actually do believe that the Nano-Damp-Curse needs a nerf/will be nerfed. It still has an attached I-Win button.
That said: I somehow *grumble* but can agree to your summary, except that the current state of Pilgrim and Curse is worse than you seem to realize.
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 15:59:00 -
[327]
Pff, why would anyone pick a pilgrim for gang support instead of a curse? Pilgrim has no role once they took away its solo ability with the nos nerf. CCP broke it. Not much more to say.
|
Sol Basso
Merchants Trade Consortium
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 16:08:00 -
[328]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Sol Basso
I'll try and summarise as completely as I can. I am open to the concept that Amarr recons need a boost, your analysis of their currents abilities appears to be accurate however I remain unconvinced that returning the ships ability to solo to their previous levels is balancing and perhaps amarr recon pilots need to consider that the ships boost may be more appropriate (or likely) in other areas (such as gang and fleet work)
There is a lot of things I would like to add, where my most important points are of course my attitude:
1. EvE is in need of a balanced stealth assassin. This is also why I am focused on a [solo] role. True and you are right for pointing it out.
2. Solo was the role and the sole purpose of most players who started with Pilgrim and Curse before that bad Nano-Curse FOTM came in, which started the nerf. It is plain wrong that players (in my extreme more than 10 mill sp) invested skill points to fill this role only to face a nerf. My bad for centering more than a year training of my EvE time around the Pilgrim. Still such a heavy nerf is plain wrong - destroying a whoile line of playstyles too.
3. I actually do believe that the Nano-Damp-Curse needs a nerf/will be nerfed. It still has an attached I-Win button.
That said: I somehow *grumble* but can agree to your summary, except that the current state of Pilgrim and Curse is worse than you seem to realize.
I sympathise and agree I probably dont appreciate how bad it is. My only parallel is virtually maxing my ECM skills (although not got Recon yet) right about the time of the ECM nerf and only now getting a much needed boost, and in terms of an Amarr fix you are probably looking at a similar length of time I'd guess (for CCP to examine the impact of the nerf)
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 16:10:00 -
[329]
Originally by: Sol Basso
Originally by: Corwain
40km web ain't shabby EWar, and with the boost to torps TPs will again be useful. BTW are TPs getting scripts? When questioned why they are putting scripts to TDs CCPs brilliant reply was "It didn't make sense not to." OK, so why not put scripts to guns then that lets you suggest tracking or damage? Or armor reps that let you pick amount or frequency? or scrams that let you select range or strength? You can apply scripts to everything, but the reason you applied it to Damps was because they were overpowered. Were TDs overpowered?
Pilgrim used to fit 2 TDs standard. Pilgrim now loses a mid to at least 1 cap mod (injector, battery, etc), down to 1 TD. Now scripts, Pilgrim has 1/2 a TD. Just remove the TD bonus completely if you're gonna do us like that, sheesh!
Bear in mind scripts are being applied to modules that have 2 effects to force the pilot to pick one over the other or accept a lower (nerfed) balance, since painters IIRC only have 1 effect (increase sig) they almost certainly wont get scripts.
Furthermore while the web bonus on the matar recons is nice (wont argue that) webbing is not matar racial ewar (which is what the comparison called for) and be careful if you want to go down the 'non-racial' route because the minute you do Caldari get the short end of the stick as they only get ECM bonuses (not nos/neut, web or scram as the other races do)
Scripts imho only really nerf the Amarr.
1. most likely no script for Target Painters
2. no scripts to ECM
3. script to Sensor Dampeners - but face the truth: targeting range reduction by x%; an ability to drop your targets locking range below Warp Disruptor range is overpowered always and will result in I-Win buttons setups.
4. The only EWAR which has been hit is Trackign Disruption which was weak already as it was.
What freaks me out, is that all that stuff is nerfed and that I am sure that a Curse nerf will appear: 38km+ NOS/Neut range, 20km+ Disruptor range and TDs to drop target lock under 20 km will ask for a nerf soon. 0 chance for a target to escape.
So we got:
- a full range of playstyles nerfed/obsolete
- broken Amarr EWAR
- broken ship designs
- a goal still not achieved and
- a nerf soon incoming when some discover NOS/Neut-Nano-Damp-Curse as another I-win button.
All that without compensating. Additionally I do believe that the Pilgrim was fine before - perfectly. Imho there was never anythign wrong with it. It did risk a lot and it did achieve a lot. Risk vs reward a fair trade off.
__
- click here - |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.16 17:04:00 -
[330]
To make it clear. Fleets are not the point which is discussed here.
Every other Force Recon is useful in small gangs, because it's lacking the range, and because Tracking Disruptors are only useful against half the ships -> no effect on Drone-Boats, nor Missile-Boats.
If you get within webrange (Medium NOS only has 13km max!!!) then the Tracking Disruptor is not useful, because there is no transversal speed anymore, to have any effect guarding yourself.
Arazu even with the new Damps is pretty damn effective, as it also has a bonus to Warp Disruptor range -> 48km with T2-Modules + the now a little bit weaker RSDs.
Rapier can web at over 30km, while having itself a really good speed to cover itself.
Falcon can permajam 2 ships simultanously from over 100km, where it's pretty safe.
So you can argue, that giving the Pilgrim a range-bonus like the Curse would do the trick, but thats not the fact. It would only render the Curse useless instead, and the Pilgrim would be ZOMG-speed-fitted by everybody, as it's done with the Curse now.
The Pilgrim was an "all-or-nothing-solo-mobile" before the NOS got changed. Feeding it's own tank with the enemies Cap, while relying on doing enough damage to kill it's opponent fast enough, before support arrives.
As the Drones get changed, you can't scoop/redeploy, as you do it now, making your weapons (Drones) weaker.
To fire a single Neutralizer, while running your Medium Repairer will kill your Cap. And 315m¦ Cargo only allows for 9 Charges 800er CapBooster + 1 in the Booster = 220 seconds, till you're capping out.
The Pilgrim was allways used as a solo-ship and it should regain this ability, by changing it's boni, like suggested multiple times now.
It will be an "all-or-nothing-ship" with the suggested changes to it and not an "I-win-button", which so many of you believe it was.
Please do not compare the Pilgrim with the Curse before the NOS-changes. Curse is totally fine for me as it is now, as a support-ship and with some ability to solo in it.
.
|
|
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 00:49:00 -
[331]
well.. just fought a vagabond (i know, i know, usually, on TQ, its a draw due to TD + transversal).
vagabond maintained around 2,000 transversal, and still hit me with his AC's (using tracking speed disruption scripts). lol.. so, now, not only are TD's worthless against missle boats and drone boats, but they are useless against turret boats now as well \o/
farewell amarr recon. wish ccp would give me back that training time.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 01:46:00 -
[332]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Edited by: Feng Schui on 17/11/2007 01:00:07
well.. just fought a vagabond (i know, i know, usually, on TQ, its a draw due to TD + transversal).
vagabond maintained around 2,000 transversal, and still hit me with his AC's (using tracking speed disruption scripts). lol.. so, now, not only are TD's worthless against missle boats and drone boats, but they are useless against turret boats now as well \o/
farewell amarr recon. wish ccp would give me back that training time.
edit:
found this on the "Pilgrim still sucks thread".. so we can get a yellow line with a cynical response, but nothing on the real threads?
Originally by: CCP Atropos
Thankyou for your astute insights into the current state of the Amarr recons, in particular the Pilgrim.
However, making many threads on the same topic will not urge us into changing the ship.
QFT, R.I.P. pilgrim.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Endica Enterprises
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2007.11.17 03:12:00 -
[333]
Thanks Hydrogen for your reply. Much appreciated.
I should note that the setup also fits well with all T2 modules in the highs.
Apart from that I don't think Nos is worthless. If you bring down your own capacitor to 40-50% fast, Nos adds to the energy loss of your target. Especially on targets with more base cap than the Pilgrim, where relative cap relation vs. absolute cap relation becomes important.
In the beginning of the fight it works as an offensive module. It helps you to bring down the enemy cap faster.
Later in the fight it works as a supporting and defensive module, allowing you to manage your cap and sustain modules.
As far as I know people used to field Nos only and were quite happy with it. Now they have to use Neuts, but one Neut works 2.5 times as effective in destroying the enemy's cap compared to a Nos. Thus one Neut plus a portion of the Nos'es has the same effect with regard to enemy cap/tanks.
Admittedly, the process is much more complicated and dangerous.
Regarding versatility, I'm not sure what you mean. Many ships are basically one-trick ponies. I don't see a big exception there.
I totally agree with regard to the tracking disruptor issues. Especially since they don't reduce falloff and the Pilgrim lacks range to stay at a safe distance. Plus the player skill compensation possibilities. That really is a problem.
Regarding the tank - as I wrote it's not super strong. Thus you shouldn't engage targets that make you die hellish fast.
This would be in line with my 'have to choose targets carefully' postulation.
Regarding rigs, there are a lot of rig-dependant ship builts out there (polycarbons?), so again, nothing special here.
All in all I think it's ok that Curse and Pilgrim are limited. I don't agree to the general notion that seems to be they shouldn't be limited and should be able to engage all targets.
Now if they are too limited, that should indeed be fixed.
@NoobALTS: I'm not sure whther the Pilgrim is meant to be able to take down battleships solo.
As I said I find it important that Curse and Pilgrim have to choose their targets carefully. All ships should have to choose their targets carefully. Everything else easily becomes fotm.
___________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf'
Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 00:02:00 -
[334]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Feng Schui
Edited by: Feng Schui on 17/11/2007 01:00:07
well.. just fought a vagabond (i know, i know, usually, on TQ, its a draw due to TD + transversal).
vagabond maintained around 2,000 transversal, and still hit me with his AC's (using tracking speed disruption scripts). lol.. so, now, not only are TD's worthless against missle boats and drone boats, but they are useless against turret boats now as well \o/
farewell amarr recon. wish ccp would give me back that training time.
edit:
found this on the "Pilgrim still sucks thread".. so we can get a yellow line with a cynical response, but nothing on the real threads?
Originally by: CCP Atropos
Thankyou for your astute insights into the current state of the Amarr recons, in particular the Pilgrim.
However, making many threads on the same topic will not urge us into changing the ship.
QFT, R.I.P. pilgrim.
Guess thats it then, odd though that making multiple threads regarding carriers & the eos, did in fact appear to urge ccp to change their plans. Consistency ftw.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Steve Hawkings
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 00:11:00 -
[335]
and i thought i was sad.
To the OP: i hear there is life outside the house.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 00:14:00 -
[336]
It's a sad, sad day.
Shall the Pilgrim's blueprints be buried next to the once so proud Amarrian Emperor.
.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 00:15:00 -
[337]
The pilgrim fails miserably. Yes it does.
-NOS only works if you arent hurting your opponent, ie he doesnt have to rep like mad
-NOS stops working when you need it to work, ie when youre hurting your enemy
-TD doesnt work against projectile fall off and with the combination of not even being able to neut projectiles to stop firing its a real friggin treat to use TDs. NOT.
-TD doesnt work against missiles and in combination with missiles not even being neut'able to eliminate either this ship fails.
It fails, it fails, it fails. End of story.
|
EeViLbOrNe ChIlDhAsPaWnD
The Flying Tigers
STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 04:29:00 -
[338]
welkom to being Amarr, we get nerf'd at every turn, about twice as much as everyone else...
this is why i say, if you can pvp with Amarr, you are teh pwn...
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 05:16:00 -
[339]
Originally by: EeViLbOrNe ChIlDhAsPaWnD
welkom to being Amarr, we get nerf'd at every turn, about twice as much as everyone else...
this is why i say, if you can pvp with Amarr, you are teh pwn...
And we are expected to not complain about this because there has been a promise of an oomph coming our way. Well if they gonna break half our **** for months and months that oomph better be a friggin total rewamp of half our ships or its gonna be worth bantha poodoo.
They did a great job fixing our khanid ships, yep. But to fix the rest of our ships its gonna take alot more then just a few tweaks and I hope ccp has the oomph-meeting soon, because half of us will be in our graves soon waiting for it.
|
haq aan
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 05:43:00 -
[340]
BUMP for every player who pays 15$ per month to play this game.
And we all expect an official word from CCP about the subject.
It better be soon and reasonable.
The main problem that crippled Amarr recons, was the CCPs solution for Nosferatu's. Nos problem could be solved by adding ' % ' to drain amount and sig calculation.
So Heavy NOS (BSs) would not entirely deactivate smaller ships, and frigs would still drain what they need. (BS and frigs given as an example)
But this is another subject that people discussed ages ago.
Lets get back to the problem and advance step by step.
* Nosferatu's are not an offensive module anymore.(web,scramble,ecm are still offensive mods) In order to benefit from the module, u have to have less cap than the target.
* So somehow, u need to kill your cap.(i.e. fit Neuts, run your reppers before armor damage) Always sounded silly to me.
* Lets say u are a reasonable player and u want to kill your cap while killing your targets aswell. And we all sure that one of the main role of your ship, is to break enemies tank by killing his cap.
* So u need to fit another module(Neut), to benefit from your NOS.
* Since Amarrian Recons donot have cap use bonus to Neuts, and your Nos(s) are useless unless your cap is less than your targets, u have to fit a Cap battery or a medium cap booster to feed your Neuts, ewar mods, repper. Oops your ship is fitting herself.
* Amarian Recons donot have enough cargo space to carry enough cap charges.
9x800 (include 1 in your booster)
Curse = 345 m3 (u need to spare some room for missiles)
Pilgrim = 315 m3
I bet some of u can calculate how long u can run your medium booster.
* According to a possible scenario, u overcome most of the problems above in your Pilgrim, and u are within 12km of your prey.
And lets say by the twist of fate, your enemy has no cap booster or neut/nos fitted. And u are relying on your 5x Hammerhead IIs + Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor.
So your self fitted Pilgrim will be quite useless against missile ships, passive tankers, Autocannons, Drone Ships, etc.
* There s not much ship class left for Pilgrim to deal with. And we all know that we can perform the same act, with another less painful, much less expensive ship.
I would write more, but u guys can already figure out what i miss.
- My solution would be;
1- Let ONLY Pilgrim and Curse drain, without calculating enemy cap.
So NOS will be used as prenerf offensive weapon, only on Amarr recons.
2-AND/OR Give '%' reduction on cap use of Neuts.
Thank u for your time,
haq aan
|
|
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Endica Enterprises
Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 08:06:00 -
[341]
Originally by: haq aan
* Since Amarrian Recons donot have cap use bonus to Neuts, and your Nos(s) are useless unless your cap is less than your targets, u have to fit a Cap battery or a medium cap booster to feed your Neuts, ewar mods, repper.
Nonsense.
On a Pilgrim a Medium Energy Neutralizer II, with Recon and Energy Emission Systems only at IV, has an activation cost of 144 and destroys 324 cap on the target.
How exactly isn't that a huge advantage over 144/180 on a normal ship?
Sure, Neuts don't use less cap, but they destroy more. Just deactivate the module every 2nd cycle or so and you get the same effect.
Secondly, fitting a capacitor battery on an Amarr recon is about as counterproductive as it gets. Yes, you want your cap to be lower than your target's cap. You want a relative cap difference for your Nos to work. Therefore increasing cap size instead of recharge hurts more than it helps.
Last but not least most PvP fittings require a cap booster. I don't see why this is such a bad thing for Curse and Pilgrim.
I don't want to say there's no issue with the Amarr recons, but please stick to the facts and don't bring invalid arguments.
___________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf'
Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 11:30:00 -
[342]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: haq aan
* Since Amarrian Recons donot have cap use bonus to Neuts, and your Nos(s) are useless unless your cap is less than your targets, u have to fit a Cap battery or a medium cap booster to feed your Neuts, ewar mods, repper.
Nonsense.
On a Pilgrim a Medium Energy Neutralizer II, with Recon and Energy Emission Systems only at IV, has an activation cost of 144 and destroys 324 cap on the target.
How exactly isn't that a huge advantage over 144/180 on a normal ship?
Sure, Neuts don't use less cap, but they destroy more. Just deactivate the module every 2nd cycle or so and you get the same effect.
Secondly, fitting a capacitor battery on an Amarr recon is about as counterproductive as it gets. Yes, you want your cap to be lower than your target's cap. You want a relative cap difference for your Nos to work. Therefore increasing cap size instead of recharge hurts more than it helps.
Last but not least most PvP fittings require a cap booster. I don't see why this is such a bad thing for Curse and Pilgrim.
I don't want to say there's no issue with the Amarr recons, but please stick to the facts and don't bring invalid arguments.
This is not nonsense, as the fact stays, that you've not enough Cap to run your Neuts effectively. It's the only weapon you got to overcome an opponent, who's flying something bigger, then a T1-cruiser.
With other Recons, this is easily done by using their EW. You keep them at range, while they cannot hurt you and slowly eat them alive.
With a Medium CapBooster and 800's Charges, you've 220 seconds before you run out of Cap. So if the opponent is able shoot in 800's himslef in the same amonut, which is pretty standard (8+1 or 9+1 charges), then you run your Neuts only to remove his Booster, dealing some Damage with your Drones, which can be shot down.
The Curse is fine I've got to say, no problem there (maybe some little ones), because you can keep range.
The Pilgrim however is allways fighting within webrange, where the Tracking Disruptor has no effect at all (webbed Pilgrim = no Transversal) and running your Medium Armor Repairer alone will use up your CapBooster Charges.
We've also the situation, that alot of other ships besides the Pilgrim and Curse are using Neuts/NOS, so if you're fighting within Med NOS/Neut Range with the Pilgrim, you're likely to get NOSsed/Neutralized yourself, weakening your *lol*advantage*lol* aswell.
I've made a suggestion in how to change the Pilgrim, and I'm damn sure it would make the ship a good choice again, without making it FOTM.
.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 15:03:00 -
[343]
IF ccp doesnt want to touch the way nos/neut work at all for fixing pilgrim then they should give pilgrim vastly, and i mean sick, cap recharge rate so it can win a cap battle with neuts against a bigger ship with cap boosters without draining himself dry.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 15:34:00 -
[344]
Minmie recons will win a web battle against any bs
Gal recons will win a damp battle against any bs
Cal recons will win a jamming battle against any bs
Amarr recons will not win a nos battle against any bs. Large nos's/neuts are as good as a bonused med nos/net on the amarr recons. Slightly less cap drain per sec but way more range.
I see this is a huge problem under the current nos script.
|
welsh wizard
Celestial Apocalypse
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 15:42:00 -
[345]
I think the Curse is pretty well balanced now. Pre-nos nerf it was as bad if not worse than the 2006 ECM/Nos Domi. A complete joke in other words.
The Pilgrim is shot though, could use some extra nos/neut range to keep it out of web range. Possibly very very slight adjustments to their cap recharge too.
It's a very thin line to tread this one, they were undeniably stupid pre nerf.
[Balance] The Caldari problem. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Uninvited Guests
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 16:09:00 -
[346]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Minmie recons will win a web battle against any bs
Gal recons will win a damp battle against any bs
Cal recons will win a jamming battle against any bs
Amarr recons will not win a nos battle against any bs. Large nos's/neuts are as good as a bonused med nos/net on the amarr recons. Slightly less cap drain per sec but way more range.
I see this is a huge problem under the current nos script.
This exactly is the current problem. CCP is cheating us again, when is this gonna end?
|
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.18 22:52:00 -
[347]
Finally posted the thread I mentioned - Linkage. Be interested to hear your thoughts, Hydrogen.
|
Linnth
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 03:08:00 -
[348]
Just checking in to see if.....ah.....yes.... Amarr recons still broken.
NEWSFLASH: CCP remove Amarr and lasers from the game.
All pilots with any AMARR skillpoints will be deleted on 1st of December(They might as well since CCP nerfed them into extinction |
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 09:48:00 -
[349]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Minmie recons will win a web battle against any bs
Gal recons will win a damp battle against any bs
Cal recons will win a jamming battle against any bs
Amarr recons will not win a nos battle against any bs. Large nos's/neuts are as good as a bonused med nos/net on the amarr recons. Slightly less cap drain per sec but way more range.
I see this is a huge problem under the current nos script.
add the not working dirsubter ( close range ) to that.. and bad dmg out put..
its a fun ship with allot of potenttial but thats about it..
->My Vids<- |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 10:10:00 -
[350]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Thanks Hydrogen for your reply. Much appreciated.
I do enjoy reasoning together on a sane level. Much appreciated.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
I should note that the setup also fits well with all T2 modules in the highs.
I actually did not verify. Simply as I got fitting issues in my setups (perfect skills); in best case lacking like 35 - 95 grid.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Apart from that I don't think Nos is worthless. If you bring down your own capacitor to 40-50% fast, Nos adds to the energy loss of your target. Especially on targets with more base cap than the Pilgrim, where relative cap relation vs. absolute cap relation becomes important.
<snip>
Admittedly, the process is much more complicated and dangerous.
Since you are talking here only about the effectiveness geared towards Cap destroyed/leeched - you got a point, except:
1. The playstyle on a Curse and Pilgrim to fuel a shield tank is impossible here (since NOS nerf).
2. Without rig slots a balanced energy management is impossible since the NOS nerf (with rigs only in case the NOS drains Cap all the time consistently).
3. Any interference to a Pilgrim's as well as to a Curse's grid kills a Curse's and Pilgrim's tank completly. Thus an Amarr Recon's main weapon is its greatest bane.
4. Only a Capacitor Booster (like in your suggested setup) enables energy management. This results in a lack of a medium slot. Having cargo issues as its resulting problem. On a sidenote: 200's cap charges are from my experience not feasible. Minimum is 400's.
5. An Amarr Recon's EWAR is unable to protect the issuing Amarr Recon and when draining/destroying a target's capacitor, it not only breaks a target's, but also its own tank.
Due to those reasons and some more additional reasons, an Amarr Recon doing what it can do best, that is destroying/leeching enemy's cap, is a glass ship and not a glass cannon. This to a point, where only dps and passive tank count. Curse and Pilgrim are doomed to loose then:
- to any other T2 ship of cruiser+ size
- to almost any ship of any size with capless weapons
-...
Please take the time and consider how narrow the potential target line for a Pilgrim is for real. And even then the risk vs reward equation seems to me completly out of whack.
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Regarding versatility, I'm not sure what you mean. Many ships are basically one-trick ponies. I don't see a big exception there.
There is an exception - you can configure almost any ship for gank, for tank or balanced between both. For the Pilgrim it is only one base setup. Tank, cap leeched/destroyed, drone damage is always exactly the same.
While drone damage has been nerfed also due to the bandwidth change.
After all the Pilgrim is a one-trick-pony more than any other ship and it is very efficient in leeching/destroying energy, but really really bad at its trick to kill an enemy.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 10:39:00 -
[351]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
I totally agree with regard to the tracking disruptor issues. Especially since they don't reduce falloff and the Pilgrim lacks range to stay at a safe distance. Plus the player skill compensation possibilities. That really is a problem.
*nods*
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Regarding the tank - as I wrote it's not super strong. Thus you shouldn't engage targets that make you die hellish fast.
This would be in line with my 'have to choose targets carefully' postulation.
Again I need to point out, that a Pilgrim's target line is very very narrow. A tank which can not consistently supplied and which lacks resists is weak. Reinforced defense values of 120 - 200 are very weak. Esspecially the low end values are Frigate class values, where the high signature radius kills a Pilgrim.
Examples: a Malediction can easily kill a Pilgrim, a Vengeance is very well suited to take out a Pilgrim, a Sacrilege... hands a horrible death to a Pilgrim (natural resists + cap less weapon + common Cap Booster...).
A Pilgrim stands a good chance vs an Omen, maybe also on a Maller, a Caracal can already be risky,... Gallente blaster or drone boats are not really a target.
Give it a shot, it really is that bad...
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Regarding rigs, well there are quite a lot of rig-dependant ship builts out there (polycarbons?). So I think that's nothing all too special here.
You mention the only rig (which is fotm also), which is not feasible on a Pilgrim - see a problem here?
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
All in all I think it's ok that Curse and Pilgrim are limited. I don't agree to the general notion that seems to be they shouldn't be limited and should be able to engage all targets.
Now if they are too limited, that should indeed be fixed.
A Curse is limited to Nano-Damp-NOS/Neut Curse, which I feel is not right as it still offers IWIN-button situations. In any other scenario so far it is safe to cnsider the Curse broken.
A Pilgrim is just that: broken. Limited targets and those targets it has are seldomly found alone and should be taken out with other ships with less risk.
That said, a Pilgrim is due to its range and abilities, a solo ship. It needs:
- abilities to make it worthwille, an asset to gang/fleets or
- a huge increase to its solo abilties. Since a Pilgrim would solo run into the risk of being blobbed, it would need the power to bring on even battleships solo to offer a fair risk vs reward. In this case, it is not only about comparing stats, but also about comparing this ships environment.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.19 14:48:00 -
[352]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
IF ccp doesnt want to touch the way nos/neut work at all for fixing pilgrim then they should give pilgrim vastly, and i mean sick, cap recharge rate so it can win a cap battle with neuts against a bigger ship with cap boosters without draining himself dry.
On a different board I made the cap to neutralizer to dps equation and back. Actually it is a difficult equation, since it needs reasonable assumptions. Still the result is basically: running Neutralizer and NOS does an unequaled high dps versus the Pilgrim himself compared to all other weapons.
In certain circumstances such an equation makes sense, since the target lacks cap to repair (dropping his repper and/or active tank) and since the cap the Pilgrim uses is cap the Pilgrim misses for running a Neutralizer or running a repper.
Funny thing: a Neutralizer if considered a weapon is completly out of line compared to all others. Thus the huge impact fo the NOS nerf for the Pilgrim.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.20 07:40:00 -
[353]
Originally by: Garia666
add the not working dirsubter ( close range ) to that.. and bad dmg out put..
its a fun ship with allot of potenttial but thats about it..
Potential and somehow addictive. A pitty to see its current state.
__
- click here - |
Lord Amentia
|
Posted - 2007.11.20 11:56:00 -
[354]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
This exactly is the current problem. CCP is cheating us again, when is this gonna end?
Reading through this thread...
I do not think "cheating" is right. It is just that CCP apparently has a different view on those things. Just which escapes me...
Any chance for a statement by CCP?
|
haq aan
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2007.11.20 17:48:00 -
[355]
Solution
- Nosferatu's on Curse & Pilgrim, ignores enemy cap while transfer. So they can drain like pre nerf.
They were fine before, so end of problem, end of story. period.
regards,
haq
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.21 09:38:00 -
[356]
Originally by: haq aan
Solution
- Nosferatu's on Curse & Pilgrim, ignores enemy cap while transfer. So they can drain like pre nerf.
They were fine before, so end of problem, end of story. period.
regards,
haq
Well... I do believe that the Pilgrim was 100% fine before nerf. The Curse actually was not fine due to the NOS/Neut-Dampener combo and all the other NOS-setups (NOS-Domi...).
Funny stuff: the NOS/Neut-Dampener Pilgrim shines similar still, the only ok ship the Pilgrim is broken :(
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.21 14:57:00 -
[357]
Another day and still no news of a change. Makes me wonder, if when will there be a fix, a change a bit of light? Atm I am sticking to the sacril. Pretty good **** btw.
More on topic, TD's are broken, med nos is broken, pilgrims cap is broken, pilgrim is broken and new scripts and bandwidth breaks the pilgrim apart. Oh its great being a Pilgrim pilot.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.21 16:31:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Another day and still no news of a change. Makes me wonder, if when will there be a fix, a change a bit of light? Atm I am sticking to the sacril. Pretty good **** btw.
More on topic, TD's are broken, med nos is broken, pilgrims cap is broken, pilgrim is broken and new scripts and bandwidth breaks the pilgrim apart. Oh its great being a Pilgrim pilot.
You forgot to mention that the Falcon/Rook gets boosted
Nevertheless I just like flying the Pilgrim, even if that means, that I'm pretty useless for my gang or that loose every second fight vs. a T1-Cruiser
I will not surrender!
.
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.11.21 16:36:00 -
[359]
I love my pilgrim, but it sucks just sitting in the hanger now.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y204/Griffinator/cofes.jpg |
Lil Mule
|
Posted - 2007.11.21 17:58:00 -
[360]
My alt made the huge mistake of training for the Curse and Pilgrim. The ship left the hanger once to test a potential post nerf build and was quickly beaten by an AF.
Since then its sat in the hanger while I train up for Minmatar Force Recon's. It will take a while yes, but my perception is Minmatar ships tend to get the least nerfs of all.
In my opinion, overall, Amarr ships are pretty dismal. In fact, Im leaving all of my Amarr training behind and switching to Minmatar completely. There are just no good objectives to reach in Amarr ship line imo (maybe Zealot? idk)
So yes - the Curse/Pilgrim is broken. However, the speed at which CCP repairs their Nerfs is terribly slow. CCP is fast to nerf, slow to tweak things back which they have ruined - my advice, dont hold your breath - switch to another race's ships. Yes it will take some time to train up - but you'll be more versatile, and its good to have multiple choices. That way when CCP pulls out the nerf bat next week to wack around some more ships, hopefully you'll still have some choices left that havent been nerfed (hint: go Minmatar!)
P.S I'd love to see some stats on racial distribution. I would be willing to bet the majority of pilots overall are Caladari or Amarr - hence why they keep getting nerfed, to encourage players to go to a different race? Thats just my conspiracy theory.
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.22 08:37:00 -
[361]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Another day and still no news of a change. Makes me wonder, if when will there be a fix, a change a bit of light? Atm I am sticking to the sacril. Pretty good **** btw.
More on topic, TD's are broken, med nos is broken, pilgrims cap is broken, pilgrim is broken and new scripts and bandwidth breaks the pilgrim apart. Oh its great being a Pilgrim pilot.
Considering the potential of Amarr Recons (and of course my skill invest) it is a shame on how both ships are set by now.
Is it only me, that I feel the NOS/Neut-Damp Curse isnt right?
__
- click here - |
Mortis Tyrathlion
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.22 10:08:00 -
[362]
Damp nerf might help a bit there. Though I guess, with the Curse's nos/neut range, it's still a little academic...
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.22 15:08:00 -
[363]
Originally by: Confessor
I love my pilgrim, but it sucks just sitting in the hanger now.
I sold mine. Simply as ppl on TS asked me, why they hear so much weird noise over tS when I logon.
I couldnt tell I was crying seeing my Pilgrim ;) So I sold it...
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.22 15:14:00 -
[364]
Damps are overpowered on a non bonused ship so yeh I see theres something wrong with the curse when you use it with damps. Speed, nos, damps and drones is a pretty awesome way to fly things and it has now become overpowered.
The problem I see it as this. Target Disruptors are obviously broken when its combat recon that has its bonus doesnt use them.
|
Belenkas
|
Posted - 2007.11.22 21:35:00 -
[365]
Considering you are going to be asked to change ship if you want to join any sized gang in Amarr Recon, yes, they completely do NOT fit any role at all.
Combat Recons are there as anti-support support(read gang ship), but considering the fact I posted as the first sentence, it is OBVIOUS they do not fill this role AT ALL.
Any change is a good change. Simply because it can't be any worse than it is.
/rant off :)
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 08:15:00 -
[366]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Damps are overpowered on a non bonused ship so yeh I see theres something wrong with the curse when you use it with damps. Speed, nos, damps and drones is a pretty awesome way to fly things and it has now become overpowered.
The problem I see it as this. Target Disruptors are obviously broken when its combat recon that has its bonus doesnt use them.
Funny enough: Dampeners will stay overpowered even after patch.
The ability as such to use Dampeners in a Nano-T2 fitting, so that you can drop your target's lockrange below Disruptor range plus NOS/Neut range was a problem and will be still in future. Even on the unbonused (as in Dampeners) Curse.
I bet that we will see another nerf in future, probably only geared to Curse. Don't get me wrong: there should not be a foolproof setup, but by then Curse will be broken too and its all over.
__
- click here - |
Charles Kuralt
Dr. Klahn's Army
|
Posted - 2007.11.23 19:07:00 -
[367]
It's amazing. I check this very thread twice a day. Once in the morning, and again in the evening hoping to hear a "we're looking into it" response. That's it. Even if we have to wait another patch or two, some sort of acknowledgment that they realize how broken the Pilgrim is and are looking into it is all I really want. I continue to soldier on and train for Amarr Recons with faith that CCP will realize how busted this ship is. Please do not let me down.
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.24 17:52:00 -
[368]
Edited by: Cailais on 24/11/2007 17:52:26
The more I think on the Pilgrim the more convinced I am that it should have the same bonus to range for nos/neuts as the curse.
For those who say it will become 'just another nano curse' Id first direct you to the other race recons, they have the same capabilities for both recon and combat variants - why should the curse and pilgrim be different in that regard?
Secondy both ships would be very different. A nano curse speed tanked with enhance its speed tank with either shields, or EW (typically sensor damps). There's very limited options to do the same with the Pilgrim as it has only 5 mids. Assuming a 'speed tanked' pilgrim fits a MWD, Warp Disruptor and some form of cap replen (such as a ca booster) that would leave only 2 slots for any additional tank: with the pilgrims lower shield hp its clear it can't 'shield tank' effectively.
With the change to damps, I think a pilgrim would struggle to damp down a target with just 2 damps - and so this really leaves only one other option: an armor tank.
While the curse and pilgrim would share some characteristics (as the other race recons do) they would still be very different.
So how about it cpp? Save the pilgrim and give it the same bonus to nos/neuts as the curse.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
|
Posted - 2007.11.24 19:00:00 -
[369]
Yeah, do it like that then CCP.
Give the Pilgrim it's range-bonus and we've a deal, although I'd prefeer something else, but I could live with it.
.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.24 23:31:00 -
[370]
i gave up
although, i do plan on getting my drone interfacing 5 and spec drone op 5's, since they'll be useful on my raven.
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.25 00:33:00 -
[371]
13 pages. Go boys
|
Rudy Metallo
G.H.O.S.T
|
Posted - 2007.11.25 01:47:00 -
[372]
They are not broken, they've just been forced into a gang role, which is where they belong and where the rest of the Recons reside as well.
--
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.25 02:20:00 -
[373]
Originally by: Rudy Metallo
They are not broken, they've just been forced into a gang role, which is where they belong and where the rest of the Recons reside as well.
too bad they perform **** poor in a gang :\
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.25 12:05:00 -
[374]
Originally by: Rudy Metallo
They are not broken, they've just been forced into a gang role, which is where they belong and where the rest of the Recons reside as well.
I don't have a problem with them being gang orientated ships, and the curse can do passabley well in this role because it can apply its primary bonus (nos & neuts) from outside of web range and warp disruptor range.
That's the same for all of the force recons in fact, that they can apply their abilities, supplemented with EW at range - BUT for the exception that is the pilgrim.
The pilgrim cannot use one of its primary bonuses unless it is within webifier range, and deep inside warp disruptor range. Hence the pilgrim is rather worse than a poor ship - its a liability.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2007.11.25 16:03:00 -
[375]
thats the problem, you fly a pilgrim in gang battle, be prepared to die each time unless your engaging 3-1 odds in favour of you whereby they're dead before you get primaried, because if you get in range to your use neut bonus, your dead, no mwd out for you.
the other recons are useful in the gang environment and safer to use because there stuff is used from range, outside of warp scramble range.
R.E.C.O.N. is recruiting
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.26 02:15:00 -
[376]
Originally by: Rudy Metallo
They are not broken, they've just been forced into a gang role, which is where they belong and where the rest of the Recons reside as well.
lol, your kidding right? A 12.5km optimal range ship where its nos/neuts wont make an effect on a gang as the target is dead before he feels his cap being drained and you can only fit 1 tracking disruptor on your ship.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.26 15:20:00 -
[377]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 26/11/2007 15:21:56
Originally by: Rudy Metallo
They are not broken, they've just been forced into a gang role, which is where they belong and where the rest of the Recons reside as well.
Let us just assume you are right, such as that Amarr Recons and Pilgrim in special are fine and meant for a gang environment.
So let us go straight for the Pilgrim:
1. It's main weapon, NOS and Neut have a range of 12.5 km in general (no, we do not equip faction stuff every time).
2. Due to 1. it becomes obvious that the Pilgrim needs a MWD in a gang environment. Simply as it will not be able to use its NOS and Neut outside that range. After all NOS/Neut is its primary weapon.
3. Let us assume that the posters claiming "jigsaw games" with your cap using NOS/Neut are fine. You still need a cap booster.
4. Since you are in range of less than 12.5 km you need a tank. Speed tank is not feasible so it is armor tank.
Now let us put it together:
- 2 NOS II/Dim, 1 Neut/Unstable
- 1 MWD II, 1 Cap Booster
- 1 MAR + mix of hardeners/EANM/plate
- we forget about rigs for this one...
What do we have now:
- a ship with a weak tank and low repping (as long as it has sufficient cap)
- a ship which dies fast, when under focused fire (focused fire is overrated - with low cap it has a problem anyway to run its repper forever while using the Neut - or does someone still believe a NOS fuels your Neut while you need cap to rep and for EWAR???)
- a ship which is most likely under focused fire when uncloaking at less than 12.5 km from enemy (EvE players did not learn yet to stand still and ignore a Pilgrim in 12.5 km range, waiting to be dry of cap)
- a ship which needs a looooong time to approach when taking advantage of its cloak (it is not that enemies know you are waiting there and thus are so kind to warp at 12.5 km from your cloaked position)
- a ship with a huge signature radius (larger than any HAC)
- a ship with a ! WORTHLESS ! tracking disruptor bonus
- a ship which needs to stay in range for at least 30 seconds to be effective at all on one target
So we have a real good gang ship:
A. Considering range and speed this ship is on an enemy for at least 1 minute until it is on next target (best case!?!)
B. A ship which offers negligble dps after next patch.
C. A ship which has issues to rep itself.
D. A ship, which is an easy kill.
Now please someone show me gangs, where the fights last at least 4 minutes so that this ship is of use, where it survives long enough and where there is a valid reason to choose Pilgrim over eg. Zealot or Sacrilege or even Curse.
@Rudy: your claim about being forced into a gang role is a not so smart claim and simply shows lack of knowledge and experience.
__
- click here - |
Neena Valdi
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.26 21:55:00 -
[378]
CCP please give us some feedback on this matter.
|
Ripcha Headov
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.26 23:07:00 -
[379]
/signed!!
CCP, you are boosting the Falcon with this next patch so its jamming bonus is in line with the combat recon Rook. ALL other force recons then will have same bonus's for range/strength as thier combat recon counterparts.
To do this and leave the pilgrim as it is is just sacrilige and ruining what could be a perfectly good force recon ship...
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE give the pilgrim the same Nos/Neut range as the Curse. You know it makes perfect sence, and infact you are admitting it does by changing the Falcon for Trinity.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 04:21:00 -
[380]
10% boost to range of energy emission systems. :)
that'll help, while not making it overpowered.
R.E.C.O.N. is recruiting
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 09:35:00 -
[381]
Wow, actually I did not expect increasing support over time :)
__
- click here - |
Pilgrippa
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 11:32:00 -
[382]
The only problem with the Pilgrim right now is it's dependence on cap boosters. No other force recon requires boosters to be effective, although there are plenty of setups that include them.
The Pilgrim however is now extremely cap intensive, and completely dependent on boosters, which limits it to areas where boosters are in ready supply. This isn't how force recons should work, as they are meant to be able to roam in hostile territory for extended periods.
Proposal:
Change amount bonus to activation bonus for neuts. An activation cost of what a gun would cost on a normal ship seems fair. (eg, 250mm railgun on an arazu)
- this would allow neuts to be used based roughly on cap regen, leaving extra cap for tanking and ewar
- would not overpower the pilgrim, as it still needs to be in web range, and the neuts are not nearly as powerful
- still would probably need cap boosters, but they would last longer. Its at least a step in the right direction.
|
Timaios
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 11:48:00 -
[383]
Well, I think the problems are twofold, like many have commented. The lack of range and the lack of cap are issues; with a longer range for the neuts it'd be a more viable ship, but I'd rather have something done with the tracking disruptors.
At the very minimum the tracking disruptor should have at least three types of scripts: one against tracking, one against optimal range and one against falloff. The latter would drastically hinder short range setups relying on blasters (2500m optimal and 6000m falloff) and have an actual effect against ships fitting autocannons. As it stands now, tracking disruptors don't have much of an effect against hostiles in short range who have you webbed.
"Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaet point." -Blaise Pascal, PensTes, 4, 277 |
Baron Goodwill
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 12:03:00 -
[384]
I want to ask a question, as a reletavily new player (abt 5mil exp) I was looking forward to curse as a solo-pvp ship (mostly pirating), just need an advice from gurus, shall I stick to the training course for curse or switch to HAC (Sac)
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 12:16:00 -
[385]
Originally by: Baron Goodwill
I want to ask a question, as a reletavily new player (abt 5mil exp) I was looking forward to curse as a solo-pvp ship (mostly pirating), just need an advice from gurus, shall I stick to the training course for curse or switch to HAC (Sac)
Right now I would suggest Sacrilege over Curse:
1. the Curse is fragile in its only viable setup and got no versatility
2. the Sacrilege is extremly versatile but heavily depends on good missile skills
If CCP doesnt change anything, by then I truly consider choosing Curse/Pilgrim a mistake. Sacrilege anytime, when there is no change.
__
- click here - |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 12:18:00 -
[386]
Originally by: Baron Goodwill
I want to ask a question, as a reletavily new player (abt 5mil exp) I was looking forward to curse as a solo-pvp ship (mostly pirating), just need an advice from gurus, shall I stick to the training course for curse or switch to HAC (Sac)
For Solo-PvP I'd go for an Sacrilege, which has a hell of a tank. The Curse can be used, but you'll horribly die to anyone with half a brain, as relying on Drones is not the best option imho, if you're 20km away from your target.
Curse is very good for small gangs tho.
.
My postings in these forums do not necessarily represent my corp or alliance. |
Baron Goodwill
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 13:13:00 -
[387]
Thanks a lot.
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 14:51:00 -
[388]
Originally by: Baron Goodwill
I want to ask a question, as a reletavily new player (abt 5mil exp) I was looking forward to curse as a solo-pvp ship (mostly pirating), just need an advice from gurus, shall I stick to the training course for curse or switch to HAC (Sac)
I fly both sacri and curse; theyre very different ships - the curse can be really very nasty but it's a right handful to fly well and if you make the slightest mistake its game over and into your pod. The sacri, with good missile skills, is far more forgiving and perhaps easier to learn the art of piracy in.
Dont totally discount the curse, but if you decide to fly it be prepared for a steep (read: expensive) learning curve.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
The Passenger
Amarr
Another fine product from the nonsense factory.
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 15:05:00 -
[389]
It's great that not one Dev has acknowledged the problem or that they are looking into it.
I remember when CCP was regarded as being leagues ahead in player/dev communication.
The Arbitrator hull is so awesome too 
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.27 17:21:00 -
[390]
Fellow Curse pilots, (with a bit of luck the link will work) - Curse Redux...TRINITY
Linkage
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.29 10:48:00 -
[391]
Originally by: Grytok
Originally by: Baron Goodwill
I want to ask a question, as a reletavily new player (abt 5mil exp) I was looking forward to curse as a solo-pvp ship (mostly pirating), just need an advice from gurus, shall I stick to the training course for curse or switch to HAC (Sac)
For Solo-PvP I'd go for an Sacrilege, which has a hell of a tank. The Curse can be used, but you'll horribly die to anyone with half a brain, as relying on Drones is not the best option imho, if you're 20km away from your target.
Curse is very good for small gangs tho.
Like Grytok said....
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.29 16:27:00 -
[392]
Originally by: Cailais
Dont totally discount the curse, but if you decide to fly it be prepared for a steep (read: expensive) learning curve.
This
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.29 18:39:00 -
[393]
Tested both Curse and Pilgri on sisi over the last couple of days.
Its hopeless. Passive tanks abound, missile ships everywhere and theres me, in an Amarr Recon with no tank to speak of and rubbish dps trying (and failing) to stop my cap zeroing out.
CCP have well and trully wrecked this ship. Oh, and its an Amarr ship. Shock.
I'm 1 x Fed up pod pilot.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Valadeya uthanaras
Killjoy.
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 04:03:00 -
[394]
Trully sad,
Today , I have gone on sisy,
tried tons, tons of different setup on my curse, with all the expensive fancy gear
(read snakes, slaves and other HG implant )
I could not even engage a ishtar or one of those new HACTOR without getting killed, I have flown the curse for a while now, and I know its not a lack of skill that put us in this situation
I feel sad for all the player who beleive in you ccp, Really sad, we have a 14+ page tread, with comments from lots of players, people trying to make you see reason on sisi, but nothing.
Amarr space is not so empty for no reason,
Gallente and Caldari space are not so full without reason
Browse the forum, ANYWHERE, never will you hear that amarr where best at something, either pvp or pve, EXCEPT for the assassin like recon they had, the only reason left to play an amarr pilot.
OUR GUNS ARE BROKEN
OUR SHIPS ARE BROKEN
OUR "INTENDED PLAYSTILES" ARE BROKEN
Tracking disruptor was the worse electronic warfare, yet you find way to nerf it
Our recon got it by 4 direct nerfbat(SPEED, NOSFERATU, EANM AND NOW SCRIPT)
yes you did admit there was need to BOOST them during the nosferatu nerf, but the boost you gave actually proved that you didnt what you were doing
IF none of your employee are playing amarr, and none of them want to, IS IT HARD TO GUESS THAT THE RACE IS BROKEN?????
the worse in this, is that you are buffing the caldari recon, are YOU MAD???? they are really good atm, their electronic warfare with their bonus is the best, yet you want to boost them
WHERE IS OUR AMARR OMPH!!!!
we are yet to see it, all you did so far is to put in line the most broken ship (khanid) in line with the rest of the race...which is broken
Your QUATERLY shows it, less than 15% amarr player, the amarr region getting hardly any player in them, and the amarr player getting hit by nerf after nerf
PLZ give a response here, plz do something,
MOST amarr player in game were aiming to these recon because they were the last good amarr ships left, we overused them because they were the only good ship we had
Amarr are not like the CALADARI or GALLENTEAN babies, I cant count the number of tread we made to give you the situation, and the numbers of pages some of them gots, yet you do nothing, all love only go to the other race,
YOU SAY ALL RACE START EQUAL, yet look at the proportion of amarr player, and ITS easy to see that we are not starting equal to other, because the entire race is getting more and more broken, patch after patch.
TO you ppl in the balance team, try to fly amarr in FD for a day, and then try to say any of our ship outperfrom all the ship of its class, or at least is equal to the other race ships of its class...because if you do play them, you wont say it
All we have is hope, hope your promise of OOMPH for amarr was not just a bait for all of us, or at least, tell us cross train to an other race, and remove the race from the game, its hardly even there anymore
VALADEYA
RIP. CURSE/PILGRIM
RIP. AMARR BROTHERS
RIP. LASER
RIP. RMR, the patch that gave us some hope, in 5 days, Trinity gonna have nice graphic, but 1 race less
|
Sarah Aubry
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 04:52:00 -
[395]
Just FYI, the Dev's HAVE responded on this issue, just not officially or in this thread.
The amarr recons are being "reconsidered" in their words.
|
Willy Joe
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 05:00:00 -
[396]
Originally by: Valadeya uthanaras
Stuff...
*wipes tear off his cheek*
Too bad it's all just a load of BS , if you ask me. Sure the pilgrim is broken , zealot is certainly not the best hac out there. It's impossible to fit the omen and the maller just tanks, but even so , we still have quite a couple of good ships on our side from the battleships to the punisher and even the curse , which is not nearly as broken as you guys might think.
I do agree with the pilgrim needing a change , because there is no way to fit it properly atm and be efficient.
The zealot should get a dronebay , nothing big though, and maybe the maller and the omen should get some extra cpu/pwd though we already have the arbitrator which is one of the best t1 cruisers out there.
Now let's all take a deep breath and stop over-reacting
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 05:18:00 -
[397]
Originally by: Cailais
Tested both Curse and Pilgri on sisi over the last couple of days.
Its hopeless. Passive tanks abound, missile ships everywhere and theres me, in an Amarr Recon with no tank to speak of and rubbish dps trying (and failing) to stop my cap zeroing out.
CCP have well and trully wrecked this ship. Oh, and its an Amarr ship. Shock.
I'm 1 x Fed up pod pilot.
C.
I've gotten some decent kills with the pilgrim on sisi.. too bad I only survived / killed as many.. due to using high grade slave implants, and other 5% tanking hardwirings
(you'd be surprised how many people don't think of implants when setting up their ships)
|
McFly
Path of Light
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 05:34:00 -
[398]
I'm a caldari pilot, however in the years I've been playing eve I haven't spent much of any SP on Capitals, I fly amarr and caldari T2 ships, AF's to Commands... I'm completing my training on Gallente, and eventually Minnie as well. Of all the races I found that my favorite ship is the Curse.
It's taken a lot of work and fitting changes but I had finally found something that worked wonders. However withe upcoming trinity nerfs I'm losing that setup. It was dependant on Sensor Damps to keep myself alive while supporting a gang. The pilgrim is hopeless in terms of it's effectiveness.
I did manage to accidently land on a gate in lowsec while aggrod, and get away in structure in my pilgrim, (dual rep setup at the time).
The curse is hard to fly but still effective if you can micro manage everything and simply keep your distance and let your gang do the killing. I rarely even remember to launch the drones because i'm too busy managing my damps, TDs and Neuts.
As a non amarr player even I'm asking CCP please save these recons...the wtfbbqpwn Pilgrim is gone now, let the curse still be able.
With these ships relying on Drones for DPS, they need someway to stay alive long enough to do it. No other recon has been forced to be a passive ship in a gang like logistics ships are required to be. Ewar shouldn't be like that.
--
--my opinions do not reflect that of my corp nor my alliance-- |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 07:47:00 -
[399]
Originally by: The Passenger
It's great that not one Dev has acknowledged the problem or that they are looking into it.
I remember when CCP was regarded as being leagues ahead in player/dev communication.
The Arbitrator hull is so awesome too
Agree, wtf, not one comment 14 pages in not including all the other threads and not one single comment by the devs. PILGRIM IS BROKEN, FIX IT DAMNIT.
|
Cailais
Amarr
W A R
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 08:28:00 -
[400]
My worry is that as Trinity is such an extensive patch that post 5 Dec CCP will not make any further changes for a considerable period of time - probably not until well into 2008.
You only need to compare the market history of the curse vs the falcon to see the major impact that the nos/neut, dampner nerf is having.
I think Ive finally got a reasonable Curse set up on sisi; meaning I can just about stay alive even if killing targets is rather tricky.
A pilgrim set up still eludes me, and Im loath the fit 'slaves' and other costly implants as Feng has done because of their hight costs on TQ. For a ship as vulnerabale as the pilgrim it's simply not worth it.
Whats really notabale is throughout this 14 page thread, and a number of other similiar threads across the forums, there are hardly any posters claiming that the pilgrim shouldnt be boosted, or that its too dangerous, or powerful. I think that speaks volumes.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
|
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 10:40:00 -
[401]
the more i'm playing around with those snakes, the more i'm thinking that another 200 powergrid increase, and a 5% per level armor resists would make the pilgrim fairly balanced as a "special bonus" if we cannot have a complete role-bonus redesign.
as it is now, i'm tanking around 24 - 28k total damage (bit over 8k armor HP w/ 2 eanm II's + mar II + armor tanking implants + snakes) before I'm popped, if the damage itself is minimal (ie: not using t2 / faction ammo, normal pvp setups, etc..)
the neutralizer cap use reduction, coupled with energy emissions 5, is fairly decent, even if i cannot run both at the same time. (2 neuts, 1 nos).
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 10:49:00 -
[402]
Originally by: Sarah Aubry
Just FYI, the Dev's HAVE responded on this issue, just not officially or in this thread.
The amarr recons are being "reconsidered" in their words.
You are right and I got a similar message directly.
Still I got major issues with the current state:
1. Changing a ship should imho be the last step to make it wortwhile before it is totally broken. This should happen before players feel totally lost. It is also a sign of respect by CCP to those players who dedicated a long EvE-time to those ships in question.
2. Considering 1. I actually do see changes to the good for several races. But when you look at which ships got changed from other races and their state ingame, by then I got the impression that I am all wrong.
The fact that CCP doesnt change the Amarr Recons - not even hinting at a change - suggests, that these ships are NOT totally broken from a CCP perspective. Both Curse and Pilgrim are on the low end of the priority list if they are considered for a massive change at all.
Lets get my opinion straight:
1. I do believe that the Nano-Damp-Curse is still a beast. Maybe overpowered still. All other setups on a Curse are broken.
2. Pilgrim is totally broken.
Yet CCP doesnt see a real problem here - compared to other recons - there appears to be no need to react immediately (like on other ships).
This attitude and the missing token of respect by CCP to the dedicated Amarr Recon players - it really freaks me out and I simply can not understand it.
Even if it is too complex to complete it, what is it that stops CCP from saying:
- "Uhmmm we know the issues, but still those are too complex to implement on short notice - please ebar with us." or
- "Too complex to change right now, for the time being we apply Curse resists to Pilgrim too." or
- "For now we revert the NOS change for Amarr Recons and leave drone bandwidth where it is until we can look deeper into this matter." or
- "I am sorry but we disagree here at CCP. From our perception Pilgrim and Curse are fine. By now they are in their intended role."
Of course the last one would make me "Sir Postalot" still an open discussion is fair and shows appreciation of work done.
I dont get it.
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 11:23:00 -
[403]
Drone bandwidth on SISI for the curse is fine, additional drones add some flexibility. I'd disagree that the non-sensor damp curses are broken, Im having some success with other set ups (including a bizzare passive shield tank curse ).
In my view the curse is a pale shadow of what it was, but its not totally redundant.
The pilgrim is a different story. Either it should be able to operate in a gang support capacity, or as a solo vessel where 1v1 it dominates: at the moment it does neither.
For the former I think it needs a bonus to nos / neut range, for the later an increase nos/neut drain bonus (perhaps to 30% per level). A larger capacitor might also be needed, but Id like to see how it trials first.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 11:24:00 -
[404]
From the Patch Notes:
Quote:
# The capacitor need of neutralizers has been reduced to improve efficiency, energy destabilization amount and range on small neutralizers has increased, fitting requirements of meta level 1 to 4 small neutralizers have been adjusted to be in line with their larger brethren.
We get a little love it seems, but all others get this too... Dominix, Ishtar, etc
At the same time in the Patch Notes
Quote:
# The capacitor need of ECM modules has been reduced by 40%.
As if ECM was'nt powerful enough allready on a dedicated ship. And now, as RSDs get "balanced" everyone with a spare mid-slot will fit a Multispec again.
Great job there
.
My postings in these forums do not necessarily represent my corp or alliance. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 11:32:00 -
[405]
Hmm...The neut change is nice, better than nothing - I dont see it as a directed buff to the Amarr recons however.
ECM cap cost reduction, again a bit 'meh' - it doesnt make the ECM module any more likely to succeed, nice buff to the Kitsune maybe. Im not convinced we'll see a return to 06 where ECM dominated everyhing.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 11:54:00 -
[406]
Ok guys, just spent 3 days on the test server with my curse totally owning all ranges of ship classes up to and including the t2 bs's. You have to have recon 5, and perfect energy skills to fly the curse, but its a damn fine killing machine again. If you doubt me, come to the test server, look me up if im online, and fight me and you will see how damn good the curse is again.
The only negative is that i had to skill so friggin high up the tree to be effectve in the curse again. The pilgrim... SCREWED is all I can say.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 13:08:00 -
[407]
Originally by: Confessor
Ok guys, just spent 3 days on the test server with my curse totally owning all ranges of ship classes up to and including the t2 bs's. You have to have recon 5, and perfect energy skills to fly the curse, but its a damn fine killing machine again. If you doubt me, come to the test server, look me up if im online, and fight me and you will see how damn good the curse is again.
The only negative is that i had to skill so friggin high up the tree to be effectve in the curse again. The pilgrim... SCREWED is all I can say.
Yup got to agree with you Confessor, the Curse is pretty useful still (Ive only got recon to IV :(), my real complaint is with the pilgrim.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Shevar
Minmatar
A.W.M
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 14:05:00 -
[408]
Originally by: Confessor
Ok guys, just spent 3 days on the test server with my curse totally owning all ranges of ship classes up to and including the t2 bs's. You have to have recon 5, and perfect energy skills to fly the curse, but its a damn fine killing machine again. If you doubt me, come to the test server, look me up if im online, and fight me and you will see how damn good the curse is again.
The only negative is that i had to skill so friggin high up the tree to be effectve in the curse again. The pilgrim... SCREWED is all I can say.
So how many of your opponents had "perfect" skills for the ships they were flying? Also claiming you pwn any ship you come across without stating what setup you are using seems kinda pointless.
The problem is still the same as right after the nos nerf, pre nos nerf the curse/pilgrim had ample of cap to run a dual rep setup and outlasting the opponent in a 1:1 situation. Post patch it can't, hence it's solo ability has gone down the drain.
This wouldn't be an issue if the curse/pilgrim would actually be usefull in gangs larger then 3 players... But quite frankly compared to every other recon it's useless in gangs, it can't scramble/web from insane ranges and can't shut down ships directly (cap draining takes time as opposed to ECM/damps which work immidiatly).
Quite frankly I REALLY doubt CCP even intends to fix this, instead they release a mini curse (the EAS'es) which has similar problems (although it can kill the cap of a similar sized ship in 2 cycles instead of their cruiser sized cousins) and nerf TD's even more. That doesn't really give me hope that they even recognize a problem.
---
-The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 14:26:00 -
[409]
Speed/damping curse is like the vaga. It can just bail if its in trouble.
Pilgrim however stays in the fight. This is why speed ships are so damn good.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 15:00:00 -
[410]
Originally by: Confessor
Ok guys, just spent 3 days on the test server with my curse totally owning all ranges of ship classes up to and including the t2 bs's. You have to have recon 5, and perfect energy skills to fly the curse, but its a damn fine killing machine again. If you doubt me, come to the test server, look me up if im online, and fight me and you will see how damn good the curse is again.
The only negative is that i had to skill so friggin high up the tree to be effectve in the curse again. The pilgrim... SCREWED is all I can say.
Curse still works with nanoSetup, but thats not the problem we're talking about.
Pilgrim is total fail atm
.
My postings in these forums do not necessarily represent my corp or alliance. |
|
|
BCBArclight
Odessa Operations
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 15:01:00 -
[411]
From my experience flying Amarr my recommendations would be:
Zealot:
+100 PG - can fit an excellent setup with this
Curse:
Give it the old style of NOS bonus as it is a NOS ship - same with the blood radier BS
Pilgrim:
Similar bonuses as the curse has now, NO old NOS bonus, maybe a bit more on the fitting side.
I think the rest of the Amarr ships are ok to a point. Khanid still sucks though but can help.
Odessa Ops, Anti-Pirate 0.0 PvP corp - Newbs and Corp Mergers Welcome
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 16:34:00 -
[412]
Originally by: BCBArclight
From my experience flying Amarr my recommendations would be:
Zealot:
+100 PG - can fit an excellent setup with this
Curse:
Give it the old style of NOS bonus as it is a NOS ship - same with the blood radier BS
Pilgrim:
Similar bonuses as the curse has now, NO old NOS bonus, maybe a bit more on the fitting side.
I think the rest of the Amarr ships are ok to a point. Khanid still sucks though but can help.
Actually I think the pilgrim is the ship that needs the 'old' nos bonus - and the only way I think that can be applied is by increasing its current bonus to neuts/nos drain. In this way a pilgrim can nos more, or neutralize more cap effecitively making the modules more efficient.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Clavius XIV
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.30 17:18:00 -
[413]
Originally by: Grytok
From the Patch Notes:
Quote:
# The capacitor need of neutralizers has been reduced to improve efficiency, energy destabilization amount and range on small neutralizers has increased, fitting requirements of meta level 1 to 4 small neutralizers have been adjusted to be in line with their larger brethren.
We get a little love it seems, but all others get this too... Dominix, Ishtar, etc
Nope, unless you are using T2 or small neuts on your pilgrim/curse there is no efficency improvement from the current situation on TQ. The changes on SISI bring T2 medium neut efficency inline with best named (medium unstables).
The curse and pilgrim would be greatly improved if running a full rack of neuts + td had the same cap impact as running full racks of EW on other recons (web/tp,ecm,disruptor+damps).
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.01 11:20:00 -
[414]
Yeh I dont know how the neut change will help the pilgrim. Imagine if this is ccp's fix for the pilgrim. I wouldnt put it past them
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.01 19:33:00 -
[415]
92 days for the rest of my drone skills / mechanic skills / nav skills...
might as well, at least those skills will help with other ships
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.02 06:28:00 -
[416]
Originally by: Feng Schui
92 days for the rest of my drone skills / mechanic skills / nav skills...
might as well, at least those skills will help with other ships
I actually dont rate drones. Maybe its because of the alliance I am in and the scale of battles I am in but drones dont work for me. One of the main reasons why the pilgrim/curse blows in large battles is because of drones.
|
Dlardrageth
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 05:52:00 -
[417]
Originally by: Feng Schui
[...]as it is now, i'm tanking around 24 - 28k total damage (bit over 8k armor HP w/ 2 eanm II's + mar II + armor tanking implants + snakes) before I'm popped, if the damage itself is minimal (ie: not using t2 / faction ammo, normal pvp setups, etc..)
the neutralizer cap use reduction, coupled with energy emissions 5, is fairly decent, even if i cannot run both at the same time. (2 neuts, 1 nos).[...]
And now please put a price tag on that setup and a number of skillpoints to make it really work... Not insinuating here that you're totally uber ofc... And if we got these numbers then it would be nice to have them compared to the other races. I'd wager it will more or less be the same story as before, with max skills (or near there) you can of course compete to a certain point with the others, but without them any decrease in the skills also decreases comparative competitiveness.
This not even touches the issue of the Pilgrim. Hydrogen wrote he sold his. I wonder who bought it for more than the reprocessed mineral worth...
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 07:17:00 -
[418]
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Originally by: Feng Schui
[...]as it is now, i'm tanking around 24 - 28k total damage (bit over 8k armor HP w/ 2 eanm II's + mar II + armor tanking implants + snakes) before I'm popped, if the damage itself is minimal (ie: not using t2 / faction ammo, normal pvp setups, etc..)
the neutralizer cap use reduction, coupled with energy emissions 5, is fairly decent, even if i cannot run both at the same time. (2 neuts, 1 nos).[...]
And now please put a price tag on that setup and a number of skillpoints to make it really work... Not insinuating here that you're totally uber ofc... And if we got these numbers then it would be nice to have them compared to the other races. I'd wager it will more or less be the same story as before, with max skills (or near there) you can of course compete to a certain point with the others, but without them any decrease in the skills also decreases comparative competitiveness.
This not even touches the issue of the Pilgrim. Hydrogen wrote he sold his. I wonder who bought it for more than the reprocessed mineral worth...
i wasn't trying to say that the pilgrim is ok tbh. its completely broken. seriously, if I need to have a full set of high grade snakes to compete, something is wrong (when i'm 99% sure that the opponents are not using correct implants... or gear for that matter).
TQ cost is around 7-10 billion isk or so.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 08:30:00 -
[419]
Ive still got my pilgrim, I just dont use it.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 09:45:00 -
[420]
Originally by: Cailais
My worry is that as Trinity is such an extensive patch that post 5 Dec CCP will not make any further changes for a considerable period of time - probably not until well into 2008.
And this.
__
- click here - |
|
|
ReePeR McAllem
The Carebear Stare
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 11:43:00 -
[421]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Ive still got my pilgrim, I just dont use it.
Its a beast still if fit right...
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 13:27:00 -
[422]
Originally by: ReePeR McAllem
Originally by: Depp Knight
Ive still got my pilgrim, I just dont use it.
Its a beast still if fit right...
Since you apparently got a hidden secret of the trade: please share and show how so the Pilgrim is a beast. Like: targets, role you fill and setup.
I am quite sure many seasoned pilots are eager to learn...
__
- click here - |
Nahalennia
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 13:33:00 -
[423]
Since Gallente gets nerfed so badly due to the Caldari whinery in Caldari Online here, we cannot have a boost to anything Amarr. Could not risk to have anything but Amarr being the ragtag bunch with which to wipe the floor. You don't like Amarr ships? Tough luck, crosstrain Caldari and join the majority.
And BTW - nerf the Sacrilege, it still can compete with other HACs! It might even kill a Caldari ship, we cannot have that, m'kay?
---------------------
CCP Prism X:
Quote:
Of course I do, it's just hard to fight the troll inside me. I reckon 1/3rd of my university education went into studying that art.
|
Andreask14
Alterum - Infinitus - Fabula
Dragons Of Oceans
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 15:16:00 -
[424]
Aww, just as i was about to train a Curse because they always kill me when ratting in belts.
Your signature is too large. Max size on a signature is 24000 bytes.- Tirg
Thank you for pointing out the obvious. |
Ashen Wraith
|
Posted - 2007.12.03 21:05:00 -
[425]
bumped
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 09:51:00 -
[426]
Originally by: Andreask14
Aww, just as i was about to train a Curse because they always kill me when ratting in belts.
In which ship are you ratting :) ?
__
- click here - |
Andreask14
Alterum - Infinitus - Fabula
Dragons Of Oceans
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 09:57:00 -
[427]
Edited by: Andreask14 on 04/12/2007 10:01:31
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Andreask14
Aww, just as i was about to train a Curse because they always kill me when ratting in belts.
In which ship are you ratting :) ?
I got killed in a geddon once. After that, i chose to use my bombalypse, which conveniently killed the enemy¦s drones and left him basically useless.
edit: he also killed my inquisitor in a matter of seconds. Lets just say that i got fond about the curse NOS abilities. Now you are saying that its nerfed, but i do not understand in what way nos has been nerfed as i cant find any nerf looking at the properties of the nos modules.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 12:50:00 -
[428]
Its pretty easy to kill a ratter these days. A few ceptors will bring down a player ratting. So a curse taking a down an npcer is nothing new.
Ill say this again, its been said over and over again.
Gal recons will out damp any ship.
Cal recons will out ecm any ship.
Minmie recons will out web any ship.
Amarr recons will not out nos any ship.
Large nos is nearly as good as a bonuses med nos. More high slots available on bs and more cap. A large neut would just own the poor pilgrim orbiting at 12km.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 14:41:00 -
[429]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Amarr recons will not out nos any ship.
Large nos is nearly as good as a bonuses med nos. More high slots available on bs and more cap. A large neut would just own the poor pilgrim orbiting at 12km.
Actually I can live with the NOS/Neut even compared to Heavies, except:
1. Range on Pilgrim
2. If it was possible to perma run those without a booster
3. If the Pilgrim had a worthwile tank, even a dual repper setup on a Pilgrim sucks balls in regards to tanking efficiency and cap management
Esspecially 2. and 3. are additional impacts to the Pilgrim since NOS nerf. I still dont get it: why break a perfectly fine ship?
__
- click here - |
Baherroth
Gallente
Laughing Leprechauns Corporation
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 16:46:00 -
[430]
Edited by: Baherroth on 04/12/2007 16:49:28
Edited by: Baherroth on 04/12/2007 16:48:12
Edited by: Baherroth on 04/12/2007 16:47:22
i fully agree with the amarr recons
and i understand that everyone, including me is a little p*ssed off
i dont mind the nos nerf but i wish they would give THIS bonus ATLEAST to the pilgrim and curse
BONUS : 50-100% reduction in cap usage of Energy Emission modules - aka neuts
this would not make the curse and pilgrim o'p because they would still need to use a cap booster to field their tank to survive, and with the incoming TD/SD changes, its gonna make us HAVE to rely on a tank, which we cannot sustain at the moment due to neut capacitor use
EITHER THIS OR, Make the Nos work as they used to ONLY on these ships, giving them the cap/per second without not functioning at certain % cap levels of the target
FIGHT FOR THE AMARR RECONS!!! |
|
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 17:36:00 -
[431]
Edited by: Diomidis on 04/12/2007 17:38:54
Pilgrim is made to work closer than any other recon, cause any other recon gets bonuces on ewar modules and/or uses weapons that can get past the 10-13km barrier. So though meant to receive a lot of dmg, it has the worst resistances to boot with - along with the Gallente Recons perhaps.
It desperately needs a range bonus - LIKE EVERY OTHER RECON in EVE...ffs
Or at least:
* Better resistances and / or tanking efficiency
* Better efficiency bonuses for Nos/Neuts. - Still not 100% like it used to be for Nos.
* Better efficiency bonuses for Tracking Disruptors than the Curse - as you actually have to work within webbing range, thus slower orbiting / transversal involved.
The Gallente Recons will soon need better bonuses for their Damps to be fair too...
|
Sofring Eternus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 19:28:00 -
[432]
I still dont understand why Neuts need to use soo much more cap than all the other EWAR modules.
If they balanced all the EWAR modules to use roughly the same CAP / CPU / GRID then I think the Amarr recons would get a significant boost.
---
ΞνΞ ΘΠLІΠΞ
Amarr dont need Grr... and RAWR is definately too much, but some Oomph would be nice. |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 19:58:00 -
[433]
Originally by: Sofring Eternus
I still dont understand why Neuts need to use soo much more cap than all the other EWAR modules.
If they balanced all the EWAR modules to use roughly the same CAP / CPU / GRID then I think the Amarr recons would get a significant boost.
The "Other" EWAR modules are not as offensive as NOS/Neuts. They cannot actually assist in breaking your targets tank, they just make him slower or less effective in the dmg dealing process - so that conventional weaponry can break it. Ewar buys you time.
In fact I wouldn't consider NOS/Neuts or even Webifiers EWAR at all - it's not accurate, it's just convenient.
Making the Neut as "effective" as you would suggest would totally imbalance things back to the pre-NOS-nerf era, unless your supposing changing the way Neuts work for the amarr recons only...
|
Sofring Eternus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.04 20:29:00 -
[434]
You replace your turrets & launchers to fit NOS & Neut.
So you lose damage to disable targets tank.
Compared to you lose tank slots to fit ECM + Amps / Damps / Webbers / Scrams
So you lose tank to disable targets damage.
Seems pretty bloody balanced to me. Doesnt need the extra penalty of flushing your capacitor down the toilet just to run Neuts, while all the other EWAR can be run fairly effeciently on most any ship.
---
ΞνΞ ΘΠLІΠΞ
Amarr dont need Grr... and RAWR is definately too much, but some Oomph would be nice. |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 02:34:00 -
[435]
15 pages and still no word on a change or even a hint that the devs know there is a problem.
|
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 03:14:00 -
[436]
Originally by: Depp Knight
15 pages and still no word on a change or even a hint that the devs know there is a problem.
Surprised? Lol.
Just for kicks I set up a nano+pulse Pilgrim tonight. Ya know it might actually work better than any nos/neut setup at this point.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 05:26:00 -
[437]
I tried an arty setup. LOL. It blew. How sad is that. I actually tried an arty setup and well your are not to far from the the pile either. Proof, Pilgrim is....... you know
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 09:51:00 -
[438]
Originally by: Diomidis
unless your supposing changing the way Neuts work for the amarr recons only...
This.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 09:55:00 -
[439]
It is worse: CURSE got HEAVILY nerfed on Trinity!
The huge middle rocket of the Curse has been removed
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 11:17:00 -
[440]
Originally by: Depp Knight
15 pages and still no word on a change or even a hint that the devs know there is a problem.
Game over it seems - the whine-faction got what they wanted and we simply took it too serious it seems. Serious, well-argued facts do not win EvE.
How about some "ommph"?
__
- click here - |
|
|
Mary Anne
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 22:21:00 -
[441]
Originally by: Kruel
Originally by: Depp Knight
15 pages and still no word on a change or even a hint that the devs know there is a problem.
Surprised? Lol.
Just for kicks I set up a nano+pulse Pilgrim tonight. Ya know it might actually work better than any nos/neut setup at this point.
Just for the laughs I guess?
|
Kruel
Blunt Force Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.12.06 23:27:00 -
[442]
Originally by: Mary Anne
Originally by: Kruel
Just for kicks I set up a nano+pulse Pilgrim tonight. Ya know it might actually work better than any nos/neut setup at this point.
Just for the laughs I guess?
Actually... After playing around for it a bit I've come to the conclusion that nano-pulse Pilgrim is actually better than a nano Zealot.
Of course that's not saying much... but at least I have some survivability in my Pilgrim now. Same dps as nano Zealot too. And it can warp cloaked. And it can fit a (useless single) TD. Aaaaaand, it's cheaper!
|
Bob Arko
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 11:49:00 -
[443]
Clearly shows how CCP cares about customers. Not.
|
arbalesttom
Caldari
Glauxian Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 11:53:00 -
[444]
Originally by: Bob Arko
Clearly shows how CCP cares about customers. Not.
Would you be happy to help a whining customer? I wouldnt.
Besides that, stop this 'awwww we got nerfed' madness, recons where never ment to solo freaking battleships etcetera, they got nerfed (just like all other, except minmatar ofc) because they are gangships/reconaissance ships.
Nice hamster! - Mindstar
Thanks!
We wont touch this sig! - Cortes
I lied - Cortes
LIAR! |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 12:48:00 -
[445]
Originally by: arbalesttom
Originally by: Bob Arko
Clearly shows how CCP cares about customers. Not.
Would you be happy to help a whining customer? I wouldnt.
Besides that, stop this 'awwww we got nerfed' madness, recons where never ment to solo freaking battleships etcetera, they got nerfed (just like all other, except minmatar ofc) because they are gangships/reconaissance ships.
You Sir definitly fit the average EvE whine/anti-whine population. Trying to discuss without knowing about what. If you would only read the thread youd have at least some information to know what it is about.
As it is now you are jsut that: a Troll.
__
- click here - |
Bob Arko
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 13:17:00 -
[446]
Originally by: arbalesttom
Originally by: Bob Arko
Clearly shows how CCP cares about customers. Not.
Would you be happy to help a whining customer? I wouldnt.
Besides that, stop this 'awwww we got nerfed' madness, recons where never ment to solo freaking battleships etcetera, they got nerfed (just like all other, except minmatar ofc) because they are gangships/reconaissance ships.
Read topic before posting next time...
About myself - I do fly minmatar and amarr recons and know what? Minmatar recons are by FAR more useful, more versatile and simply more fun to fly. Guess why?
|
Dreadpilot Roberts
Viper Squad
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 13:45:00 -
[447]
tbh I think your solutions are crap. you just want the i-win button back lolz :)
keep 50m3 drone-bandwith on both
give pilgrim 50 more pg, and 70 more cpu,
give curse 100 more pg and decrease it's mass somewhat, 10-15%ish ( tbh there's no tank with 4 low slots )
to give them both the old nos ability would be nice but i don't think ccp would do that. instead buff their tracking disrupt bonus by another 25% which at this point is kinda useless lol.
I'm sorry, did I say u could speak ? |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 15:19:00 -
[448]
Just checking in to see if the amarr recons are still broken...
Ah yes, still broken.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Alex Harumichi
Gallente
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 15:30:00 -
[449]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Just checking in to see if the amarr recons are still broken...
Ah yes, still broken.
Yeah, and now the Gallente ones are broken, too. Joy.
Guess we'll have to adapt. And by "adapt", I mean "train Caldari Cruiser V"
|
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 15:45:00 -
[450]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Just checking in to see if the amarr recons are still broken...
Ah yes, still broken.
Yeah, and now the Gallente ones are broken, too. Joy.
Guess we'll have to adapt. And by "adapt", I mean "train Caldari Cruiser V"
they can make there own post
->My Vids<-
|
|
|
Zakarazor
|
Posted - 2007.12.07 19:59:00 -
[451]
what about we scrap the tracking distruptor bonus and give the curse and pilgrim a bonus that bring back the nos to full strenght but only on those 2 ships? that will let the pilgrim usefull again at the same time as it keep nos from being overpowered...
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 07:52:00 -
[452]
Originally by: Zakarazor
what about we scrap the tracking distruptor bonus and give the curse and pilgrim a bonus that bring back the nos to full strenght but only on those 2 ships? that will let the pilgrim usefull again at the same time as it keep nos from being overpowered...
If only it was that easy. Oh wait.
|
Juana Morlaine
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 11:35:00 -
[453]
Wow huge thread. I am looking for my long term training goal in EvE and always wanted to fly the Pilgrim. Reading this I am now very unsure.
Honestly: should I continue training for Pilgrim or not??
Thank you.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 18:54:00 -
[454]
Originally by: Juana Morlaine
Wow huge thread. I am looking for my long term training goal in EvE and always wanted to fly the Pilgrim. Reading this I am now very unsure.
Honestly: should I continue training for Pilgrim or not??
Thank you.
Its a very limited ship, but provided you stick to a limited selection of targets its possibly still the better 'solo' recon out of them all. If you're looking for a gang ship, then the other recons are a better bet.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Jackal79
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 19:09:00 -
[455]
Amarr laser ships or gallente hybrid ships are totally screwed if you catch one alone in your web/neut range. Tracking disruptor nerf means you can't really engage a minmatar projectile ship without considerable risk.
By the way, if I still fit a tracking disruptor on a pilgrim, should I use it unscripted or fit a tracking speed script in it? I haven't had a chance to experiment with it much yet.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.08 19:18:00 -
[456]
Originally by: Jackal79
Amarr laser ships or gallente hybrid ships are totally screwed if you catch one alone in your web/neut range. Tracking disruptor nerf means you can't really engage a minmatar projectile ship without considerable risk.
By the way, if I still fit a tracking disruptor on a pilgrim, should I use it unscripted or fit a tracking speed script in it? I haven't had a chance to experiment with it much yet.
with the testing i did on sisi, tracking speed script is the way to go. My setup had 2x TD's, i took one off and added a stasis web. seems good enough to kill solo noobs
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 05:12:00 -
[457]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 09/12/2007 05:12:29
joy, got recon to level 5 today, and what happens?
both of my pilgrims go pop (hurricane with T1 drones using autocannons, yay for tracking disruptors.. oh yea, the pilgrim has to operate well within optimal range of autocannons..
and then to a "bait and gank" blob, why? no ******* range.
finishing combat drone op 5, then i'm training minmatar recon 5. **** this ****.
|
McFly
Path of Light
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 05:43:00 -
[458]
A Pilgrim Success Story...
Recently I used a pilgrim to investigate a cyno near my alliance's 0.0 holding in lowsec. I found a very pretty Mammoth sitting with the Cyno and an Ammarian Dreadnought a little ways off. I called it out in the intel chan and soon had a gang ready to jump in the system. The dread warped off as the gang came in, (he had been 100k from the hauler) and I popped the cyno hauler quickly. Keeping an eye out to where the dread warped, the gang soon had him tackled at a gate, (why would you warp a dread to a gate is beyond me..)
Anyway the pilgrim still has a limited value in popping cyno alts in haulers. But that seems to be the extent of it's abilities until something gets done. But just thought I'd put in .02 isk on the current value of the pilgrim....
--
--my opinions do not reflect that of my corp nor my alliance-- |
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 06:07:00 -
[459]
Originally by: McFly
Anyway the pilgrim still has a limited value in popping cyno alts in haulers. But that seems to be the extent of it's abilities until something gets done. But just thought I'd put in .02 isk on the current value of the pilgrim....
A: I'm something that can cloak and kill cyno haulers
Q: What is a Pilgrim?
I've had similar experiences popping haulers in my Anathema
|
Pilgrippa
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 06:14:00 -
[460]
Don't get me wrong. I too would like an adjustment to the pilgrim at least. But lets get a little perspective. If we're talking about straight up recon fights, amarr has the best combat recon, and arguably the best force recon.
Recon Comparison:
Curse > Huginn > Rook > Lachesis
Rapier > Pilgrim > Falcon > Arazu
You could argue that a rapier doesn't have the dps to break a pilgrim's tank, but it could spend all day trying at least. If that pilgrim ever got the rapier webbed, it would be game over. The pilgrim is easily able to defeat the other 2 recons.
The curse is somewhat threatened by the huginn, but a good pilot should win most encounters. Curse vrs falcon or arazu = curse wins every time.
It's too bad that the pilgrim is not able to use nos like it used to, but it's still a damn fine ship capable of killing many things. Take advantage of the price :)
|
|
|
Pilgrippa
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 06:23:00 -
[461]
Just one more note regarding tracking disruption.
Yes it recieved a nerf. With decent skills, you will still reduce a targets tracking by over 60%. The optimal range script will probaly never be used.
This module should only really be considered a drone saver. The problem with the pilgrim was getting webbed, which negated the TD effect.
A good rule of thumb for any pilgrim pilot is not to get webbed, by anything it can't nos out or tank. (read Battleship) This wasn't much of a problem before the nos nerf, but it is now.
There aren't many cruiser size ships, or even battlecruiser size that the pilgrim can't kill solo. Let's see a falcon, or an arazu claim the same thing.
|
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 06:34:00 -
[462]
Originally by: Pilgrippa
Don't get me wrong. I too would like an adjustment to the pilgrim at least. But lets get a little perspective. If we're talking about straight up recon fights, amarr has the best combat recon, and arguably the best force recon.
Recon Comparison:
Curse > Huginn > Rook > Lachesis
Rapier > Pilgrim > Falcon > Arazu
You could argue that a rapier doesn't have the dps to break a pilgrim's tank, but it could spend all day trying at least. If that pilgrim ever got the rapier webbed, it would be game over. The pilgrim is easily able to defeat the other 2 recons.
The curse is somewhat threatened by the huginn, but a good pilot should win most encounters. Curse vrs falcon or arazu = curse wins every time.
It's too bad that the pilgrim is not able to use nos like it used to, but it's still a damn fine ship capable of killing many things. Take advantage of the price :)
I guess it depends on what you believe to be their primary role, but do you think it's reasonable to base the worth of a recon on its ability to solo kill other recons?
It's true I replaced my Curse and T2 fittings for under 100 mil yesterday, which was nice, but that price reflects something more than the cost of building the things.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 19:26:00 -
[463]
Originally by: Pilgrippa
Rapier > Pilgrim > Falcon > Arazu
It's too bad that the pilgrim is not able to use nos like it used to, but it's still a damn fine ship capable of killing many things. Take advantage of the price :)
Claims without proof. If you believe that list to be true, then add arguments and on how Pilgrim fills its role. Comparing the ability to kill other racial ships of tis class makes you look... well go figure.
The same list in assett for gang looks totally different.
__
- click here - |
kiera0990
Imperial Shipment
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 08:10:00 -
[464]
Sort of liked the options of making nos usable prechange like on pilg & curse. Would make sense seeing how they are two of three specific nos ships now (minus faction ships).
|
Pilgrippa
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 17:08:00 -
[465]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Pilgrippa
Rapier > Pilgrim > Falcon > Arazu
It's too bad that the pilgrim is not able to use nos like it used to, but it's still a damn fine ship capable of killing many things. Take advantage of the price :)
Claims without proof. If you believe that list to be true, then add arguments and on how Pilgrim fills its role. Comparing the ability to kill other racial ships of tis class makes you look... well go figure.
The same list in assett for gang looks totally different.
Yeah, that list looks totally different in assets to a gang, but when has the pilgrim ever been a great gang ship. Everyone uses it solo. Is that it's intended role? I dunno, but it does it pretty well, or used to. I think my point was that the pilgrim is a different class of recon. One that can kill stuff.
Even the curse is not that great in a gang, but has the perception of being a solo roamer like the vagabond. Do you want them to be gang ships? I don't get it.
|
Clavius XIV
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 17:15:00 -
[466]
Originally by: Pilgrippa
Do you want them to be gang ships? I don't get it.
Uh yes.. they are EW support first, not killers. If you have crusier V and want a killer HACs make more sense for the role.
|
Pilgrippa
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.12.10 17:27:00 -
[467]
Well current gang dynamics make it hard for a pilgrim to add much to any gang. For small gangs a curse does really well for anti nano stuff. Armour tanked with a couple guardians does really well.
I'll just say, that I think the pilgrim is very crippled compared to what it was. It was never overpowered to begin with, but it was very useable.
It needs help in the capacitor department. The ability to run 3 neuts with a natural recharge is what I'd like to see. Either through a neut cap use bonus, or a cap recharge bonus.
P.S. Even with this change, it would still be crap in a gang :P
|
Doomsday
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 09:08:00 -
[468]
/signed
Give the Pilgrim some love.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 23:12:00 -
[469]
I read some posts and thought: "well maybe I am wrong so I go out for a test run"
test ship: Pilgrim, dual rep, rep rigs (max T2 tank)
environment: 1vs1 to Drake (T2 tank, but low missile skills)
result:
- able to closely tank it (until the 8x800 cap charges are out)
- running Neut + Nos permanently (until the 8x800 cap charges are out)
- unable to break tank
- unable to hold cap down
conclusion:
- Pilgrim definitly is not a solo ship, as it lacks standing power (lack of space for cap charges).
- Pilgrim cap management is extremly tight, thus the Pilgrim is extremly vulnerable.
- Pilgrim is unable to take advantage of the cloak due to range and target delay.
- Pilgrim can not kill.
- Nos/Neut management plain sucks - target's cap booster disables any cycled Nos/Neut management.
... so much more... disgusting
__
- click here - |
Zhulik
Abyss Restless
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 23:18:00 -
[470]
It is widely known that drakes are deathly afraid of pilgrims.
|
|
|
shinsushi
|
Posted - 2007.12.11 23:25:00 -
[471]
hey Hydro, now that the curse/pilgrim have a little brother, what do you think of that one aswell?
An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.12 09:38:00 -
[472]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 12/12/2007 09:39:21
Originally by: Zhulik
It is widely known that drakes are deathly afraid of pilgrims.
Drake = heavily cap dependant on shield. Anyways it is not so much about the Drake. The thing about solo capabilities and running out of cap boosters (only able to carry 9x800's) sure is a major issue. Also if it is a T2 solo ship, it should be able to bring on a T1 BC. Mark me, where the Drake pilot was for sure at about average skills and the Pilgrim pilot at close to maximum skills.
So, it is not a solo ship as it is now. Also:
- lack of cargo space to bring cap booster charges
- tight cap management even with cap booster
- lack of versatility
are points from that "test".
__
- click here - |
Pilgrippa
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:40:00 -
[473]
Pilgrim vrs Drake? Are you serious?
Look man, I'm on your side about the Pilgrim, but maybe try your test on a Brutix, or some other active tank first.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:49:00 -
[474]
Originally by: Pilgrippa
Pilgrim vrs Drake? Are you serious?
Look man, I'm on your side about the Pilgrim, but maybe try your test on a Brutix, or some other active tank first.
Nah please just look at the reasoning right above your post.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 15:41:00 -
[475]
Some more frustrating experiences in Pilgrim.... If only I could at lest carry some more Cap charges and could survive close combat. Be it gang or solo...
__
- click here - |
Dillius Archania
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 18:31:00 -
[476]
Really bugs me, since I finally finished Amarr Cruiser 5 and now I just really don't know if it was worth it, between the issues with the Pilgrim and the Zealot lately.
|
Bruce Deorum
Minmatar
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 18:59:00 -
[477]
Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 16/12/2007 19:14:53
Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 16/12/2007 19:00:37
Originally by: Hydrogen
I read some posts and thought: "well maybe I am wrong so I go out for a test run"
test ship: Pilgrim, dual rep, rep rigs (max T2 tank)
environment: 1vs1 to Drake (T2 tank, but low missile skills)
result:
- able to closely tank it (until the 8x800 cap charges are out)
- running Neut + Nos permanently (until the 8x800 cap charges are out)
- unable to break tank
- unable to hold cap down
conclusion:
- Pilgrim definitly is not a solo ship, as it lacks standing power (lack of space for cap charges).
- Pilgrim cap management is extremly tight, thus the Pilgrim is extremly vulnerable.
- Pilgrim is unable to take advantage of the cloak due to range and target delay.
- Pilgrim can not kill.
- Nos/Neut management plain sucks - target's cap booster disables any cycled Nos/Neut management.
... so much more... disgusting
Totally wrong approach.
It's a passively tanked ship.
- The only reason to Neut a Drake is if you wonna get out and you have to break his scram, or slow it down should it actually had an AB/MWD at the first place and was trying to disengage and re-approach a gate. You would be far more efficient with a Web in the second scenario.
>>> So a better point to "look into" against a Drake is a series of questions:
Part A: Tanking Questions:
1) "Can I tank it with 1x MAR" Y/N (if N, go to Q#4)
2) "Can I perma-run 1x MAR and relative tanking mods*?" Y/N (if N, go to Q#3)
3) "Can I Q#2 with 1x or more NOS on an average Drake?"
4) "Can I tank it with 2x MARs? Y/N (if N, disengage!, if Y go to Q#5)
5) "Can I perma-run 2x MARs and relative tanking mods*?" Y/N (if N, go to Q#6)
6) "Can I Q#5 with 1x or more NOS on an average Drake?" Y/N (if N, and you have a booster go to Q#6)
7) "Can I sustain my tanking sufficiently enough with both NOS and my available 800's long enough?" Y/N (if Y, you are qualified for part B).
Part B: Ganking Questions:
1) "Can I break his tank?*" - Y/N (if N, go to #2)
2) "Do I carry or use the right drones? Cause Drakes - or the X targer - unless ratting EM dmging rats are usually EM weak" = aka KNOW YOUR OPPONENT - Y/N
*Note that peak recharge is below 50% Shields, so this takes time! So tanking is above ganking in this occasion, as there is no way you can out-dps a drake in a Pilgrim enough to make up for his 5x effective HPs. You either tank it, or you're leaving!
Getting the spirit? I'm with you in this "save amarr recons" story, just stop trying unrealistic scenarios:
= Neuting a Drake Dry for nothing...
= TD a Drake for nothing...
All these are just wasted cap.
Since these questions with relative variations apply in each and every duel, between each and every ship type, serious testing is worthless if it doesn't adds something you didn't know. It's nothing new to me that you cannot easily gang a Drake, while I know that for example a Gang-Geddon is a nice "average" Drake killer. It doesn't impress or inform anyone understanding both Drakes and Pilgrims even a bit, posting these "results".
Be constructive and resonuble in your arguments.
** EDIT: some EFTing: a typical Drake with 2xLSE (to leave room for PVP) has 10-13,5K ΗP shields. Assuming 0 EM resistances and Infiltrators II = <170dps you will now that there is no way to break him faster than ~2 minutes cause you cannot stop it's regen. But I tend to believe that you CAN actually last way more than 2minutes with 2x MAR + NOS and 10x 800s...it's like 5 circles per MAR II, per 800 charge.
So more or less 1 minute per charge, per MAR II!
The point is, do you TANK him with 2x MAR II and how efficiently with NOS?
We know that EFT says "1x Dim NOS sustains 68% a MAR II"
DOES THE DRAKE, sustain 1x NOS?
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 19:37:00 -
[478]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 16/12/2007 19:38:41
Originally by: Bruce Deorum
Be constructive and resonuble in your arguments.
I am generally with you here. Again the thing is not neccessarily the Drake as such, but:
1. inability of Pilgrim to last in a fight due to lack of cap boosters.
2. inability to kill due to lack of dps (even in the case of the drake passive tanked about 150 effective dps are needed, maybe 180)
3. inability to tank opponents with more than average dps
4. ...
As a result the Pilgrim can't be a solo ship or is broken as such.
Like shown before the Pilgrim is not a gang ship either. Thats my attitude of proof and my point in the test.
What bothers me, that none from CCP officially acknowleges it is broken. Yet again it seems that at least one poster in this thread was from CCP or CCP-affiliated. Looking at results (nothing that is) I am more than just disappointed.
__
- click here - |
Bruce Deorum
Minmatar
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 20:36:00 -
[479]
Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 16/12/2007 20:44:21
Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 16/12/2007 20:38:57
Originally by: Hydrogen
1. inability of Pilgrim to last in a fight due to lack of cap boosters.
Very few ships can do that actually. At least the Pilgrim can "help itself" active tank with NOS more efficiently, perhaps un-matched to it by any other ship.
Originally by: Hydrogen
2. inability to kill due to lack of dps (even in the case of the drake passive tanked about 150 effective dps are needed, maybe 180)
Choosing the right drone for the weakest dmg type is a plus...few ships can actually concentrate 170~240 dps in a single dmg type, while most ships are generally weak in one resistance. The Drake is a bad example cause it's a tanking beast. And it's a pretty big beast as well - A BC.
The same fight against a Harbinger with either plated buffer or even worst - active tank could be much easier for the Pilgrim. Although the Harbinger actually gets more gank than a Drake.
Solo is all about picking fights. And an argument could be pretty much ruined if the maker picks the wrong example to "back-it up"...it could even back-fire...!!!
Place the Pilgrim in a solo situation versus a Drake -> useless as a recon, posibly useless as a tanker and ganker. It's just a cloaking cruiser with some DPS to assist his gang.
Place the Pilgrim in a solo situation versus a Prophecy -> the Pilgrim is an overpowered ship!
Originally by: Hydrogen
3. inability to tank opponents with more than average dps
It can, by actually being of comparable size and having cap-depentable weapon systems. The problem is that it' should be able to postpone or even prevent dmg inflicted on it or a gang member the first place. The fact that it cannot tank effectively with JUST its ewar is what makes it broken.
Originally by: Hydrogen
As a result the Pilgrim can't be a solo ship or is broken as such.
The Vagabond is not a super tanker, not a super ganker, it's a super fight-picker thus it solos. The Pilgrim is weaker than the Vaga -> has more limitations and the good point in this comparison is that the Pilgrim cannot TD the hell out of a Vaga, one of the most range and tracking sensitive gunships.
This is a good point, the bonus % on TDs that could actually tank the Pilgrim - and JUST itself or any other ship in its gang.
It's NOS/Neuts are helpful in limited situations - and limited range limits them further.
TDs are limited in both range (for long range fights) and even countered by manual navigation and such skills in close ranges.
Cause as said - most other recons can actually use their ewar as tank. Just one is enough. Etc, the Falcon doesn't have to jam and tank the same target. Nor needs to. The Rapier doesn't has to web and paint at the same time to make sense aka HARM the opponent in any way, or tank him. It knows it cannot, and uses it's ewar's range advantage to walk-around tank issues. At least webs, painters and arties that get bonuses in these ships work perfectly together against small targets
The Lachesis is not a gunship either...but it can still tank remarkably just with it's damps versus more than one targets, or even foolproof tackle and criple a single one.
What makes the pilrgim weak it's the fact that its both a better ganker, and a better tanker than any of the Recons, but weak as a recon! Yes, the Falcon is also a BB with a cloak...but with a few more USE FULL bonuses.
The Pilrgim as a ganger is the same as the Arbitrator, and tanks a little better - just cause it's a T2. It's more HAS like and less Recon like than recons. It's the Jack of all trades...condemned to be "average"
It can still solo, while it's not intended for this role, cause it cloaks = it picks fights. Thats because ppl cannot do much more with it. Besides opening cynos...I wonder how many Pilrgims, or any other Force Recon, were ever bought just for that...
|
Dillius Archania
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 20:54:00 -
[480]
Originally by: Bruce Deorum
Very few ships can do that actually. At least the Pilgrim can "help itself" active tank with NOS more efficiently, perhaps un-matched to it by any other ship.
Choosing the right drone for the weakest dmg type is a plus...few ships can actually concentrate 170~240 dps in a single dmg type, while most ships are generally weak in one resistance. The Drake is a bad example cause it's a tanking beast. And it's a pretty big beast as well - A BC.
...
It can, by actually being of comparable size and having cap-depentable weapon systems. The problem is that it' should be able to postpone or even prevent dmg inflicted on it or a gang member the first place. The fact that it cannot tank effectively with JUST its ewar is what makes it broken.
So a Pilgrim should be expected to go through an entire hold of cap boosters per 1v1 fight, as well as having a full array of each damage type of drone (For mediums that would be 200m^3, 50 more than it actually has), have no other kinds of drones for maintenance or special purposes. Along with this you're assuming that the opponent actually HAS a weak resist, and is not generally omni tanked, which is a completely separate Amarr complaint
The problem with NOS is it can be extremely hard to tell what your opponents cap is at. Plus heck, if they realize you're using NOS to keep yourself alive, it's a simply matter for them to burn through their own, particularly if they are easily tanking your quite pathetic damage.
TD's are incredibly pathetic, I can agree with that. They really did not need the trinity nerf.
|
|
|
Bruce Deorum
Minmatar
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.16 22:41:00 -
[481]
Originally by: Dillius Archania
So a Pilgrim should be expected to go through an entire hold of cap boosters per 1v1 fight, as well as having a full array of each damage type of drone (For mediums that would be 200m^3, 50 more than it actually has), have no other kinds of drones for maintenance or special purposes. Along with this you're assuming that the opponent actually HAS a weak resist, and is not generally omni tanked, which is a completely separate Amarr complaint
No, the Pilgrim should not be expected to go through an entire hold of cap boosters to 1vs1.
I'd expect from a force recon like the Pilgrim being able to tank with it's ewar alone on "below average" targets like the Drake Discribed, even if it could practicaly NEVER kill them solo.
That's more "recon" like.
It's extensively explained in my "Sentinel" posts also - tho this EAS is more of a curse: even the possibility of Solo intrigues me. The slightest possibility. Sth a Falcon never gets - cause it's truly specialized and not a "Jack of all trades" as I name the Pilgrim.
That's why so many ppl are frustrated with the Pilgrim, while at the same time the applications for other Force Recons are much clearer to define - as are the possibilities in 1vs1 encounters. Yes TDs work 100%...BUT, tracking computers and manual navigation along with maintained transversal etc come in factor...it's actually much worse that the "chance based" ECM a falcon gets (which is pretty good bet vs. small ships) or the locking range reduction each and every other experienced Force Recon pilot actually "feels and factors".
The falcon pilot knows more or less that some cruisers or BCs are an easy target...you have to be really unlucky to miss jamming them. He actually knows that before engaging. An engagement can be pushed out to scram range easily.
The Rapier can easily judge which target's weapon he can out-range with webs before engaging. An engagement can be pushed out to scram range easily.
The Lachesis can easily judge which target's sensors he can out-range with damps before engaging. An engagement can be pushed out to scram range easily - especially.
The Pilgrim pilot can take nothing for granted. Unless he jumps on a frig or sth and decloak close enough to neut / web it...wow! ewar specialization!
Oh, and maybe that it can track-nerf a long range large turret...wow...
So, leave the Curse for "combat"...let it be the only Amarr recon that can gank, even that little, as it can help breaking a tank otherwise from a safe distance.
At least give a relative ewar boost to the pilgrim...make it ewar more...
If that's involves TD mechanics which are multi-explained why are a bit gimped atm, fine...fix TDs then...but plz CCP...actually DO sth...
Give us a practical way to use this ship as a Recon. Not a neuting sub par Ishtar with cloak...
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.17 00:23:00 -
[482]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 17/12/2007 00:23:51
I've fought drakes and won (we won't mention they where about a week old though)
edit: and I still use up all of my cap boosters, even though i'm not using neuts or TD's.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.17 05:24:00 -
[483]
A recon should be able to tank from its EW alone. If the recon fails to do that, then its really dead. All recons act like that in some sort of fashion.
Caldari recons prevent the target from locking
Dito for Gallente
Minmie recons keep the target out of range.
Now even pre nos nerf the pilgrim could not tank from its EW. Read through the 17 odd pages on why, however it could tank on its ability to nos.
Now the only way for the pilgrim to tank is the use of cap boosters, and from its small bay this wont last long. Not only that but it cost 150pg, CCP only gave the pilgrim a 100pg increase, also it cost 1 less mid slot on a ew which could of helped reducing dmg.
Now with 50 less pg the pilgrim now has less to spend in its lows on its tank. It now cannot fit its desired armor platge.
Hence how shot the pilgrim is now. Cant tank, cant drain the targets cap, less EW, a close range ship still etc etc.
|
Steakkbone
Helios Incorporated
Insurgency
|
Posted - 2007.12.17 08:07:00 -
[484]
Originally by: Depp Knight
A recon should be able to tank from its EW alone. If the recon fails to do that, then its really dead. All recons act like that in some sort of fashion.
Caldari recons prevent the target from locking
Dito for Gallente
Minmie recons keep the target out of range.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.17 14:10:00 -
[485]
^
?
|
Kel Dario
Amarr
Blue Sky Inc
|
Posted - 2007.12.17 23:33:00 -
[486]
It's getting late and I don't feel like going trough all pages to see if someone come up with a sensible solution to the problem of the pilgrim, so bear with me if this has been said already:
Give all stealth recons the fourth bonus of their combat brethren, and instead turn the -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level into a special bonus or another rolebonus.
And give them all a slight increase in capacitor recharge.
With AB and TD running it should work with them not tracking me at all if they are a slow gunship and my own capacitor not be hurt that much.
Now if its a drake or raven and I feel I want to test my luck... then I deploy a wing of ecm-drones and hope he forgot his f.o.f's at home while neutralizing his capacitor first before switching over to damage drones.
More likely I will either keep him pinned down before friends join in or I just let him be. The Pilgrim can't do it all and its something I have to accept as a pilot.
//Kel
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 08:37:00 -
[487]
Hello, 17 pages and not one word on a change. WTF
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 11:04:00 -
[488]
with the way ccp zulupark responded, i doubt they know recons exist anymore :\
|
Dillius Archania
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 12:21:00 -
[489]
Originally by: Feng Schui
with the way ccp zulupark responded, i doubt they know recons exist anymore :\
What response is this and where can it be found?
|
Shevar
Minmatar
A.W.M
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 12:30:00 -
[490]
Originally by: Dillius Archania
Originally by: Feng Schui
with the way ccp zulupark responded, i doubt they know recons exist anymore :\
What response is this and where can it be found?
They introduced the sentinel, which has exactly the same issues as the curse and pilgrim :>.
Amarr EW is borked since the nerf of nos. And quite frankly I doubt it will ever get fixed or better yet replaced by normal EW that is actually useful in gangs.
---
-The only real drug problem is scoring real good drugs |
|
|
Dillius Archania
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 12:32:00 -
[491]
Originally by: Shevar
Originally by: Dillius Archania
Originally by: Feng Schui
with the way ccp zulupark responded, i doubt they know recons exist anymore :\
What response is this and where can it be found?
They introduced the sentinel, which has exactly the same issues as the curse and pilgrim :>.
Amarr EW is borked since the nerf of nos. And quite frankly I doubt it will ever get fixed or better yet replaced by normal EW that is actually useful in gangs.
Oh god I was about to say, SOMEONE RESPONDED!? Was preparing a sacrificial goat until you responded....
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
Drunken N Disorderly
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 13:39:00 -
[492]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 19/12/2007 13:40:37
In the live devblog. Listen and weep
Originally by: From the live devblog, but you'll need to listen to it, seriously
CCP Mindstar: Ok, umm, IĘm going to touch back on scripts, because we talked a lot about them at the start of the devblog, there have been a lot of comments about how the electronic warfare specialist recon ships have taken a little bit of a hit perhaps of how underpowered or overpowered they already where with the introduction of scripts and their favorite modules now and their affecting ones.. for ships like the arazu, pilgrim, lachesies. Any thoughts on giving them some love or do you guys think theyĘre ok?
CCP Zulupark: I havenĘt looked at those ships in particular, but I mean, I umm, I look at everything, I mean, maybe we need to tweak the special bonuses, you know, IĘll look into it. ThatĘs my word to you. Yay.
CCP Mindstar: Ok, looking into it.
|
Sofring Eternus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 15:05:00 -
[493]
Hi, I'm your new game balance dev.
We just made sweeping changes to all forms of E-Warfare this year. NOS, Neuts, ECM, TD, Damps, etc.
But apparently I never bothered to check how this would effect T1 or T2 EW dedicated ships...
---
ΞνΞ ΘΠLІΠΞ
Amarr dont need Grr... and RAWR is definately too much, but some Oomph would be nice. |
Kruel
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2007.12.19 15:54:00 -
[494]
Originally by: From the live devblog
CCP Zulupark: I havenĘt looked at those ships in particular, but I mean, I umm, I look at everything, I mean, maybe we need to tweak the special bonuses, you know, IĘll look into it. ThatĘs my word to you.
Good god... the dude has no idea.
The balance devs clearly don't read this forum anymore either.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 01:40:00 -
[495]
Edited by: Cailais on 20/12/2007 01:40:33
Quote:
CCP Zulupark: I havenĘt looked at those ships in particular......
Erm...shouldnt those have been the first ships to be looked at in particular???
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.20 10:39:00 -
[496]
Cant beleive they are not reading the forums.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.12.21 08:49:00 -
[497]
Boost patch?
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.12.21 09:27:00 -
[498]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Boost patch?
Trouble is with this 'boost patch' concept is that it will almost certainly fail to meet expectations. CCP would do far far better to provide a detailed blog on what theyre looking at, i.e. provide a range of options that they are considering. Just lumping everything into some fabled 'boost patch' will only serve to create a mirage.
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.12.21 10:13:00 -
[499]
BOOST PATCH
|
Karma
Gallente
Vortex Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.12.21 20:23:00 -
[500]
i've seen this before, both in EVE and other MMOs...
group A complains about being underdeveloped, and if it's right before a big patch all the DEVs will say is: "please look forward to the boost patch"...
patch comes, and there's ONE, or at the most TWO items in there that could from a certain angle be viewed as slightly beneficial to the group...
I wont believe the boost patch will do anything but maintain the status quo until I see the patch notes.
that said, there are a few people who have stated that they have excellent setups for the Curse for both PvP and PvE. I'd be quite interrested in finding out the specifics ;)
post in here if you don't want to spam this thread.
|
|
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2007.12.21 20:53:00 -
[501]
lol @ the "boost patch".
more like the "oops! patch".
-jg.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.23 03:04:00 -
[502]
Ive jumped back into my pilgrim. Dont know why, think new graphics makes it look sexy.
|
ShurNui
Minmatar
Aggressive Tendencies
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2007.12.23 04:44:00 -
[503]
ok i have now spent 2 hours reading this seeing as i am considering the curse/pilgrim as a viable ship
base line as far as i see it needs a change to the nuets drin on it's own cap which eliminates the need for a cap booster just to sustain the nuets
the role of cyno is so that the pilgrim can get 10 jumps into enemy territory drop cyno bring 50 cap ships in and disapear in 5mins instead of 10 it cuts down on the fuel costs (which have soared recently) and time which when you are moving for examples across 3 cyno jumps you would rather wait 5mins than 10 mins-simple
right so so far what i have stated theoretically covers the recons "useless(insert other name for it here) bonus and the nos nerf to the amarr recons
i personally think (with no experiance of curse/pilgrim flying) that engaging a prophecy in a hac(other than maybe a vaga) solo is stupid let alone a recon so more fool you waaaaaaaaaaay back at the begining for doing so.
baseline is it needs a few changes most things do live with what they do voice comments dont spend years writing an essay its a game ok i know i sounds boring and possably reppetative but most ships i have flown have been nerfed in someway at somepoint
just say thank god that you dont go away for a month( rom eve with no iternet for forums or anything) come back buy a crow 3 II nanos a gisti mwd faction warp disruptor and fully kit a crow out spending about 300mil then find out about the nano nerf and all that and that you now have just wasted about 300M on a soon to be useless set (didnt happen to me thank god) the uy said **** and that was it he got on with it because its a game tbh
no doubt in 5 months there will be a new nerf (if not sooner) and one of the many ships i fly will be nerfed (heck i fly all interdictors and they just got nerfed so...) there we go and ill be ****** but its a game ill get over it (enter saddening real story with trajic ending here)
so hey loosen up and say guys the curse has lost a part of its fihting ability it can no longer do this plz change it and make it more effective end
not 17 pages of tbqfh twaddle about TD, ecm, damps and all that if you spent 7M SP on one ship your choice, i have varied my ships so it would have to be deliberate to nerf all my ships :)
so like i said chill out and if your thinking of a new ship i would suggest a damnation i hear its really good both tank and cap wise but a lil lacking in dps with the long-range Hams loaded
chill out and its a game to enjoy not moan about
SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
Bacci Galu
Honour Bound
|
Posted - 2007.12.23 09:11:00 -
[504]
@ op.... U smokin some serious drugs brother..
As iam someone who has played a hell of a lot longer than you;
Recons are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
My raven would and has kicked many pilgrims a_ss's...it would kick your pilgrims a_ss.... your pilgrim is not meant to be able to solo a bs, no pilgrim is, just as no force recon is.
sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up.
:: |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2007.12.23 10:12:00 -
[505]
Hah, you know we can forget abou any amarr fix. CCP basically said: "There is no problem with amarr just a few ships that need a little love" Wich means they basically denied anything being wrong with amarr ew and lasers.
CCP will never learn to fix stuff from the core. Stupid duct tape fixes makes me sad.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Zinrix
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.12.24 04:16:00 -
[506]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Ive jumped back into my pilgrim. Dont know why, think new graphics makes it look sexy.
For about the last week I've been trying to convince myself to get back in the Pilgrim for this very reason. I can completely relate.
|
Sarah Aubry
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2007.12.24 09:08:00 -
[507]
Originally by: Bacci Galu
Edited by: Bacci Galu on 23/12/2007 09:53:00
@ op.... U smokin some serious drugs brother..
As iam someone who has played a hell of a lot longer than you i will explain the following;
Recons are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
My raven would and has kicked many pilgrims a_ss's...it would kick your pilgrims a_ss.... your pilgrim is not meant to be able to solo a bs, no pilgrim is, just as no force recon is.
sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up.
You have no idea about the OP so shutup. You need to go look at some killboards of any capable recon pilots and you will see many solo bs kills.
The pilgrim was especially good at killing any npc'ing bs pre nerf.
For your raven to solo kill pilgrims the pilgrim pilot would have to be pretty stupid to stay in the fight if he was losing.
Your last "sentence" makes no sense at all:
"sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up."
Previous to the patch the pilgrim/curse WERE solo bs killers. You can't dispute that. The patch is what changed the situation, not what made it possible.
"Grow up"? You are the one questioning the OP's character and now you show your own. You make this a personal attack, so who's maturity is in question here? (Hint, it's not the OP's)
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.25 11:13:00 -
[508]
Originally by: Bacci Galu
Edited by: Bacci Galu on 23/12/2007 09:53:00
@ op.... U smokin some serious drugs brother..
As iam someone who has played a hell of a lot longer than you i will explain the following;
Recons are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
My raven would and has kicked many pilgrims a_ss's...it would kick your pilgrims a_ss.... your pilgrim is not meant to be able to solo a bs, no pilgrim is, just as no force recon is.
sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up.
LOL this guy thinks he knows he stuff cause he has played longer. You do have to right to believe that Recons should not be able to solo a bs.
As you said Quote:
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
But the problem pre nos nerf that the pilgrim was a terrible compliment to a roaming gang of all sizes but that role was forgotten as it was a much better solo ship of all recons. Like how the domi is terrible in fleet, you don't hear complaints as it was a brilliant solo ship. Now after nos nerf the pilgrim is worse in roaming gangs of all sizes because now it has to use 1 mid for an injector and also it can no longer solo a ratting bs, hence why we believe the pilgrim is totally broken
But of course you know all of this because your 'experienced.' Unfortunately you donĘt know your ****. Grow up.
|
Adonai RisenStar
Gallente
Deathwatch Inc.
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.12.25 19:08:00 -
[509]
Originally by: Bacci Galu
Edited by: Bacci Galu on 23/12/2007 09:53:00
@ op.... U smokin some serious drugs brother..
As iam someone who has played a hell of a lot longer than you i will explain the following;
Recons are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
My raven would and has kicked many pilgrims a_ss's...it would kick your pilgrims a_ss.... your pilgrim is not meant to be able to solo a bs, no pilgrim is, just as no force recon is.
sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up.
Pilgrim's bonuses are to neuts, nos and TDs right? so how would TDs affect tracking on missles? hmmmm, not much argument there. you fought someone who had no idea what he was doing.
[center]
Risen's Art for ISK - Custom made images, sigs, logos, etc. tailor made to your specification! Competative pricing and absolute |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.12.25 19:20:00 -
[510]
This just in!
Pilgrims are not broken. We are all just using the wrong setups. See this post to correctly set up your pilgrims.
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.12.27 11:51:00 -
[511]
I would not let this thread being buried by Gal and Cal fitting threads. To many good things have been said to be ignored
|
Black Stiletto
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.27 14:15:00 -
[512]
I have just returned to Eve after a long break and fully intended to carry on my Recon training with the aim of soloing in a Pilgrim. I am absolutely gutted to find that the devs have destroyed the ship in the way they have. It's not like the ship was an uber-killer to begin with. So why alter it at all???
I don't know whether to re-train for something completely different or just not bother playing. Absolutely gutted!
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2007.12.27 15:03:00 -
[513]
Originally by: Bacci Galu
Edited by: Bacci Galu on 23/12/2007 09:53:00
@ op.... U smokin some serious drugs brother..
As iam someone who has played a hell of a lot longer than you i will explain the following;
Recons are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
My raven would and has kicked many pilgrims a_ss's...it would kick your pilgrims a_ss.... your pilgrim is not meant to be able to solo a bs, no pilgrim is, just as no force recon is.
sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up.
And the pilgrim does this how exactly? what is this 'vast amounts' of EW youre speaking of?
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 16:39:00 -
[514]
This should probably be at the top, since CCP Zulu claims he reads the ships and modules forums.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2007.12.28 17:18:00 -
[515]
Originally by: Feng Schui
This should probably be at the top, since CCP Zulu claims he reads the ships and modules forums.
Its sad that he doesnt think amarr cap bonus is a bull**** bonus.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.30 01:35:00 -
[516]
Originally by: Bacci Galu
@ op.... U smokin some serious drugs brother..
Keep it civil. I sometimes fail there too, still I try and also dont fail at dropping an excuse where it needs to be.
Originally by: Bacci Galu
As iam someone who has played a hell of a lot longer than you i will explain the following;
Uhmmm, you played EvE before the Beta?????
Originally by: Bacci Galu
Recons are not meant to be solo pwn mobiles
That is exactly what I outlined the posts before. Not only that, the Pilgrim is not even a solo ship. That said: if someone says its viable, it must be a gang ship or?
Originally by: Bacci Galu
The are meant to compliment roaming gangs/fleets with vast amounts of electronic warefare. they are meant to take away the ememies ability to fight effectively
Well good point. Now show me, how the Pilgrim can do that :) I esspecially liked your statement of "vast amounts of electronic warfare". I am completly with you there...
Originally by: Bacci Galu
My raven would and has kicked many pilgrims a_ss's...it would kick your pilgrims a_ss.... your pilgrim is not meant to be able to solo a bs, no pilgrim is, just as no force recon is.
Good point. So yet again it must be a gang ship, like you told. Just show us how it is :)
Originally by: Bacci Galu
sure, the nos nerf was a lil harsh, i can sympothise with that...but as for making your precious pilgrim a solo bs killer...grow up.
Your post somehow lacks arguments. I also fail in seeing alternate suggestions from your *cough* vast experience. Also on how you suggest that a Pilgrim effectively deploys its *cough* "vast amounts of electronic warfare", which sure makes it a unique assett to any roaming gang, is still a miracle to me.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.30 02:15:00 -
[517]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 30/12/2007 02:15:20
Black OPs
Those got a definite role. But when you are really into those you will realize 3 things:
1. Black OPs rely on teamwork with other Cloakers.
2. Even though BOs got no target delay, they must use at least Improved Cloak types, with the best offering still -22% scan resolution. So basically BO lock times suck big time.
3. Due to 1. and 2. BOs need tackler support.
Now let us have a close look at point 3. Which ships are able to supply the tackle support? Suggested there is a scenario, where you need BO firepower,... is there any cloak ship to tackle, which is able to survive until the BO jumped in?
In short: no there is not. Getting your BO in first spoils the point of fielding BOs, since local shows that somethign is wrong. Which leaves us to the following ship types as tacklers...
A. Stealth Bombers
B. Covert Ops
C. Force Recons
Well of all those, type C. can tackle, but are unable to survive... Also: does a covert cyno gen enable movement of the ship issuing it...(not sure here)? Well,... you see my point. Also the targeting delay on force recons with Cloaking at lvl 5 still spoils the lock time due to target delay.
However you put it: Cloaked gangs with BO support severly lack tacklers.
Since this is a Pilgrim thread and a lot of ppl seem to agree that Pilgrim could/should be a gang ship: a heavy tank to enable it to tackle, now that would be kinda kewl... Add in the ability to insta-covert-cyno-gen, allowing it to move still...
You get the point.
What is needed?
- increase Pilgrim base resist to a decent level, eg like on Zealot or at least Curse
- increase cargo bay (for cyno and cap boosters)
- add the ability to move after covert cyno gen
Voilß? Whatcha think?
__
- click here - |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2007.12.30 12:59:00 -
[518]
Dropping a Cyno and keep moving is not going to happen, but...
... getting rid of the targeting-delay after decloaking has to be removed, and voila.
You get the Pilgrim in and tackle the target (Scram and Dual-WEB) and then you drop the Cyno directly besides him, while keeping him in place.
That would work somehow I believe.
Force Recons fit T2-Cloaks ffs, there should'nt be a targeting-delay!
.
Work in progress: EvE FlashMAP |
Leather Rebel
VersaTech Interstellar Ltd.
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.30 21:02:00 -
[519]
Bump for a thread for the greater good of the pilgrim, used to be my ship of choice
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.31 12:26:00 -
[520]
Originally by: Grytok
Dropping a Cyno and keep moving is not going to happen, but...
... getting rid of the targeting-delay after decloaking has to be removed, and voila.
You get the Pilgrim in and tackle the target (Scram and Dual-WEB) and then you drop the Cyno directly besides him, while keeping him in place.
That would work somehow I believe.
Force Recons fit T2-Cloaks ffs, there should'nt be a targeting-delay!
Imho it is kinda stupid on how some ships get rid of some drawbacks of non-Cov Ops cloaks. Also my old point still stands: it makes no sense to use cov ops cloak and still be visible in local. I do understand it on every other ship, but a scout/recon, which is cloaked all the time, can move cloaked, but everyone knows its there... beats the whole purpose of being sneaky.
That said: BO gangs lack tacklers. Force Recons are well suited to fill that niche, but lack survivability as it stands now.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
|
Posted - 2007.12.31 12:49:00 -
[521]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Grytok
Dropping a Cyno and keep moving is not going to happen, but...
... getting rid of the targeting-delay after decloaking has to be removed, and voila.
You get the Pilgrim in and tackle the target (Scram and Dual-WEB) and then you drop the Cyno directly besides him, while keeping him in place.
That would work somehow I believe.
Force Recons fit T2-Cloaks ffs, there should'nt be a targeting-delay!
Imho it is kinda stupid on how some ships get rid of some drawbacks of non-Cov Ops cloaks. Also my old point still stands: it makes no sense to use cov ops cloak and still be visible in local. I do understand it on every other ship, but a scout/recon, which is cloaked all the time, can move cloaked, but everyone knows its there... beats the whole purpose of being sneaky.
That said: BO gangs lack tacklers. Force Recons are well suited to fill that niche, but lack survivability as it stands now.
The only ships that are bonuced against targeting delay are SBs, and these lack any kind of tank, while cannot fit cov-ops cloaks and jump while cloaked. It's a fair "balancing" trade-off.
The Pilgrim can fit cov-ops and warp while cloaked, having a "sick" tank compaired to each and every SB .
T2 cloaks (both improved and cov-ops) should never be invisible in local. It'll be totally un-balanced, cause a roaming gang of multiple recons would be immune to anything but blobs. The whole "idea" fights the perpose of "resurecting" the Pilgrims solo capabilities, while it won't help it after it decloaks - where it really lacks.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.12.31 13:04:00 -
[522]
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Grytok
Dropping a Cyno and keep moving is not going to happen, but...
... getting rid of the targeting-delay after decloaking has to be removed, and voila.
You get the Pilgrim in and tackle the target (Scram and Dual-WEB) and then you drop the Cyno directly besides him, while keeping him in place.
That would work somehow I believe.
Force Recons fit T2-Cloaks ffs, there should'nt be a targeting-delay!
Imho it is kinda stupid on how some ships get rid of some drawbacks of non-Cov Ops cloaks. Also my old point still stands: it makes no sense to use cov ops cloak and still be visible in local. I do understand it on every other ship, but a scout/recon, which is cloaked all the time, can move cloaked, but everyone knows its there... beats the whole purpose of being sneaky.
That said: BO gangs lack tacklers. Force Recons are well suited to fill that niche, but lack survivability as it stands now.
The only ships that are bonuced against targeting delay are SBs, and these lack any kind of tank, while cannot fit cov-ops cloaks and jump while cloaked. It's a fair "balancing" trade-off.
Black OPs:
- Note: can fit covert cynosural field generators and covert jump portal generators. No targeting delay after decloaking. (from description)
- have a scan resolution bonus compared to T1 counterparts
- can field average to really sick tanks (esspecially Redeemer can be tanked to hell)
- can field average to good damage output
Or in short: your whole point is just that - pointless.
__
- click here - |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
|
Posted - 2007.12.31 14:54:00 -
[523]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Black OPs:
- Note: can fit covert cynosural field generators and covert jump portal generators. No targeting delay after decloaking. (from description)
- have a scan resolution bonus compared to T1 counterparts
- can field average to really sick tanks (esspecially Redeemer can be tanked to hell)
- can field average to good damage output
Or in short: your whole point is just that - pointless.
Oops...I think pre-TRI...
Still what makes my post "pointless" while makes the "remove-target-delay" whine is meaningfull??
- all recons get this "delay" feature, so it's not a pilgrim's weakness.
- BOs are bigger, way more expencive and way more skill intensive ships with way more "offensive" orientation (look at the bonuses) than any Recon. And of course it tanks better. It's a BS ffs...the Pilgrim tanks pretty well for it's class.
- Nice quoting on the specialized BO "covert" modules, just no cov-ops CLOAKING. So the "no-targeting-delay" role bonus is compairable to SBs, not the Pilrgim.
- should you prefer to solo or small-gang in a Black Ops BS, feel free...still it's role makes clear that BOs are meant to make way for cov-ops ships to jump in enemy teritory through a specialized jump-bridge. So cov-ops, force recons, SBs and BO are more or less relying in each other for viable stealth combat behind enemy lines.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2007.12.31 16:53:00 -
[524]
I've never claimed the ability of targeting after decloaking without a delay as "Pilgrim-Only-Bonus".
I've made a post in which I stated, how I would like to see every Force Recon changed, including removal of the Targeting Delay.
There is no point in getting in unseen, but then not beeing able to lock for 5+ seconds after decloaking. 5+ seconds is plenty to get out for the target if smaller then a Battleship. And if Battleship is aligned while ratting, because he allready see you in Local, then he'll allways get away.
Catching nano-Ships? Well... that would actually be quiet easy, if you could target instantly after decloaking and put the Rapiers webbers on the nanoFag.
And there is another thing, why this is ridiculous of not beeing able to target without a delay... it's that you yourself are targettable right after you decloaked. So you actually have a huge disadvantage here.
.
Work in progress: EvE FlashMAP |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.01 18:30:00 -
[525]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 01/01/2008 18:31:34
Originally by: Grytok
I've never claimed the ability of targeting after decloaking without a delay as "Pilgrim-Only-Bonus".
I've made a post in which I stated, how I would like to see every Force Recon changed, including removal of the Targeting Delay.
It plain makes no sense, that other ships with subpar cloaks even receive a no targetting delay after decloak, when Cov Ops and Force Recons are meant to be the cloaker ships using the best and most advanced cloak available. Also with those new changes the skill system regarding cloaks is plain obsolete. Obsolete since the devs/balancing team plain ignored their existance even.
It is just that as it is now: poor game design.
My suggestion:
- BOs can use cov ops cloak
- SBs can use cov ops cloak
- if a no target delay is needed then add an advanced cloaking skill: -25% to cloaking delay with cloaking V as prerequisite
That would be a straightforward cloaking skill design.
And once again - showing cloaked ships at least with cov ops cloak in local is also poor game design, here is why:
1. Recons and Cov Ops are meant to be sneaky. By design those ships offer a paper-thin to non existant tank.
2. It is difficult to maintain a coherent group position, when all are cloaked in a cloaked gang - sometimes even impossible.
3. Upon decloak a cloaked gang is just that - a normal ship gang with no cloak advantage at all.
4. Showing a cloaked gang in local informs any possible targets of: size of gang, preferred race and maybe even (looking at kb) of possible ship types. In general: opponents know quite likely what they face when seeing someone or some people in local. This heavily contradicts being sneaky in the first place.
5. Risk vs reward: in general for scouting purposes the risk vs reward equation is in favor of the scout when using a newbie alt in a pod (which most ppl do anyways). For simple scouting the risk of loosing 10 mill - 250 mill (for cov ops to some force recons) is totally out of line compared with the newbie alt option.
6. Someone soloing alone or ratting or mining,... in lowsec or 0.0 deserves to be posed to the permanent risk of being obliterated. As it is now: ratting/mining in a quiet lowsec/0.0 system requires a warp to safe spot and cloak or logout. A 100% foolproof tactic. The risk vs reward for solo players is totally out of line in this case.
Originally by: Grytok
And there is another thing, why this is ridiculous of not beeing able to target without a delay... it's that you yourself are targettable right after you decloaked. So you actually have a huge disadvantage here.
Good point - weak tank on your Recon/Cov Ops and upon decloak you are actually at a disadvantage.
I call it: CPBS - Carebear Protection Balancing System.
__
- click here - |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
|
Posted - 2008.01.01 18:50:00 -
[526]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Grytok
And there is another thing, why this is ridiculous of not beeing able to target without a delay... it's that you yourself are targettable right after you decloaked. So you actually have a huge disadvantage here.
Good point - weak tank on your Recon/Cov Ops and upon decloak you are actually at a disadvantage.
I call it: CPBS - Carebear Protection Balancing System.
The Pilgrim and every other Force Recon has the advantage of picking fights. Being able to insta-lock after decloaking while being able to warp cloaked etc is definately overpowered with current game mechanics, and no ship is capable of doing all of the above at the same time precisely for that reason.
Stop thinking the Pilgrim as a SB...the SB cannot warp while cloaked, nor does the BO.
The SB tho can insta-lock, cannot insta-dmg it's target from comfortable safe distance. That's there for a reason too. Ppl whine about the missile flight times in SBs cause they don't want to face some facts:
- It would be overpowered to have insta-lock, insta-hit and cloaked warps in the same package. Way more overpowered than the current nano-ships that cause so much fuz. Combine that with invisible in local cov-ops enabled ships and you've got a crasy perspective:
ASAP after such changers, the PvP world would be flooded with cov-ops gangs, that would be forcing everyone to stay put / docked / cloaked etc, cause there would be no clue on what you are fighting against.
If you think that ratting cloakers are irritating think how much a roaming gang of cloakers would affect regular players in 0.0...a pack of SBs can do it even now -> pin multiple players in a station or away from ratting in belts.
Stop thinking "solo-solo-solo"...
All these "hide from local", "warp while cloaked for gang ships" etc, would ruin the game if it would find its way to blobs.
|
Risar Surtr
The Phoenix Rising
FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.01.01 18:58:00 -
[527]
The Amarr recons are broken. They were built for a play style that was nerfed.
CCP should have made changes to all Amarr ships partially to compensate for the NOS nerf, mostly cause they are broken. Amarr simply do not have a viable energy ratio due to the insane power requirements of lasers. They do low damage and on top of that require so many cap mods to use that you cannot boost the damage sanely/safely.
+1 for fixing the recons
+2 for fixing Amarr in general (hint: requires giving ships useful bonus's not just a pitiful reduction in energy usage of turrets)
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2008.01.02 08:27:00 -
[528]
Bump for the new year
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Liang Nuren
The Avalon Foundation
Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 20:52:00 -
[529]
This shouldn't really be on the 7th page. The Pilgrim is a broken ship, and needs some love.
-Liang
--
Originally by: "QProQ"
When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.01.04 21:40:00 -
[530]
Pilgrim and Curse are both up on my hangar wall as decoration. They need love, or they are staying there.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 00:26:00 -
[531]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Pilgrim and Curse are both up on my hangar wall as decoration. They need love, or they are staying there.
Im still waiting for a reason to train the last bit for this ship.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 11:05:00 -
[532]
Everyday hurts being a Pilgrim pilot. Maybe the only thing we can do is get a petition going and email it. Who shall start it. We can start it right now.
Just put your name down that you want the pilgrim to be boosted as soon as possible and ill send it away. But we really need more numbers. Or we can sit here and just say the same stuff over and over. Up to you but atm we all know the pilgrim is like HD-DVD. Dead and looking like it wont come back.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2008.01.06 21:27:00 -
[533]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Everyday hurts being a Pilgrim pilot. Maybe the only thing we can do is get a petition going and email it. Who shall start it. We can start it right now.
Just put your name down that you want the pilgrim to be boosted as soon as possible and ill send it away. But we really need more numbers. Or we can sit here and just say the same stuff over and over. Up to you but atm we all know the pilgrim is like HD-DVD. Dead and looking like it wont come back.
Or we could just keep posting in these large threads with millions of arguments and prove once and for all zulu doesnt read the forums as he claimed.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 01:53:00 -
[534]
lets just not buy them period anymore.
Go Hard, or go Home.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 07:06:00 -
[535]
Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver
lets just not buy them period anymore.
I like to fly in style. Pilgrim looks sexy pitty under the hood it just sucks :(
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 08:35:00 -
[536]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver
lets just not buy them period anymore.
I like to fly in style. Pilgrim looks sexy pitty under the hood it just sucks :(
Thats why CCP created T2 cargo expanders
|
Ms Belle
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 14:07:00 -
[537]
Ive been mulling over the Pilgrim and will dust off the old girl tonight to see what she can do.
I realise the following fitting ignores half the bonuses of the ship but I think this is viable as long as you have very good gunnery skills.
Highs: 3x 425/220mm (be interesting to check which is better) Autocannon II 1x Cov Ops Cloak
Mids: 1x10MN MWD II 1xWEB II 1x24K Scram 1x Cap Booster II (800 charges)1x Unknown
Lows: 2x MAR II 1x DC II 2x EANM II or damage specific if you know what you are going to face
Rigs 2x Aux Nano Pumps
Drones: Damage Specific
She is not going to be that fast but as long as she can tackle a target the cloak will enable to pick a scrap. Note this ship is a Gankship setup vs lone ratters.
I have a spare midslot that I am unsure what to do with any Idea's A tracking disruptor is not really viable as you will not be able to go fast enough to make use of it. Sensor Booster prehaps?
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 14:52:00 -
[538]
Originally by: Ms Belle
Ive been mulling over the Pilgrim and will dust off the old girl tonight to see what she can do.
I realise the following fitting ignores half the bonuses of the ship but I think this is viable as long as you have very good gunnery skills.
Highs: 3x 425/220mm (be interesting to check which is better) Autocannon II 1x Cov Ops Cloak
Mids: 1x10MN MWD II 1xWEB II 1x24K Scram 1x Cap Booster II (800 charges)1x Unknown
Lows: 2x MAR II 1x DC II 2x EANM II or damage specific if you know what you are going to face
Rigs 2x Aux Nano Pumps
Drones: Damage Specific
She is not going to be that fast but as long as she can tackle a target the cloak will enable to pick a scrap. Note this ship is a Gankship setup vs lone ratters.
I have a spare midslot that I am unsure what to do with any Idea's A tracking disruptor is not really viable as you will not be able to go fast enough to make use of it. Sensor Booster prehaps?
Surely it can do some dmg to small ships, but there is no reason it could work really better than NOS/Neuts. Adding a capless weapon like ACs is a good deal to substitute for 1-2 NOS/Neut units, but leave all your NOS/Neuts home for a short range, un-bonused and un-supported by dmg mods in low slots weapon system is not that good...
Even 1-2 NOS/Neuts can brake a far better active tank than any 3x AC configuration possible on the pilgrim IMHO.
The dual Repper setup is there to help you keep your own cap low enough for NOS to be viable. A plate should work better than a second repper if there is no NOS to support it, as you will run out of cap charges really fast against a serious target. Than again, a serious target shouldn't go down before you cause your DPS is meh and you still have to fight within webbing range.
Loosing the webber and using 2x TDs in the mids, along with arties would make more sense IMHO for a turret approach.
|
Julio Bielsa
Amarr
Ninja Trade
Caeruleum Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.09 05:41:00 -
[539]
bump
"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" |
Reviera
|
Posted - 2008.01.09 05:49:00 -
[540]
i guess ill write in this thread to make it even longer.
i belive that curse and pilgrim need some love.
having nos nerfed was good, but the ships that rly have there bonus on nos and neuts is now not as useful as they used to be.
maybe the nerf shouldent be on curse pilgrim and the ew frig, so only ships with role on this can use them for real. other ships dont have the same efficenty.
and cpu is terrible on the pilgrim :(
|
|
|
Zhulik
Abyss Restless
Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.01.09 06:07:00 -
[541]
I like them the way they are, thank you very much :)
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.09 07:04:00 -
[542]
Originally by: Zhulik
I like them the way they are, thank you very much :)
Good for you but it seems many others arent.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Kingwood
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 00:30:00 -
[543]
Just recently came back to the game after more than a year of abstinence. Had hoped that Amarr had been given a buff in the meantime, but no, the only ships I was interested in flying have been nerfed to oblivion. (I enjoy flying solo, or with a buddy. I don't want to be forced to fly with a large gang all the time). I guess I will train up for the Sacrilege first (being one of the few decent Amarr ships... and it uses missiles...), and see whether the Pilgrim will be given a boost.
In all honesty though, I think the Sacrilege will be nerfed first. After all, a decent Amarr ship would stand out too much from the rest of the lineup. Can't have that.
Somebody slap the dev responsible for this, please.
|
Lil Mule
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 02:06:00 -
[544]
Having flown Amarr, Cladari and Minmatar, I can say that imo Amarr ships do require far more skills in order to make them function at a sub-par level. With all relevant ship skills to 5 you can get away with actually doing some combat with Amarr ships, but just dont expect to do a lot of damage, or be a real asset to your gang. Other races Ive flown dont have such strict guidlines to fly and operate the ships. Clearly CCP isnt quite sure what to do with the Amarr, and it is a race that is a bit 'unfair' in the sense that if you pick it, you can expect to spend far more time training than flying your desired ship.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 04:14:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Kingwood
In all honesty though, I think the Sacrilege will be nerfed first.
Id like to dare them do that, theyll lose half of the amarr population over the night. We dont have many working ships.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Mo Steel
Caldari
Sanguis vix Dignatio
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 04:18:00 -
[546]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Kingwood
In all honesty though, I think the Sacrilege will be nerfed first.
Id like to dare them do that, theyll lose half of the amarr population over the night. We dont have many working ships.
The Amarr destroyer makes a solid after-mission salvage eater.
-----
Want a sig made? Eve-Mail me, signatures made for 5 million isk each. |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 11:28:00 -
[547]
Originally by: Mo Steel
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Kingwood
In all honesty though, I think the Sacrilege will be nerfed first.
Id like to dare them do that, theyll lose half of the amarr population over the night. We dont have many working ships.
The Amarr destroyer makes a solid after-mission salvage eater.
i had to chuckle at that.
|
Kingwood
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 15:18:00 -
[548]
Edited by: Kingwood on 10/01/2008 15:19:35
Edited by: Kingwood on 10/01/2008 15:19:05
I am honestly thinking about just giving up on Amarr and skill either Gallente or Minmatar Cruiser to 5 also. No sense to keep betting on a dead horse. CCP Zulupark is Caldari, so not gonna choose that race.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 16:10:00 -
[549]
Originally by: Kingwood
Edited by: Kingwood on 10/01/2008 15:19:35
Edited by: Kingwood on 10/01/2008 15:19:05
I am honestly thinking about just giving up on Amarr and skill either Gallente or Minmatar Cruiser to 5 also. No sense to keep betting on a dead horse. CCP Zulupark is Caldari, so not gonna choose that race.
I cant be arsed to train another race because ccp cant balance the races. They either do it in boost patch or im out to find a new game
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.01.10 16:25:00 -
[550]
Edited by: Kingwood on 10/01/2008 16:25:36
It's not so bad for me, as I am still rather low on SPs (wasting another 20 days on Cruiser 5 sucks though, tbh). The direction CCP is taking with wanting to force everyone to fly in a gang, and make this a "true" MMO is as worrying as the continued neglect of the Amarr race as a whole. I just resubscribed, so I am gonna wait this out for a month or 2, then decide whether I am going down the Minmatar/Gallente route, or just quit for good.
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.11 13:28:00 -
[551]
I would like to add this. Its important because its how the game has played out over the last year. Last year I would fit a -2 7.5km scram on all my frigs. Reasons behind that was obviously stabs played a big part of that game. Now no frig pilot fits a 7.5km scram on their ship. Its just pointless. Before if you were tackled by a frigate in your pilgrim it was just a web and nos and that frig is doomed.
However now frigs use 20km scrams and will orbit you outside both web and nos range. To make this worse the way ceptors are these days you know longer need cpr to keep your scram running. Instead they get a scram cap bonus and rely on nano's and od's for speed, leaving your drone less likely to scare them.
Im sure someone else can explain it better but the way the game has gone now 12.5km weapons are just pointless if you are slow which the pilgrim is. Just another thing that people here havnt mentioned.
A caldari recon can jam a tackler
Gal recon can dampen a tackler.
Minmie would own a tackler
Curse could also own a tackler
Pilgrim cannot.
more proof that the pilgrim is unbalanced and needs a buff.
|
Kruel
Beyond Divinity Inc
|
Posted - 2008.01.11 15:56:00 -
[552]
I've been using a nano Pilgrim. It's good for catching frigs! Not sure it's good for anything else though.
Just end this CCP and give it a friggin range bonus already.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.14 14:05:00 -
[553]
Originally by: Kruel
I've been using a nano Pilgrim. It's good for catching frigs! Not sure it's good for anything else though.
Just end this CCP and give it a friggin range bonus already.
We dont need a frig catcher, we got inties, destroyers and sentinels for that.
---------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition I - Swift Justice |
EvilFree
Amarr
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.14 14:26:00 -
[554]
The only thing I ask to keep me happy in a Pilgrim is a boost to nos/neut range.
At present this ship is useless in gangs due to the crap range on it.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 09:10:00 -
[555]
Originally by: EvilFree
The only thing I ask to keep me happy in a Pilgrim is a boost to nos/neut range.
At present this ship is useless in gangs due to the crap range on it.
Yeah but it cant lose the nos strength bonus, that would make it utterly crappy.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 10:28:00 -
[556]
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
.
Work in progress: EvE FlashMAP |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 10:56:00 -
[557]
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 11:34:00 -
[558]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
No, because the other recons bonuses to web range, ecm and damps already allow them to operate outside of web, and indeed warp scramble/dis range: in fact thats the point.
Hence its a very valid suggestion.
(Oh and Amarr EW is Tracking Disruptors, not neut/nos which is a speciality module bonus)
C.
Originally by: Jenny Spitfire
Dehumanisation - griefers are cool and if you are not a griefer, you do not belong here.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 11:53:00 -
[559]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 15/01/2008 11:54:17
It wasn't an end all be all fix for the pilgrim, as its a skill, not a boost to the pilgrim.
tracking disruptors need fixed, as they don't work anymore
cap use for the neuts needs fixed, you can't use your bonuses and stay alive as everyone else can
and wtf is my cloaking speed skill 
edit:
oh yea, my 800 mill uber faction pilgrim, popped by a turret ship.. he only missed me once the entire fight
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 12:50:00 -
[560]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
No, because the other recons bonuses to web range, ecm and damps already allow them to operate outside of web, and indeed warp scramble/dis range: in fact thats the point.
Hence its a very valid suggestion.
(Oh and Amarr EW is Tracking Disruptors, not neut/nos which is a speciality module bonus)
C.
No amarr ew is a mix of td and nos.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
|
|
Sofring Eternus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 13:41:00 -
[561]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
There already are skills for extra ECM and Damp range, just like TD's.
Long Distance Jamming(4): 10% optimal per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Frequency Modulation(3): 10% falloff per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
---
ΞνΞ ΘΠLІΠΞ
Amarr dont need Grr... and RAWR is definately too much, but some Oomph would be nice. |
tehnomage
Amarr
Rubra Libertas Militia
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 14:35:00 -
[562]
Originally by: Zhulik
I like them the way they are, thank you very much :)
http://killboard.intrepidcrossing.org/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=2977&view=ships_weapons
Strange, I don't see you using a pilgrim in there ... maybe I'm blind or something :)
--
Someone once said about the "best pvp alliance in game", and I quote "DBP, if you can't beat them on the battlefield, beat them on the forums". |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.15 15:19:00 -
[563]
1. NOS/Neut is Amarr-specialty, but not their EW. EW is Tracking Disruptors
2. TDs don't work when in webrange, as you usually get webbed yourself there
3. yes there are Skills for ECM/Dampener/TargetPainter/Tracking Disruptor range and falloff
4. giving the Pilgrim both boni range and amonut would result in one bonus more then all other Recons
So we want to stay comfortable outside webrange, which would be given with the new Skill. At 15/16 km the Tracking Disruptors would work like a charm on Turrets.
Either that, or switching the amount for range is the only thing I can imagine that CCP may consider fixing the Pilgrim.
CCP would never give the Pilgrim amount + range bonus to NOS/Neut, as NOS/Neut is seen as a weapon and not as EW. Therefore you can read the description of the Skill Energy Emission Systems:
Operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 5% reduced capacitor need of energy emission weapons per skill level.
So as I see it, as it's supposed to be weapon, the second damage-bonus should be given to the Curse (Combat Recon Ship) and the Pilgrim should've the range as main-bonus to NOS/Neut.
I hear you cry, that you won't be able to roam around solo anymore, without the amount-bonus, but I think otherwise.
The range-bonus would add to the Tracking Disruptor Bonus, which would let you engage pretty much any Turret-Ship, while fueling your tank/speed with your NOS to some degree. NOS does work without the amount bonus, if you keep your own Cap below his levels and that actually works fine, when running some mods.
Also for gangs you become aviable option again, as you can fire your Neuts and Tracking Disruptors at comfortable range.
So I'd be actually happy with range instead of amount
.
Work in progress: EvE FlashMAP |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 01:10:00 -
[564]
At the start I wouldnt be happy if the pilgrim got the range bonus because then it would be just like the curse. It would lose its identity which is get in close.
But the range bonus would help the pilgrim out in gang instantly. Even though the curse is still one of the worst combat ships in gangs it still can be usefull. The pilgrim with that range bonus would be close to that level.
But another thing that ccp needs to look at is Tracking Disruptors. They really need to be better. As a damp and ecm can counter all other ew. The scripts really didnt need to be included in TD's. The scripts for damps was a great idea as he brought damps down the same level as TD's but all cpp did was bring TD's down even further. DUH!!
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 07:19:00 -
[565]
Originally by: Sofring Eternus
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
There already are skills for extra ECM and Damp range, just like TD's.
Long Distance Jamming(4): 10% optimal per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Frequency Modulation(3): 10% falloff per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Yeah my bad, I meant more like range bonus to web and scramble for example. It would be silly wouldnt it?
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 10:03:00 -
[566]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Sofring Eternus
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
There already are skills for extra ECM and Damp range, just like TD's.
Long Distance Jamming(4): 10% optimal per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Frequency Modulation(3): 10% falloff per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Yeah my bad, I meant more like range bonus to web and scramble for example. It would be silly wouldnt it?
I don't know for sure, would it be really bad to have Advanced Skills to improve range on Webs and Scrams?
/me likes
.
Work in progress: EvE FlashMAP |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.16 14:39:00 -
[567]
Originally by: Grytok
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Sofring Eternus
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
There already are skills for extra ECM and Damp range, just like TD's.
Long Distance Jamming(4): 10% optimal per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Frequency Modulation(3): 10% falloff per level to ECM, TP, TD, RSD
Yeah my bad, I meant more like range bonus to web and scramble for example. It would be silly wouldnt it?
I don't know for sure, would it be really bad to have Advanced Skills to improve range on Webs and Scrams?
/me likes
Increased webrange for everyone would kill inties as a shipclass. Too much that needs rebalancing if you do this.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.17 01:45:00 -
[568]
Well I lost my pilgrim yesterday. My first pilgrim lost. I fell 3 short of 100 killmails.
Sad sad day. Now I can let go.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.17 12:32:00 -
[569]
DISCLAIMER: Take this one not too serious.
High: COCD II, 3x HPL II (Scorch)
Meds: 10MN MWD II, Large Battery II, 2x Balmer Series TD, Warp Disruptor II
Lows: 2x Overdrive II, 2x Nanofiber II, CPR II
Rigs: 2x CCC
Drones: 10x Hammerhead II, 5x Valkyre II
As there is 75% Ravens/Drakes used for ratting, and all other ships equipped with either speed-setups, Heavy NOS/Neut or Drones this is just for the lulz, but...
...if you find actually a lonely slowboating ship with turrets and without Heavy NOS/Neut, this may actually work
Too bad this is only 0.00001% of the time you travel around searching for targets
.
Work in progress: EvE FlashMAP |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.01.18 16:50:00 -
[570]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
There was a good suggestion over in the Game Development section of these forums.
Advanced Energy Emission Systems (Rank 8)
Advanced operation of energy transfer array and other energy emission systems. 10% range bonus to energy emission weapons per skill level.
Skill Requirements: Energy Emission Systems LvL 5
This would give 18.9 km on a T2-NOS/Neut with max skills, and would let you stay comfortable out of web-range.
But then everyone would get range bonus on amarr ew.
Should we add advanced extra web range, ecm and damp skills aswell?
I think ccp should fix the damn ship instead.
No, because the other recons bonuses to web range, ecm and damps already allow them to operate outside of web, and indeed warp scramble/dis range: in fact thats the point.
Hence its a very valid suggestion.
(Oh and Amarr EW is Tracking Disruptors, not neut/nos which is a speciality module bonus)
C.
No amarr ew is a mix of td and nos.
Im nitpicking, but Nos isnt EW, it doesnt full under that skill bracket (iirc its engineering).
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
|
|
Juana Morlaine
|
Posted - 2008.01.20 12:48:00 -
[571]
Originally by: Cailais
No amarr ew is a mix of td and nos.
Im nitpicking, but Nos isnt EW, it doesnt full under that skill bracket (iirc its engineering).
Actually it is embarassing. Looking at the fall of Diminishing NOS pricing gives a clear example on what NOS is worth (or considered to be worth...).
No matter if NOS/Neut and TDs are EW or not - their use is more than just limited, but can also be considered broken. Pricing mirrors the current state very well...
|
Gods Coldblood
Naughty 40
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.20 14:14:00 -
[572]
I personally think all amarr pilots seem to want all their ships redone.. Each race has weaknessĘs, amarr likes to moan about theirs the most... I know some really good amarr pilots, even after some nerfs they have used their knowledge of the game and still made an effective setup whether its solo pvp or gang warfare..
I do not think any recons should have a hac tank either and i still donĘt think there supposed to be solo wtf own ships
THE WAY OF THE WARRIOR |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.20 14:17:00 -
[573]
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
I do not think any recons should have a hac tank either and i still donĘt think there supposed to be solo wtf own ships
You fail to grasp the design of pilgrim and curse. This is not something the amarr people have come up with, this is how ccp designed amarr recons and now they jacked them up without fixing it.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.20 14:39:00 -
[574]
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
I personally think all amarr pilots seem to want all their ships redone.. Each race has weaknessĘs, amarr likes to moan about theirs the most... I know some really good amarr pilots, even after some nerfs they have used their knowledge of the game and still made an effective setup whether its solo pvp or gang warfare..
I do not think any recons should have a hac tank either and i still donĘt think there supposed to be solo wtf own ships
There are enough Amarr whine threads. It is not even hard to find those. As long as you do not have any constructive addition based on facts, or arguments,... for that long please just refrain from posting here.
This is - if you had the time to read - an Amarr Recon thread. Any construcitve addition or critic welcome - Trolls please post elsewhere.
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.21 02:22:00 -
[575]
Bump so ccp doesnt miss this thread either and fix TDs for amarr.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Gods Coldblood
Naughty 40
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.21 11:19:00 -
[576]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
I personally think all amarr pilots seem to want all their ships redone.. Each race has weaknessĘs, amarr likes to moan about theirs the most... I know some really good amarr pilots, even after some nerfs they have used their knowledge of the game and still made an effective setup whether its solo pvp or gang warfare..
I do not think any recons should have a hac tank either and i still donĘt think there supposed to be solo wtf own ships
There are enough Amarr whine threads. It is not even hard to find those. As long as you do not have any constructive addition based on facts, or arguments,... for that long please just refrain from posting here.
This is - if you had the time to read - an Amarr Recon thread. Any construcitve addition or critic welcome - Trolls please post elsewhere.
haha sorry if i upset u but im not trolling, u are if u ask me!! The tank on ANY recon is their bonus to ewar, yes, EWAR.. If u fail to realise this then lol. So if i am right in thinking u want the curse to have a tank like a full tanked hac plus the use of ewar at the same time???..
U fail to understand what i was saying it was a constructive criticism, ur just hurt because u cant solo pvp in it with a 99% probability of wining aginst a good pvper....
In a small gang warfare the curse or pilgrim are still very very effective..
THE WAY OF THE WARRIOR |
Jack Jombardo
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.21 11:38:00 -
[577]
If the EW is there defence, shouldn't TD then effect missiles/rockets?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.21 11:55:00 -
[578]
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
I personally think all amarr pilots seem to want all their ships redone.. Each race has weaknessĘs, amarr likes to moan about theirs the most... I know some really good amarr pilots, even after some nerfs they have used their knowledge of the game and still made an effective setup whether its solo pvp or gang warfare..
I do not think any recons should have a hac tank either and i still donĘt think there supposed to be solo wtf own ships
There are enough Amarr whine threads. It is not even hard to find those. As long as you do not have any constructive addition based on facts, or arguments,... for that long please just refrain from posting here.
This is - if you had the time to read - an Amarr Recon thread. Any construcitve addition or critic welcome - Trolls please post elsewhere.
haha sorry if i upset u but im not trolling, u are if u ask me!! The tank on ANY recon is their bonus to ewar, yes, EWAR.. If u fail to realise this then lol. So if i am right in thinking u want the curse to have a tank like a full tanked hac plus the use of ewar at the same time???..
U fail to understand what i was saying it was a constructive criticism, ur just hurt because u cant solo pvp in it with a 99% probability of wining aginst a good pvper....
In a small gang warfare the curse or pilgrim are still very very effective..
Pilgrim effective in gang warfare? You smoking again? Curse yeah, because it has the range but not pilgrim.
You also utterly epically fail to grasp the inherent design of amarr recons that scream for a tank unlike the other recons. They differ alot from the other 3. This is something ccp came up with not us. Then ccp nerfed everything about it and now they havent fixed it.
Either they give us EW that disables every weapon system (or something as useful as long range webs) or they fix the tank capability of pilgrim regarding to nos/neut warfare.
-------------------------------------------
[Video]The Inquisition II - Vanguardian |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.21 18:27:00 -
[579]
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
*snip*
*snip*
haha sorry if i upset u but im not trolling, u are if u ask me!! The tank on ANY recon is their bonus to ewar, yes, EWAR.. If u fail to realise this then lol. So if i am right in thinking u want the curse to have a tank like a full tanked hac plus the use of ewar at the same time???..
U fail to understand what i was saying it was a constructive criticism, ur just hurt because u cant solo pvp in it with a 99% probability of wining aginst a good pvper....
In a small gang warfare the curse or pilgrim are still very very effective..
I can't solo much in 0.0 because there's 99% of the time Ravens or Drakes hunting through the belts, in which case my so uber Tracking Disruptors are useless.
I don't have a Range-Bonus like all other Force Recon Ships (Arazu = Scram-range, Rapier = Web-range, Falcon = ECM-range) so I can't engage without the risk of beeing webbed, where my so uber Tracking Disruptors would'nt do much, as I'm a rolling stone.
So you Sir are totally negating facts here, what could be seen as trolling.
Also, all other Recons, especially the Arazu with it's two boni, absolutely complimenting each other stand a chnace of getting out of a fight, if it's getting critical.
That's why the Pilgrim is in utter need of a heavy tank.
Nobody is complaining about the Curse, which can make good use of the Tracking Disruptors with NOS/Neuts working up to 35-40 km.
Pilgrims NOS/Neut has 12.6km, which is in point-blank range not gaining something by having Tracking Disruptors, which were recently "fixed" into stoneage, as they wasn't bad allready and useless against 50% of EvE's weaponsystems.
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.22 05:05:00 -
[580]
Those who say that Recons tanks are its EW are totally spot on.
But the amarr recons EW is useless to be used as a tank. The pilgrim makes life worse as your in web range. Also you dont have the flexability to go with damps like the curse as your to close anyway. I cant believe CCP nerf Tracking Disruptors. They were in line as the worst EW along with Target paiters which are very useful if used with Webs.
If anything, TD's should some how help avoid missiles, maybe a by chance system like ECM. I dont know and its really not the topic of discussion.
If you break it down TDs have to choose its bonus from range or tracking but you still have to deal with drones, missiles and not to mention all other EW.
Thats the big one above. A ship that uses tracking Disruptors still needs to deal with other forms of EW. If a ship was to get some damps on your ship or a ECM those two mods alone counter all forms of combat. It prevents EW on yourself, it prevent dmg and protects your drones.
Hello CCP, the pilgrim is totally ****** and you know it.
|
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 12:53:00 -
[581]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 23/01/2008 12:55:09
Edit: I was too direct in my first version for my taste ;)
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
I personally think all amarr pilots seem to want all their ships redone.. Each race has weaknessĘs, amarr likes to moan about theirs the most... I know some really good amarr pilots, even after some nerfs they have used their knowledge of the game and still made an effective setup whether its solo pvp or gang warfare..
I do not think any recons should have a hac tank either and i still donĘt think there supposed to be solo wtf own ships
There are enough Amarr whine threads. It is not even hard to find those. As long as you do not have any constructive addition based on facts, or arguments,... for that long please just refrain from posting here.
This is - if you had the time to read - an Amarr Recon thread. Any construcitve addition or critic welcome - Trolls please post elsewhere.
haha sorry if i upset u but im not trolling, u are if u ask me!! The tank on ANY recon is their bonus to ewar, yes, EWAR.. If u fail to realise this then lol. So if i am right in thinking u want the curse to have a tank like a full tanked hac plus the use of ewar at the same time???..
U fail to understand what i was saying it was a constructive criticism, ur just hurt because u cant solo pvp in it with a 99% probability of wining aginst a good pvper....
In a small gang warfare the curse or pilgrim are still very very effective..
1. EWAR - the issue of EWAR have been completly outlined in this thread. Simply put there is a huge difference between Amarr Recon EWAR and other races EWAR.
2. On why and what I want or suggest it would for sure help you to actually read this thread.
Constructive criticism is a form of communication in which a person tries to correct the behavior of another in a non-authoritarian way, and is generally a diplomatic approach about what another person is socially doing incorrectly. It is 'constructive' as opposed to a command or an insult and is meant as a peaceful and benevolent approach. Participatory learning in pedagogy is based on these principles of constructive criticism.
Criticism can also be a tool of antisocial behavior, such as a passive-aggressive attack.
__
- click here - |
Gods Coldblood
Naughty 40
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 14:49:00 -
[582]
Edited by: Gods Coldblood on 23/01/2008 14:51:02
Edited by: Gods Coldblood on 23/01/2008 14:50:33
well guys i think maybe i overracted abit .... I am annoyed with seeing amarr are broke threads all the time when i know amarr are actually really good race to be.. I think the film http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=688507 here really proves it..
The biggest probelm, that maybe the pilgim needs a boost but if all everyone does as a whole is wine about the race as a whole i wish u good luck with getting a boost..
I have one question tho; If the pilgrim can use a covert ops cloak do u think its fair to let it have a tank of a curse?
Im not a recon pilot really but i always thought the combat recons had a better tank/range or speed instead of the cloaking option...
THE WAY OF THE WARRIOR |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 17:46:00 -
[583]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 23/01/2008 17:48:25
Edited by: Hydrogen on 23/01/2008 17:47:27
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
well guys i think maybe i overracted abit .... I am annoyed with seeing amarr are broke threads all the time when i know amarr are actually really good race to be.. I think the film http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=688507 here really proves it..
The biggest probelm, that maybe the pilgim needs a boost but if all everyone does as a whole is wine about the race as a whole i wish u good luck with getting a boost..
I have one question tho; If the pilgrim can use a covert ops cloak do u think its fair to let it have a tank of a curse?
Im not a recon pilot really but i always thought the combat recons had a better tank/range or speed instead of the cloaking option...
Like I wrote before, this thread is not meant as an Amarr whine thread at all, but I do feel your overall pain...
Regarding the tank on a Pilgrim - first of all the opinion on this one is diverse - the least said. On a second glance there are imho valid reasons to consider such an option:
+ The Pilgrim is a close combat ship. Range heavily limits its usability to close quarter combat.
+ The Pilgrim has limited speed, thus is unable to "escape" on its own.
+ Considering the first two points, the amount of targets a Pilgrim can handle is heavily limited.
+ Considering the points so far, the Pilgrim can - even in a group/gang environment - be considered a close combat solo ship. Or at least it has similar requirements.
In group/gang environments the Pilgrim is a sitting duck - vulnerable to all ships, unable to defend at all versus non-turret weapons (drones and missiles) except for its tank. Even the secondary weapons of some ships can break a Pilgrims tank - easily with good skills. Since a lot of ships of Cruiser+ size offer such a secondary weapon set (missile slots, drones,...), the usage of a Pilgrim becomes pointless. Pointless since the risk vs. reward relation is totally out of whack.
Leaving those considerations aside, concentrating on primary turret based weapons, one might think: now it is ok. Unfortunately this does not apply. Simply since the Pilgrim operates in web range, thus enabling opponents to position themselves physically in space versus a Pilgrim, therefore negating all or almost all Tracking Disruptor effects.
All this was neglectable, when NOS could fuel a Pilgrim's tank. This does not apply anymore. As a result a drastically increased tank would help the Pilgrim in combat.
In this "food for thought" the covert ops cloak imho does not count. Simply since the reduction in range is the trade off for equipping the cloak.
Close combat ships need a mean tank (be it EWAR, resist/rep or a mix of both).
Without a mean tank, close combat ships are bound to die easily.
Ships, which die easily when they do what they are meant to do are failed designs.
Failed designs are broken ships.
...
The Pilgrim is a broken ship.
A mean tank would change that. Thats why it is imho a valid suggestion.
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 18:12:00 -
[584]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 23/01/2008 18:12:56
Originally by: Gods Coldblood
I have one question tho; If the pilgrim can use a covert ops cloak do u think its fair to let it have a tank of a curse?
I dont know how often we need to say this but here goes:
-ccp created pilgrim without range bonus to nos
-this mean pilgrim is close range ship
-this means it will take alot more damage then ANY other recon in combat
-therefor IT NEEDS MORE TANK
Why should the other recons be able to tank battleships through speed or ew but the pilgrim not?
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Kadoes Khan
|
Posted - 2008.01.23 18:56:00 -
[585]
Quote:
I am annoyed with seeing amarr are broke threads all the time when i know amarr are actually really good race to be.. I think the film http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=688507 here really proves it..
Do you see people arguing that the Armageddon is not a good ship? In fact I think it's been pointed at several times its one of the exceptions in the Amarr fleet that are actually quite powerful. This thread isn't about the Armageddon it's about the Pilgrim and to a lesser extent the curse.
-=^=-
"Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity." |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 02:13:00 -
[586]
Originally by: Kadoes Khan
This thread isn't about the Armageddon it's about the Pilgrim and to a lesser extent the curse.
Aight...
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 02:27:00 -
[587]
Originally by: Kadoes Khan
Quote:
I am annoyed with seeing amarr are broke threads all the time when i know amarr are actually really good race to be.. I think the film http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=688507 here really proves it..
Do you see people arguing that the Armageddon is not a good ship? In fact I think it's been pointed at several times its one of the exceptions in the Amarr fleet that are actually quite powerful. This thread isn't about the Armageddon it's about the Pilgrim and to a lesser extent the curse.
QFT.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
UGLYUGLY
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 06:13:00 -
[588]
Honestly if anyone touches or changes the curse I see ***** slappings in their future . I personally think it is an awesome solo, small gang boat and some what fleet boat. And as it is dose not need to be changed. I never flew it before the nos nerf, so I have no idea how much more awesome it use to be. But As it is, it is by far one of my favorite amarr ships to solo in.
As said it's cap killing powers are not really "Ewar" but it is by far the most powerful asset of the ship (in my opinion). Able to cripple ships that relay on cap.
That said I do think the pilgrim needs some love. If i had to change it, i would place the range bonus in place of the Drone DPS. Giving it less DPS but I think it will definatly make it a better/more useful boat.
These are just my opinions
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 10:40:00 -
[589]
Originally by: UGLYUGLY
Honestly if anyone touches or changes the curse I see ***** slappings in their future . I personally think it is an awesome solo, small gang boat and some what fleet boat. And as it is dose not need to be changed. I never flew it before the nos nerf, so I have no idea how much more awesome it use to be. But As it is, it is by far one of my favorite amarr ships to solo in.
As said it's cap killing powers are not really "Ewar" but it is by far the most powerful asset of the ship (in my opinion). Able to cripple ships that relay on cap.
That said I do think the pilgrim needs some love. If i had to change it, i would place the range bonus in place of the Drone DPS. Giving it less DPS but I think it will definatly make it a better/more useful boat.
These are just my opinions
In regards to Curse it is imho not so much of "adding oooomph". The Curse was versatile before the NOS nerf. It no longer is versatile - by far not as versatile as possible. A whole line of playstyles are eliminated. This esspecially applies to NOS fueled shield tanks. Also the Curse is plain short on app. 80 grid :)
I disagree on the "awesome solo part" of the Curse (see thread).
I fully agree tot he statement "small gang boat".
I 100% disagree to "fleet boat". Survivability in a real fleet ~ 0% for a Curse.
__
- click here - |
Ban Shui
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 11:25:00 -
[590]
I havent read the whole thread - too long.
I like the idea of a fairly hefty cap use bonus for energy neuts.
How about a bonus for nos that allows draining with 5% higher capacitor per level? At level 5 you could nos someone to 0 cap while at 25% cap.
|
|
|
Venetos
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 11:39:00 -
[591]
Edited by: Venetos on 29/01/2008 11:39:58
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
-ccp created pilgrim without range bonus to nos
-this mean pilgrim is close range ship
-this means it will take alot more damage then ANY other recon in combat
-therefor IT NEEDS MORE TANK
Why should the other recons be able to tank battleships through speed or ew but the pilgrim not?
QFT - Nicely put.
Also lets see some other Force Recon Class facts:
- Each and every other Force Recon has base stats that further boost both their offensive and defensive capabilities. e.g. :
Rapier is an anti-speed EW ship and it's the fastest / lightest (Agility + MWD speed) of them all, and with the smaller sig radius. Locks pretty fast too.
Falcon is an ECM EWar boat with the strongest sensor strength in its class, that surpasses all BSs
Arazu - well not THAT physically favored like the ones above, but it still can out-range most BSs locking range without any SBs and thats up-par with its bonuses.
The Pilgrim cannot out "NOS/Neut" another ship, simply cause tho it's the Cap Warfare Recon, I has a very slight cap advantage over the other Force Recons, still in can by no way be compared to a BS. The only real "advantage" in it's base stats appears to be in the PG output, tho that's absolutely mandatory due to the NOS/Neut PG requirements that lead to very tight fits PG-wise. The Pilgrim is also very CPU-limited, almost crippled compaired to the other Force Recons, and even faction fits cannot allow for 3x Balmer TD's without further sacrificing either speed, tank or NOS/Neut Capability.
Also - as mentioned before - most standard PvP fits make one or both of the Amarr Recon's "Ewar" effects go away. By using any combination of tracking boosting modules, cap-less weapons, passive shield tanking, missiles, drones etc.
So physical tanking capability is a must. Yes, DPS is a tank, and the Pilgrim gets some nice DPS compared to it's class, but that's not enough of an advantage. It's just making it even more skill intensive than any other Force Recon.
- posted with my trading alt - sorry for missing that - Diomidis
|
haq aan
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 12:03:00 -
[592]
I almost read the whole forum within 3 months or so.
Some of them should ve been mentioned before, but i wanted to post a few constructive ideas.
1- Negate Nos/capacitor formula applies on a pilgrim. (built in fix)
2- Let Pilgrim can keep draining even she is at %50 cap (built in fix)
3- %10 bonus to capacitor capacity per level (arguable)
Giving a better tank? Well Pilgrim started to need a better tank, when they remove her ability to fuel herself.
First or second one is my favorite. Ship was fine before Nos nerf, so it would be wise trying to fix Pilgrim, in the direction of new Nosferatus.
Imo, she is a Nosferatu specialist. Pilgrim deserves to use them different than others.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 12:31:00 -
[593]
Originally by: haq aan
I almost read the whole forum within 3 months or so.
Some of them should ve been mentioned before, but i wanted to post a few constructive ideas.
1- Negate Nos/capacitor formula applies on a pilgrim. (built in fix)
2- Let Pilgrim can keep draining even she is at %50 cap (built in fix)
3- %10 bonus to capacitor capacity per level (arguable)
Giving a better tank? Well Pilgrim started to need a better tank, when they remove her ability to fuel herself.
First or second one is my favorite. Ship was fine before Nos nerf, so it would be wise trying to fix Pilgrim, in the direction of new Nosferatus.
Imo, she is a Nosferatu specialist. Pilgrim deserves to use them different than others.
There are a lot of claims on how overpowered the Pilgrim once was. Actually I never got to the point, where I considered it to be true (totally different for pre nerf curse). Thus applying 1st would be an easy solution.
__
- click here - |
Aramendel
Amarr
North Face Force
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 15:37:00 -
[594]
The pilgrim got the "overpowered" status from the pre-ECM-nerf days. With 2 multispecs of doom, cloak & nos-fuelled tank it was simply too strong. But that changed now well over a year ago.
After the ECM and before the nos nerf the pilgrim was pretty balanced.
|
Zakarazor
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 15:58:00 -
[595]
Edited by: Zakarazor on 29/01/2008 16:07:11
curse
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level
Role bonus: The special capacitor systems on the amarr recons enable them to use nosferatu modules at a much higher level than normal ships.
so how about that? we give the amarr recons back the pre-nerf nos. that way they will still work and its a simple fix. no more nos domis but the amarr get some of their great ships back...
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 16:18:00 -
[596]
Originally by: Zakarazor
Edited by: Zakarazor on 29/01/2008 16:07:11
curse
Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness and 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per level.
Recon Ships Skill Bonus: 40% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer range and 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount per level
Role bonus: The special capacitor systems on the amarr recons enable them to use nosferatu modules at a much higher level than normal ships.
so how about that? we give the amarr recons back the pre-nerf nos. that way they will still work and its a simple fix. no more nos domis but the amarr get some of their great ships back...
I see outraged players, when players see the prenerf NOS Nano-Curse return...
For the Pilgrim I am fine with your suggested change to make it a pre-NOS-nerf Pilgrim. Where I love it on the Curse, there would be ****loads of Nano-Curses back in action....
__
- click here - |
Pan Zhu'Liang
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 18:14:00 -
[597]
Originally by: Ban Shui
I havent read the whole thread - too long.
I like the idea of a fairly hefty cap use bonus for energy neuts.
How about a bonus for nos that allows draining with 5% higher capacitor per level? At level 5 you could nos someone to 0 cap while at 25% cap.
this i think is an idea with potential. although i think a slightly different approach would be better. a bonus that allows NOS to function at reduced effect if your cap is higher than the target's. i'm not going to pretend to know enough about these ships to set the right % per level, but i think this addresses the main issues raised in the thread.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.01.29 23:28:00 -
[598]
As I've stated before a couple of times, we cannot give them Amarr Recons an additional bonus, as this would create imbalance, even if it actually make them more balanced compared to the other races.
I'd still say, that the Pilgrim needs the range more, then the strength to make it a viable choice as a support ship.
With 40% range instead of 20% amount, the Pilgrim could be very useful in gangs, staying out of range like the other Recons using both NOS/Neut and Tracking Disruptors.
Even without the bonus to amount, 3 longranged Medium NOS/Neut could demolish an active tank on a BC or even BS.
This would be the simpliest way to overhaul the Pilgrim without introducing new stuff.
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 00:35:00 -
[599]
Just do something !!!
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 00:55:00 -
[600]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Just do something !!!
Best post yet. We have given some great ideas and some poor ones. There are lot of options for CCP to choose if they dont wish to think for themselves. But it all comes down to this.
As Madla Said
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Just do something !!!
|
|
|
Darth Luazae
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 10:43:00 -
[601]
bump
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.01.30 20:47:00 -
[602]
Bump, read the thread ccp and fix it.
Amarr pvp Vids: Inq - I Inq - II |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.31 09:09:00 -
[603]
Originally by: Grytok
As I've stated before a couple of times, we cannot give them Amarr Recons an additional bonus, as this would create imbalance, even if it actually make them more balanced compared to the other races.
I'd still say, that the Pilgrim needs the range more, then the strength to make it a viable choice as a support ship.
With 40% range instead of 20% amount, the Pilgrim could be very useful in gangs, staying out of range like the other Recons using both NOS/Neut and Tracking Disruptors.
Even without the bonus to amount, 3 longranged Medium NOS/Neut could demolish an active tank on a BC or even BS.
This would be the simpliest way to overhaul the Pilgrim without introducing new stuff.
Ir becomes more and more obvious, that CCP cant decide at all, which role the Pilgrim should fill. As they apparently cant decide, they simply do: nothing. Only problem: doing nothing is a decision too - the worst possible if I may add...
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 01:07:00 -
[604]
I cant remember when this nos nerf patch happen but I know this thread has started 3 months ago and I know there were other pilgrim/amarr recon threads before this. This is a long time without a single bit of information of a near future fix.
|
Zinrix
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 05:01:00 -
[605]
Originally by: Grytok
DISCLAIMER: Take this one not too serious.
High: COCD II, 3x HPL II (Scorch)
Meds: 10MN MWD II, Large Battery II, 2x Balmer Series TD, Warp Disruptor II
Lows: 2x Overdrive II, 2x Nanofiber II, CPR II
Rigs: 2x CCC
Drones: 10x Hammerhead II, 5x Valkyre II
As there is 75% Ravens/Drakes used for ratting, and all other ships equipped with either speed-setups, Heavy NOS/Neut or Drones this is just for the lulz, but...
...if you find actually a lonely slowboating ship with turrets and without Heavy NOS/Neut, this may actually work
Too bad this is only 0.00001% of the time you travel around searching for targets
I've been rollin with a similar setup and it seems to work fine especially if you've got a few other recon buddies close by. A nano-Sac or Ishtar would be significantly better in just about every way, but whatever. Also, what's with the low sensor res of force recons compared to combat recons? It's frustrating.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:41:00 -
[606]
The new Dev Blog is telling us to wait another year, before they come up with some changes.
Lowering EM resist on armor and Explosive resist on shields will not help the Pilgrim at all, but at least CCP is doing something
Instead of tweaking the amarrian ships, they're making general overhauls leaving us with the same old problems while interestingly boosting other races by those general changes.
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Julius Romanus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:51:00 -
[607]
Originally by: Grytok
The new Dev Blog is telling us to wait another year, before they come up with some changes.
No its not. Since you post in english, I'll assume you can read it. Which means you're just choosing to ignore what was actually said in the devblog and zulu's subsequent post. Amarr EWAR and SHIP SPECIFIC changes are coming in the next devblogs. Go back to your cave.
|
Kali Ananda
Minmatar
Prophets Of a Damned Universe
Elemental Fury
|
Posted - 2008.02.01 18:53:00 -
[608]
Originally by: Zinrix
Originally by: Grytok
DISCLAIMER: Take this one not too serious.
High: COCD II, 3x HPL II (Scorch)
Meds: 10MN MWD II, Large Battery II, 2x Balmer Series TD, Warp Disruptor II
Lows: 2x Overdrive II, 2x Nanofiber II, CPR II
Rigs: 2x CCC
Drones: 10x Hammerhead II, 5x Valkyre II
As there is 75% Ravens/Drakes used for ratting, and all other ships equipped with either speed-setups, Heavy NOS/Neut or Drones this is just for the lulz, but...
...if you find actually a lonely slowboating ship with turrets and without Heavy NOS/Neut, this may actually work
Too bad this is only 0.00001% of the time you travel around searching for targets
I've been rollin with a similar setup and it seems to work fine especially if you've got a few other recon buddies close by. A nano-Sac or Ishtar would be significantly better in just about every way, but whatever. Also, what's with the low sensor res of force recons compared to combat recons? It's frustrating.
I've been experimenting with Heavy Pulse Laser setups as well. My DPS is much higher, and I can stay out of range of blasters and autocannons.
But I must agree with you about the low sensor resolution. Its bad enough waiting a few seconds after cloaking to start targeting, but then staring at a 5-6 sec lock time on a frigate is downright painful. I missed a kessie in a belt last night due to that.
Pilgrim needs better scan resolution Sil Vous Plait! At least on par with Curse, especially since we are already waiting for the cloak timer to cool off.
Kali Ananda
POD-U
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 09:24:00 -
[609]
Originally by: Newest Devblog
Tracking Disruptors
Finally we have added a falloff modifier to the Tracking Disruptors. The Optimal Range Disruption ARM script has been change to modify both optimal range and falloff. The reason for this change is the Tracking Disruptors are largely ineffective against blasters and auto cannons which have a high tracking speeds and large falloffs. Disrupting the optimal range does not affect them in any significant way and tracking disruption is not very effective either because of the large falloff. By allowing the Optimal Range Disruption script to affect falloff as well, Tracking Disruptors can be used effectively to reduce the range of blasters and auto cannons. Skills and bonuses that affect the effectiveness of Tracking Disruptors have been changed to also affect the falloff.
Pilgrims are fixed!!
(Please note the sarcasm)
Project: Gank - Solo Pilgrim Video |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 14:00:00 -
[610]
Edited by: Depp Knight on 02/02/2008 14:00:36
http://myeve.eve-online.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=537
They fix the apoc. Great.
They fix the omen. Great
BUT THEY ****IN DIDNT FIX THE PILGRIM
At least tracking disruptors got a boost in falloff penalty. Still wish there was no script to it. I dont see why you would use the range script in a pilgrim. Normally your at close range and still doesnt make an effect in a large battle like damps and ecm do. But at least its a start.
Still, hello dev blog, wheres the pilgrim fix?
|
|
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 16:43:00 -
[611]
The proposed changes to TDs effecting both optimal and fall off make it clear (in my view at least) that the pilgrim is deserving of a boost to nos/neut range.
Its a catch 22 situation with the pilgrim: if you want to make use of your nos/neuts you must be within web range (or so close youre running a high risk of wandering into it). If you want to make use of your EW you must be well outside of nos/neut range at which point your cap fails and you cannot produce sufficient dps vs a repping target.
Im hoping CCP considers the pilgrim in this stark light - but Im not holding my breath..
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 00:31:00 -
[612]
Originally by: Julius Romanus
Originally by: Grytok
The new Dev Blog is telling us to wait another year, before they come up with some changes.
No its not. Since you post in english, I'll assume you can read it. Which means you're just choosing to ignore what was actually said in the devblog and zulu's subsequent post. Amarr EWAR and SHIP SPECIFIC changes are coming in the next devblogs. Go back to your cave.
You fail at reading.
When CCP says, that they'll have a Dev Blog about it, it usually means, that there will be some changes maybe in 2010 or soon(tm) or in 2059, but clarly they did'nt say that there will be some changes to the Pilgrim within the next Patch.
As you can see by the changes they've made on SiSi atm, they don't have the slightest clue of what they're doing tbfh.
TD's affecting FallOff is fine however, but Amarr will not get better by changing resists, which favours MinMatar more then Amarr, or giving some ships more turrets or whatever.
Amarr needs maybe 10% more Cap and slightly decreased fitting for Energy Turrets in general, but no... CCP decides to do something totally different of what thousands players experience every day.
Way to go baby... way to go!
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.03 12:55:00 -
[613]
Originally by: Cailais
The proposed changes to TDs effecting both optimal and fall off make it clear (in my view at least) that the pilgrim is deserving of a boost to nos/neut range.
Its a catch 22 situation with the pilgrim: if you want to make use of your nos/neuts you must be within web range (or so close youre running a high risk of wandering into it). If you want to make use of your EW you must be well outside of nos/neut range at which point your cap fails and you cannot produce sufficient dps vs a repping target.
Im hoping CCP considers the pilgrim in this stark light - but Im not holding my breath..
U can either range-disrupt and receive virtually no dmg outside NOS/Neut range, or track-disrupt within NOS/Neut range - or even both...
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 00:19:00 -
[614]
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: Cailais
The proposed changes to TDs effecting both optimal and fall off make it clear (in my view at least) that the pilgrim is deserving of a boost to nos/neut range.
Its a catch 22 situation with the pilgrim: if you want to make use of your nos/neuts you must be within web range (or so close youre running a high risk of wandering into it). If you want to make use of your EW you must be well outside of nos/neut range at which point your cap fails and you cannot produce sufficient dps vs a repping target.
Im hoping CCP considers the pilgrim in this stark light - but Im not holding my breath..
U can either range-disrupt and receive virtually no dmg outside NOS/Neut range, or track-disrupt within NOS/Neut range - or even both...
Ermm...if you're using TDs outside of NOS range you'll eventually run out of cap, and without the cap reduction on your target its unlikely your drones will dent their tank. Furthermore you'll recieve reduced damage from turrets - not drones or missiles so you'll probably need to run both TDs and reppers.
And yes you can close to with nos/neut range at which point you'll most likely be webbed. As you're webbed youre transeversal will drop, and the turrets (and drones and missiles) will hit you. How you have worked out you can do both.....well Im flumoxed.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 02:24:00 -
[615]
Edited by: Diomidis on 04/02/2008 02:28:45
Originally by: Cailais
Ermm...if you're using TDs outside of NOS range you'll eventually run out of cap, and without the cap reduction on your target its unlikely your drones will dent their tank. Furthermore you'll recieve reduced damage from turrets - not drones or missiles so you'll probably need to run both TDs and reppers.
And yes you can close to with nos/neut range at which point you'll most likely be webbed. As you're webbed youre transeversal will drop, and the turrets (and drones and missiles) will hit you. How you have worked out you can do both.....well Im flumoxed.
C.
U can both disrupt range and / or tracking using 2x TDs...it's easy.
And we are talking about a Pilgrim, not a ceptor ffs...u can easily perma run 2x Balmer TD's, a T2 disruptor and 10mn AB II with basic for a recon lvl skills, while pulsing a MWD or sustaining it for quite a while is easy even with a small cap booster.
There are options after all.
Outside Nos/Neut range, 2x TD's can now effectively disrupt most short-ranged turrets with range scripts (as long as the fall-off disruption is applied), while tracking disruption is the best deal when coming in closer and vs. long range rails, beams and arties. And since you disrupt most dmg taken, MAR will not be running all the time etc.
Being webbed by your opponent is a possibility, still 2x TD's backed up by adequate skills can trouble most turret ships, while a plated or dual repped pilgrim can tank quite some dmg. 2x NOS + 1x Neuts is my personal choice. 2x Reppers + AB or 1x Repper and MWD can keep your cap low enough for the 2 NOSes to work effectively.
The MWD sig penalty is not that of a penalty vs. medium turrets, but most cruisers will be cap dry before you do, while BSs will really be troubled hitting you even when you are webbed with 2x TD's on them. Fitting a webber yourself instead of a second TD and trying to gain some distance is also an option...it's not like you insta pop when webbed under most circumstances.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 09:42:00 -
[616]
Tracking Disruptors are not really needed on a Pilgrim. You just have to get into webrange to pin your target down.
If you approach your target and you're zero meters away from it, your enemies turrets won't hit you a single time, as the game mechanics can't calculate a hit for turrets at zero distance. The formula will allways end with 0 as a result.
So there is more use of a Dual-Web, then of Tracking Disruptors. The second free slot (thats, if you had 2 TDs in your setup) can be used for whatever helps. ECM-Burst is a good choice here, as it uses lot's of cap, letting your NOSs work better, and it gives you more room to breath, as your target looses it's lock on you.
I go into webrange on purpose with the Pilgrim, because staying out of it does you no favour, as you might've noticed.
The situation would only change, if the Pilgrim would get a Range-Bonus, or if turrets would hit at zero distance.
So, as I don't see both of those happening soon(tm), you've only to avoid Missile-Boats, and Heavy-Drone users.
Missile Boats can be jammed, so there's room for some "out of the box" setups, using 2 Gravimetric Jammers
Yeah, I've finally given up waiting for some changes, and came up with something useful to fit on the Pilgrim. If it pops, because the plan didn't work... well... Pilgrim is not that expensive in the end or at least not more expensive then a HAC.
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 09:43:00 -
[617]
Just switched from "Quote" to "Reply to thread".
Somehow I am not in a flamemood today (gawd sometimes I do believe am not too bad in it). Not seein a serious Pilgrim change plain makes me sad....
__
- click here - |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:08:00 -
[618]
I see what you did there
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.04 10:31:00 -
[619]
Originally by: Grytok
Tracking Disruptors are not really needed on a Pilgrim. You just have to get into webrange to pin your target down...So there is more use of a Dual-Web, then of Tracking Disruptors. The second free slot (thats, if you had 2 TDs in your setup) can be used for whatever helps. ECM-Burst is a good choice here, as it uses lot's of cap, letting your NOSs work better, and it gives you more room to breath, as your target looses it's lock on you.
Well that's true - since I am trying to think what CCP proposes for the pilgrim, due to it's bonuses. CCP also makes it clear to us that the Pilgrim is not a solo-killer - so, I also don't think this is happening soon(tm)...
Till then, what about changing the bonuses in NOS/Neuts to reach as far as minmatar recons do with stasis, and add a "string" that makes Neuts on a pilrgim/curse kill a hefty % of it's targets cap, just like the stasis webbers cut 90% of speed GUARANTEED.
A single bonused Neut should drain a BS clean in a few circles...fair = the webber nearly stops it in a single circle.
So now the formula would be sth like:
[(Neut's base cap loss) + ship bonuses] ≤ Cap actually killed ≤ a certain % of the ships cap.
That way a single Heavy Neut should not out-cap a cap-killing specialized ship that easier than a pilgrim caps-out a BS with 3x bonuced Neuts. Surely 3-4 Heavy Unstables should drop it dead, but with single heavy neuts becoming so popular to stop roaming Vagas etc in ratting fits, and since this module matches the T2 disruptor's range, Pilrims and Curses alike should still have some edge in cap-warfare.
Multi-million faction disruptors are not the answer, and even if they where, that would be an option just for the Curse.
|
Juana Morlaine
|
Posted - 2008.02.05 10:16:00 -
[620]
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: Grytok
Tracking Disruptors are not really needed on a Pilgrim. You just have to get into webrange to pin your target down...So there is more use of a Dual-Web, then of Tracking Disruptors. The second free slot (thats, if you had 2 TDs in your setup) can be used for whatever helps. ECM-Burst is a good choice here, as it uses lot's of cap, letting your NOSs work better, and it gives you more room to breath, as your target looses it's lock on you.
Well that's true - since I am trying to think what CCP proposes for the pilgrim, due to it's bonuses. CCP also makes it clear to us that the Pilgrim is not a solo-killer - so, I also don't think this is happening soon(tm)...
Till then, what about changing the bonuses in NOS/Neuts to reach as far as minmatar recons do with stasis, and add a "string" that makes Neuts on a pilrgim/curse kill a hefty % of it's targets cap, just like the stasis webbers cut 90% of speed GUARANTEED.
A single bonused Neut should drain a BS clean in a few circles...fair = the webber nearly stops it in a single circle.
So now the formula would be sth like:
[(Neut's base cap loss) + ship bonuses] ≤ Cap actually killed ≤ a certain % of the ships cap.
That way a single Heavy Neut should not out-cap a cap-killing specialized ship that easier than a pilgrim caps-out a BS with 3x bonuced Neuts. Surely 3-4 Heavy Unstables should drop it dead, but with single heavy neuts becoming so popular to stop roaming Vagas etc in ratting fits, and since this module matches the T2 disruptor's range, Pilrims and Curses alike should still have some edge in cap-warfare.
Multi-million faction disruptors are not the answer, and even if they where, that would be an option just for the Curse.
Pilgrim is too weak to survive colse quarter combat.
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 16:15:00 -
[621]
oops, I fell and bumped the thread.
|
Dromidas Shadowmoon
Minmatar
54th Knights Templar
Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 16:53:00 -
[622]
I agree.. nerf the curse, boost the pilgrim
_______________________________________________
Minmatar will always go faster than you, get over it. |
Noisrevbus
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 18:21:00 -
[623]
Quote:
Issues:
- it is impossible to field a decent setup with NOS/Neut/Neut/HML/HML in high, MWD/Cap booster/... in mid and MAR/tank in low. It is close to impossible to field this setup with an Afterburner even without sacrificing tank/EWAR in rig slots. Setup issues arise simply due to lack of grid.
- To use its special abilities a Curse is Cap hungry and never able to use its special abilities to its fullest extent. Even jigsaw games with its own capacitor are unplayable - the least said.
The problem here, is simply based on asking too much. Most ships with a specialization give dimensions up for that role, some of these give up quite alot. While the Cap-warfare ideal may not be as specialised esp. not before the comming TD buff, it is still quite alot to ask for a ship to have mobility, omni-tank, active tank, cap injection, good weapons with damage mods, tackle and both it's EWar roles intact. So even if a Curse to a larger proportion need an allround fitting than say an ECM ship, it's still asking a bit too much in this sense and you can make a number of minor tweaks to salvage the concept.
If the weapons are hard to fit, go down in size. Many cruisers, even specialised Caldari ones, opt to get AMLs instead of HAMLs or HMLs. It allow you a nice nische role and help you with your grid issues. For much the same reason, you can throw away the BCS for more capmods and/or fitting mods, since it isn't your job to deal damage - that's just a nice perk and AMLs have the same range as your NOS/Neuts (~40km).
You already mentioned the option to Shield tank it, which is a good way to deal with the cap issues, and an approach many shield tankers with mobility opt for as well as you generally bulk-tank a shield ship that have mobility. When taking those tweaks into account the ship may surely have to make some active choices in combat, on how to run it's modules - and you may still have to think about some fitting options, but overall the Curse is still a very homely ship, especially with the TD changes since you now have the option to roam ~40km and consider which strategy would best suit augmenting your generally weaker tank with EWar.
I can see 3-4 options on how to toggle modules on and off to make such a setup cap stable as long as you have the proper skills to support it. So while the tweaks may not solve all issues, it plugs the primary issues you spoke of A) Fitting, B) Compromise toggles to save caps not being viable. I also see further compromises available in the fitting on certain utility slots to help out with a buffert for skillpoint issues.
No comments about the Droneboat at this time, beyond the fact that it is less specialized for the role and may have a much more narrow role (which on the other hand is not very uncommon for many shipclasses, with one allround better and one more narrow option). Overall, the Curse is still a great ship (at least if you come from a Caldari background into Amarr crosstraining).
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
Black-Out
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 23:27:00 -
[624]
please can we just let this ship die. its a beautiful looking ship.
dont buy it, dont fly it.
thanks.
Go Hard, or go Home.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Dark-Rising
The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 00:09:00 -
[625]
Originally by: Dromidas Shadowmoon
I agree.. nerf the curse, boost the pilgrim
Painfull I kinda agree with this. Curse sucks anyway and gets melted by pretty much anything with a cap booster and some range. Atleast give us our pilgrim back with some tanking power, it has a purpose because it can cloak. Why fly a curse when you can fly a zealot or sacri, except when you need to kill capital tanks. Yea zealot can pop inties too, you dont need a curse for it.
--------------------------------------
The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 00:51:00 -
[626]
I'm testing some setups since yesterday and ECM is working best on the Pilgrim so far, even if they're unbonussed.
I've brought my skills up to LvL 4/5 and my Multispecs have a strength of around 3 now.
I killed some Zealots and Deimos in 1vs1 situations and are to believe that pretty much every non-nano-Cruiser and BC is defeatable with the setup I'm using.
I get the target jammed 1/3 of the time with 2x Multispecs, which gives plenty of room to breath and to dry the targets cap.
So here we're back in the ECM-age
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 13:56:00 -
[627]
Personally, I've given up on trying to provide arguments about why the pilgrim needs fixed.
Project: Gank - Solo Pilgrim Video |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 14:44:00 -
[628]
Originally by: Grytok
I'm testing some setups since yesterday and ECM is working best on the Pilgrim so far, even if they're unbonussed.
I've brought my skills up to LvL 4/5 and my Multispecs have a strength of around 3 now.
I killed some Zealots and Deimos in 1vs1 situations and are to believe that pretty much every non-nano-Cruiser and BC is defeatable with the setup I'm using.
I get the target jammed 1/3 of the time with 2x Multispecs, which gives plenty of room to breath and to dry the targets cap.
So here we're back in the ECM-age
Ouch you frighten me. There is a reason why I did not raise ECM skills (can you spell Black Ops). I am all in to head into this direction, but see a nerf already inc....
__
- click here - |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 15:15:00 -
[629]
ECM was nerfed allready a while ago, so I don't think CCP is going to nerf it again soon(tm).
If anything, then they're nerfing Target Painters next
.
CCP gave us shiny new graphics. Too bad they removed Anti Aliasing for me :\ |
Raxxius Maelstrom
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 15:29:00 -
[630]
Originally by: Grytok
ECM was nerfed allready a while ago, so I don't think CCP is going to nerf it again soon(tm).
If anything, then they're nerfing Target Painters next
Dunno, I could see them nerfin ECM as it's still the most powerful ewar system by a long shot.
Maybe scripting it like damps, so one breaks locks and the other prevents locking for 20 seconds?
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 15:39:00 -
[631]
CCP need to stop with the nerf bat and start with the boost bat. A good start would be balancing EW mods. Apart from Warp scrams and webs ECM is now the number EW module and working as intended. ECM is now followed by Damps since the nerf which is lagging behind more so now. And a long way off from those 2 is Target painters then tracking disruptors and even further behind is linking mods. eg Sensor Booster linking. Or whatever they are called. Has anyone actually used linking mods?
Anyway balance EW and while you at it CCP. Boost the pilgrim :P. IĘm serious to. That tongue is me spitting at you. FIX THE DAMN PILGRIM!!
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.10 16:15:00 -
[632]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 10/02/2008 16:15:16
The Pilgrim is perfectly balanced, see for yourself:
2008.02.05 11:58:00
Victim: Feng Schui
Alliance: NONE
Corp: The Ninja Coalition
Destroyed: Pilgrim
System: xxx
Security: 0.0
Damage Taken: 63719
Involved parties:
Name: xxx
Security: -3.5
Alliance: xxx
Corp: xxx
Ship: Megathron
Weapon: Neutron Blaster Cannon II
Damage Done: 39752
Name: xxx
Security: -9.9
Alliance: NONE
Corp: xxx
Ship: Unknown
Weapon: Heavy Missile Launcher II
Damage Done: 17065
Name: xxx
Security: 0.5
Alliance: NONE
Corp: xxx
Ship: Absolution
Weapon: Heavy Pulse Laser II
Damage Done: 5187
Name: xxx
Security: -0.5
Alliance: xxx
Corp: xxx
Ship: Sleipnir
Weapon: 425mm AutoCannon II
Damage Done: 1092
Name: xxx
Security: 0.2
Alliance: xxx
Corp: xxx
Ship: Unknown
Weapon: Heavy Pulse Laser II
Damage Done: 623
Destroyed items:
Balmer Series Targeting Inhibitor I
Cap Booster 400, Qty: 17 (Cargo)
Warp Disruptor II
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Auxiliary Nano Pump I
Stasis Webifier II
Hammerhead II, Qty: 4 (Drone Bay)
Armor Thermic Hardener II
Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive
Medium Capacitor Booster II
Valkyrie II, Qty: 2 (Drone Bay)
Ancillary Current Router I
Dropped items:
Nanite Repair Paste, Qty: 395 (Cargo)
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Medium Nosferatu II
Armor Kinetic Hardener II
Hammerhead II (Drone Bay)
Medium Energy Neutralizer II, Qty: 2
Standard Exile Booster (Cargo)
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Valkyrie II, Qty: 3 (Drone Bay)
Medium Armor Repairer II
Optimal Range Disruption
=========================
We just won't mention that this was on SISI, and I have a set of high grade slave implants, and it was actually 2 seperate fights (warped out, repped, grabbed more boosters, then dueled a megathron). kk?
pilgrim is FINE i tell you, it is the best ship ever.
/sarcasm
Project: Gank - Solo Pilgrim Video |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 17:09:00 -
[633]
Originally by: Feng Schui
hey, look at that, once again I lost the battle in cap warfare, against a non-cap warfare specialized ship. Isn't that just amazing? I mean, seriously. He was using neuts, and repping, and using ewar, while I was using a NOS + boosters, and couldn't maintain enough cap to run my warp disruptor, let alone anything else.
This (except your posted km as a test looks "arguable")
__
- click here - |
Lithel
Amarr
The Soviet Galactic Union
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 17:40:00 -
[634]
Yup, it needs fixing. That's all there is too it. It is and will always be on the bottom of CCP's list of things to do.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 09:06:00 -
[635]
Funny stuff: we had so much talk about EWAR and Tracking Disruptors. Also we had so many "wannabee" experts knowing it better than us about "EWAR tanking".
It comes to no suprise, that our well-thought out statements are true:
"Finally we have added a falloff modifier to the Tracking Disruptors. The Optimal Range Disruption ARM script has been change to modify both optimal range and falloff. The reason for this change is the Tracking Disruptors are largely ineffective against blasters and auto cannons which have a high tracking speeds and large falloffs. Disrupting the optimal range does not affect them in any significant way and tracking disruption is not very effective either because of the large falloff. By allowing the Optimal Range Disruption script to affect falloff as well, Tracking Disruptors can be used effectively to reduce the range of blasters and auto cannons. Skills and bonuses that affect the effectiveness of Tracking Disruptors have been changed to also affect the falloff. "
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 11:01:00 -
[636]
Test it on sisi before you get too happy about it.
-Videos-
Project:Gank
-Guides-
Pilgrim Guide |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 11:14:00 -
[637]
Still does not help against Missiles, as well as your cap-warfare leaves Missiles unimpressed, as they don't need cap to fire.
During the reboot yesterday I tested on with my ECM-setup and had a good 1vs1 with a Myrmidon, which I lost. But it was very very close call there. 1 more jam-cyccle and I would've won
Ganked another Zealot and a Hurricane, which died without me getting to deep into trouble there.
I prefer 2 Jammers + 5x EC-600 (Drones to get out, when things go wrong), and if I'm lucky enough, then I get the target jammed 1/2 of the time, which leaves plenty of room to breath.
So I don't really see, how Tracking Disruptors would work better then ECM tbh.
Next thing I wanna try, if I find some pilots on SiSi, are Ratting-Ravens
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.14 12:10:00 -
[638]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Test it on sisi before you get too happy about it.
I am not happy about the "boost" at all. When you look at my quote, you will see, that I quoted the statement of the shortcommings of Tracking Disruptors.
First of all: it is important, that the problems are acknowledged. The proposed changes infact once again proove a lack of understanding in game balance...
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.15 08:36:00 -
[639]
Originally by: Grytok
Still does not help against Missiles, as well as your cap-warfare leaves Missiles unimpressed, as they don't need cap to fire.
During the reboot yesterday I tested on with my ECM-setup and had a good 1vs1 with a Myrmidon, which I lost. But it was very very close call there. 1 more jam-cyccle and I would've won
Ganked another Zealot and a Hurricane, which died without me getting to deep into trouble there.
I prefer 2 Jammers + 5x EC-600 (Drones to get out, when things go wrong), and if I'm lucky enough, then I get the target jammed 1/2 of the time, which leaves plenty of room to breath.
So I don't really see, how Tracking Disruptors would work better then ECM tbh.
Next thing I wanna try, if I find some pilots on SiSi, are Ratting-Ravens
Back by today, so I got some time to do a few runs myself...
__
- click here - |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 11:57:00 -
[640]
*bump*
Im still waiting CCP for you to fix the pilgrim, quite possibly the most useless T2 ship in the entire game.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
|
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 17:55:00 -
[641]
C'mon CCP, alittle love for the Pilgrim, pretty please
.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.02.25 18:27:00 -
[642]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 25/02/2008 18:28:32
Fix pilgrim.
Why?
People see pilgrim on scanner: "haha, well just gank it and thats it"
People see falcon on scanner: "**** we had upper hand but now we need to abort, no way we can reach the falcon and it just popped up when we started fighting"
--------------------------------------
The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 12:05:00 -
[643]
Thread on Page 14
.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 13:25:00 -
[644]
Yeh I take the blame for the non bump. I am just over it and just believe the pilgrim will suck forever. Its a RIP ship now.
A rapier will win a web battle
The arazu will win a dampening battle.
A falcon will win a ecm battle and can win all other ew battles.
A pilgrim cannot win a cap warfare battle. A domi is more deadly at that. Has more range, more dps and more tank and can even be fitted to be faster.
Now to take that into consideration. Put the pilgrim as a close range, even web range ship, with poor tank, poor cap, low dps, slow speed, crap EW and you get a broken ship.
WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT CCP.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 15:54:00 -
[645]
CCP doesnt seem to be interested and obviously the "balancing team" really does suck. You call it flaming? Oooook here we go with facts about the "balancing team":
1. Pilgrim - well this thread covers it nicely.
2. Black Ops - those didnt come prenerfed, but "hell-"nerfed, anyway... (limited DPs, poor resist increase, limited Jump Fuel cargo, limited cap booster cargo - where cap boosters are needed, scan res reduction due to cloak,...)
3. Omen still has similar dmg potential to zealot
4. Apoc with projectiles wins vs Apoc with lasers
5. ...
Well balancing in EvE right now sucks?
__
- click here - |
Amira Shadowsong
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.03.04 16:48:00 -
[646]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Yeh I take the blame for the non bump. I am just over it and just believe the pilgrim will suck forever. Its a RIP ship now.
A rapier will win a web battle
The arazu will win a dampening battle.
A falcon will win a ecm battle and can win all other ew battles.
A pilgrim cannot win a cap warfare battle. A domi is more deadly at that. Has more range, more dps and more tank and can even be fitted to be faster.
Now to take that into consideration. Put the pilgrim as a close range, even web range ship, with poor tank, poor cap, low dps, slow speed, crap EW and you get a broken ship.
WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT THAT CCP.
QFT.
FIX PILGRIM. ITS MORE BROKEN THEN THE EAGLE THAT DID RECIEVE A BOOST.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Hedonistic Imperative
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 12:37:00 -
[647]
Originally by: Hydrogen
CCP doesnt seem to be interested and obviously the "balancing team" really does suck. You call it flaming? Oooook here we go with facts about the "balancing team":
1. Pilgrim - well this thread covers it nicely.
2. Black Ops - those didnt come prenerfed, but "hell-"nerfed, anyway... (limited DPs, poor resist increase, limited Jump Fuel cargo, limited cap booster cargo - where cap boosters are needed, scan res reduction due to cloak,...)
3. Omen still has similar dmg potential to zealot
4. Apoc with projectiles wins vs Apoc with lasers
5. ...
Well balancing in EvE right now sucks?
The current team couldn't balance a set of scales tbh. No dev input unless you happen to fly gallente or a carrier. I mean what do these guys do all day??
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 14:31:00 -
[648]
Yeh, seeing the eagle which is fine for a sniping support killer get a little buff and seeing the pilgrim still being a piece of **** that it is, makes me sad.
|
Ammath
Amarr
Mentis Fidelis
R-I-P
|
Posted - 2008.03.05 16:25:00 -
[649]
I say we start a new petition to just delete the Pilgrim from the game database... its a faster, less painful process than just being ignored for six months. I mean if Amarr are not supposed to have ewar and are merely supposed to be direct damage laser boats then just delete every Amarr ship that does anything but DPS. It will save database room on the servers, might improve overall eve performance a bit.
Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 01:26:00 -
[650]
We didnt get involved in the boost patch. *sigh*
|
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 20:12:00 -
[651]
bump, so this piece of crap ship gets buffed next patch together with the AFs.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Sean Faust
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 22:12:00 -
[652]
So let me get this straight... You're complaining that a ship designed to function solely as a SUPPORT ship cant be a solopwnmobile?
Wow.. I'm shocked
NONE of the ewar ships were designed to be "solo" pvp ships, or even high damage ships. None of them were ever designed or intended for use as anything more than SUPPORT. Understand this and you'll see that they aren't as broken as you might think.
|
Endless Subversion
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 22:17:00 -
[653]
Originally by: Sean Faust
So let me get this straight... You're complaining that a ship designed to function solely as a SUPPORT ship cant be a solopwnmobile?
Wow.. I'm shocked
NONE of the ewar ships were designed to be "solo" pvp ships, or even high damage ships. None of them were ever designed or intended for use as anything more than SUPPORT. Understand this and you'll see that they aren't as broken as you might think.
Was that a troll bump?
<--- Real bump.
Self Destruct & LogOffs |
Riaz Qaadir
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 22:56:00 -
[654]
I agree something is needed for the Pilgrim, but i'm not sure if there is an issue with the Curse with its combination of mobility and ability to alpha a ships cap.
Pilgrim I would probably try to improve the cap warfare parts of the ship by doing:
1) Add ship role bonus reducing cap use of neuts.
2a) Then either increase the amount bonus of nos/neuts
or
2b) Change the bonus to ROF so that you increase the chance of hitting a nos cycle when they have more cap than you or neuting before they have chance to use all the cap from a cap booster.
Not sure if this is enough but I think its a good starting point to improving the Pilgrim.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 23:33:00 -
[655]
Originally by: Riaz Qaadir
I agree something is needed for the Pilgrim, but i'm not sure if there is an issue with the Curse with its combination of mobility and ability to alpha a ships cap.
Pilgrim I would probably try to improve the cap warfare parts of the ship by doing:
1) Add ship role bonus reducing cap use of neuts.
2a) Then either increase the amount bonus of nos/neuts
or
2b) Change the bonus to ROF so that you increase the chance of hitting a nos cycle when they have more cap than you or neuting before they have chance to use all the cap from a cap booster.
Not sure if this is enough but I think its a good starting point to improving the Pilgrim.
The fix for pilgrim and curse is easy. Give them a bit higher neut bonus per level and change pilgrims damage bonus to a range bonus.
THIS = AMARR RECONS FIXED once and for all.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 23:34:00 -
[656]
Originally by: Sean Faust
So let me get this straight... You're complaining that a ship designed to function solely as a SUPPORT ship cant be a solopwnmobile?
Wow.. I'm shocked
NONE of the ewar ships were designed to be "solo" pvp ships, or even high damage ships. None of them were ever designed or intended for use as anything more than SUPPORT. Understand this and you'll see that they aren't as broken as you might think.
Support ship with 12km neuts? You fail.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Vrabac
Amarr
Zawa's Fan Club
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 23:45:00 -
[657]
Originally by: Riaz Qaadir
2b) Change the bonus to ROF so that you increase the chance of hitting a nos cycle when they have more cap than you or neuting before they have chance to use all the cap from a cap booster.
This would murder your own cap when using neutralizers, with consumption bonus or no. In my experience best thing is to drop nos altogether.
IMO first and foremost problem of pilgrim (and curse in connection) is it's utterly useless as an EW platform. Tracking disruptors in their present form are a joke, to say it mildly. Want to cripple a ship? Jam it. Jammed ships dont shoot, dont send drones, dont web, dont scram, dont fire missiles (yes yes FOF and what if drones are already sent but we all know it's bs). So use a falcon/rook.
What is curse good for? IMO only place where cap killing potential is a good thing is in a small fight, meaning solo or very small gang. A gang that has 2-3 gank BS or even HACs will rip it's typical target to shreds much faster than curse can work on it's cap. So what's the point? Hey guys, I'm your gang's recon ship and I'll make sure all those guys are aware that if they lived 1 minute longer they'd die dry. This means curse's and pilgrim's cap killing potential are basically useless in a gang, not even a very big gang. Now lets put some background into the discussion and keep in mind we are talking about AMARR ships. That are supposed to operate in huge groups overwhelming ther opponents. While this is rather well depicted in battleships and most dmg dealing ships, with their ability to plate and equip several heatsinks giving them ability to outlast and outdamage their dual repping solopwnmobile gallente opponents in bigger fights, when you look at recons it's just funny.
As I already said, tracking disruptors are a joke. And again, the bigger the fight the bigger the joke they are. "Don't worry guys I'm tracking disrupting that guy so he's not hitting you 100% but only 70% by using all my X (not a lot given the mid slot issues) TDs on him and everyone else is having a field day shooting you!" Great ain't it? And again only really effective usage can be immagined in some sort of very small fight where each dps counts, also in case where smaller ships are fighting bigger turret ships. Again, all very much non-amarrish scenarios. Hell it sounds more like something tree hugging freedom shouting william wallace wannabes would use.
These 2 things combined mean that both curse and pilgrim are in trouble. Pilgrim more because of it's range issues, but both ships are crap in a very similar way.
In my oppinion these ships need their EW capabilities boosted, and a lot. They serve no purpose in most gangs, or serve a very limited one that someone else can do better. Recon ship should be able to support the rest of the gang using its EW, and that's something curse and pilgrim simply don't do. With this im not referring to cap warfare, but to proper EW, in this case tracking disruptors. Scripts literally murdered these modules, just as they did with more than few others. Drop the scripts would be best thing to do in my oppinion but since I doubt it's going to happen I can only suggest to SOMEHOW boost that poor excuse for electronic warfare. Yes I heared about faloff modifier but just that is not enough. Make them CRIPPLE a turret ship. Keep in mind they still wont work on missile and drone boats, neither will they prevent a turret ship from webbing, scramming, neutralizing, doing it's EW etc etc. So make them render turret ships damage almost non existant. Would give amarr recons a role.
|
Firkragg
PREDATORS OF DESTRUCTION
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 23:49:00 -
[658]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Sean Faust
So let me get this straight... You're complaining that a ship designed to function solely as a SUPPORT ship cant be a solopwnmobile?
Wow.. I'm shocked
NONE of the ewar ships were designed to be "solo" pvp ships, or even high damage ships. None of them were ever designed or intended for use as anything more than SUPPORT. Understand this and you'll see that they aren't as broken as you might think.
Support ship with 12km neuts? You fail.
Agreed pilgrim cant do much solo anymore and its rubbish in gangs due to its small engagement range.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 23:57:00 -
[659]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 11/03/2008 23:57:11
Originally by: Firkragg
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Sean Faust
So let me get this straight... You're complaining that a ship designed to function solely as a SUPPORT ship cant be a solopwnmobile?
Wow.. I'm shocked
NONE of the ewar ships were designed to be "solo" pvp ships, or even high damage ships. None of them were ever designed or intended for use as anything more than SUPPORT. Understand this and you'll see that they aren't as broken as you might think.
Support ship with 12km neuts? You fail.
Agreed pilgrim cant do much solo anymore and its rubbish in gangs due to its small engagement range.
Exactly and I dont understand why ccp doesnt fix it with a fix that so easy to make:
-INCREASE NEUT/NOS BONUS PERCENTAGE PER LEVEL ON BOTH RECONS
-CHANGE PILGRIMS DRONE DAMAGE BONUS FOR A NEUT/NOS RANGE BONUS LIKE THE CURSE
Its as simple as that and both curse and pilgrim will then be inline with minmatar and caldari recons Id say.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 00:08:00 -
[660]
As we all saw in the tournament during the last two weeks, the Curse isn't to bad in small skirmishes, as it can help to overcome a basically stronger opponent by killing it's tanking-abilities. Ships that need cap to shoot, are also heavy influenced by a Curse in a small engagement 5 vs. 5.
Tracking Disrupters do work in a small engagement also rather well, but then again only against Turret-Paltforms.
If in that last fight, there would've been Ravens instead of Megathrons, the Ruptures would've lost for sure.
So the Curse only works in very few situations and can make use of the range-bonus it gets. Also, the only viable option for flying a Curse is the nano-setup.
The Pilgrim don't have the range like a Curse, which forces you to engage within web-range, where you're a dead Pilgrim against a battleship within a few seconds. A webbed target isn't really hard to track down, even for large turrets.
So the Pilgrim won't even work in small engagements against a bigger target, as you can be sure beeing called primary.
Only thing you can do in a Pilgrim atm is sitting cloaked somewhere. But this is doable in a T1-frigate as well at a much cheaper price-tag.
Scouting is not a real option either in a Pilgrim, as you can't fit the Pilgrim to do good speed, even with 5 Low-Slots. A Rapier or Arazu will be much more faster with less low-slots, and much better EW-boni.
So yeah, when can we expect to get the Pilgrim worthwile flying again?
.
|
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 00:13:00 -
[661]
Originally by: Grytok
...
Still even the curse needs a bit better neut efficiency, pilgrim also. And pilgrim needs range instead of damage bonus. Thats it. Why doesnt anyon fix this? Its such an easy fix.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 00:13:00 -
[662]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 11/03/2008 23:57:11
Originally by: Firkragg
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Sean Faust
So let me get this straight... You're complaining that a ship designed to function solely as a SUPPORT ship cant be a solopwnmobile?
Wow.. I'm shocked
NONE of the ewar ships were designed to be "solo" pvp ships, or even high damage ships. None of them were ever designed or intended for use as anything more than SUPPORT. Understand this and you'll see that they aren't as broken as you might think.
Support ship with 12km neuts? You fail.
Agreed pilgrim cant do much solo anymore and its rubbish in gangs due to its small engagement range.
Exactly and I dont understand why ccp doesnt fix it with a fix that so easy to make:
-INCREASE NEUT/NOS BONUS PERCENTAGE PER LEVEL ON BOTH RECONS
-CHANGE PILGRIMS DRONE DAMAGE BONUS FOR A NEUT/NOS RANGE BONUS LIKE THE CURSE
Its as simple as that and both curse and pilgrim will then be inline with minmatar and caldari recons Id say.
Nah, don't do away with the Drone-bonus, to give it a range bonus. Simply switch the NOS/Neut-amonut bonus for the range-bonus, as it will do just fine this way.
I've done the math, and you'll be able to fuel your MWD or a Medium T2 Rep without the boni, sucking the target dry over time.
This would be much more appealing to me, instead of cloaked nano-Curse without damage-output.
.
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 00:16:00 -
[663]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
...
Still even the curse needs a bit better neut efficiency, pilgrim also. And pilgrim needs range instead of damage bonus. Thats it. Why doesnt anyon fix this? Its such an easy fix.
The Curse is absolutely fine if fitted right. You can run a MWD, Scram and 3x Med Neuts without fitting a CapBooster.
.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 01:53:00 -
[664]
Edited by: Depp Knight on 12/03/2008 01:53:48
Originally by: Grytok
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Grytok
...
Still even the curse needs a bit better neut efficiency, pilgrim also. And pilgrim needs range instead of damage bonus. Thats it. Why doesnt anyon fix this? Its such an easy fix.
The Curse is absolutely fine if fitted right. You can run a MWD, Scram and 3x Med Neuts without fitting a CapBooster.
After looking into some setups I agree. The curse even though has been nerfed hard and isnĘt the same ship can still be very useful if you adapt. However its impossible to adapt to the pilgrim as a combat ship. Yes it can still pop cynos and set up on targets and you can come up with a EW set-up where you can hold down a single target effectively before you fleet arrives but its all limited to just that role.
My opinion is that Target painters and Tracking disruptors do need a boost because the best EW in the game are, Scrams, Web, ECM and Damps. What can counter all ew in ECM and this is why its number one. Not to mention the range of ECM ships are amazing, infact you can see a caldari recon jamming you 200 clicks away.
Damps are still useful and got keep a ECM ship at bay. Webs of course are insta kill for anything smaller than you while scrams are a must. The thing is Target Disruptors are only used in limited situations and even then its not effective. Lets face it a ECM or Damp can be just as effective on all ships and sizes. TD's are only effective in larger ships where tracking does become an issue.
A good start would be that Tracking disruptors causes a dysfunction in drone usage. Which means if you are being tracking disruptor your drones cannot be used. That way Tracking disruptors can be used in an unusual and most importantly itĘs a mod that can only be used in this situation.
|
Amira Shadowsong
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 08:42:00 -
[665]
Bump for fix.
|
SirDanceAlot
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 12:46:00 -
[666]
Can we please get a range bonus instead of a damage bonus on our pilgrims please?
|
haq aan
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 13:12:00 -
[667]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
And pilgrim needs range instead of damage bonus. Thats it. Why doesnt anyon fix this? Its such an easy fix.
this. /signed :]
My god! I agree with Lyria! From now on,I ll be cursed with ' Greater spell of Nerf Minmatar '
haq o/
|
Jaketh Ivanes
Do Or Die And Live Or Try
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 13:29:00 -
[668]
I just have 1 question.
If the Pilgrim got the wanted bonus, would you ever fly a Curse then?
|
Amira Shadowsong
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 13:31:00 -
[669]
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
I just have 1 question.
If the Pilgrim got the wanted bonus, would you ever fly a Curse then?
So what? No one flies the rook either. If ccp want the combat recons to be more popular they need to punish the cloaking ones with more then just a slight damage loss.
This is no reason to not give pilgrim a range bonus. If you think curse will be unwanted because of this youll need to nerf pretty much all other force recons aswell to get inline with pilgrim. And I dont think anyone wants that...
|
Jaketh Ivanes
Do Or Die And Live Or Try
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 13:37:00 -
[670]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
I just have 1 question.
If the Pilgrim got the wanted bonus, would you ever fly a Curse then?
So what? No one flies the rook either. If ccp want the combat recons to be more popular they need to punish the cloaking ones with more then just a slight damage loss.
This is no reason to not give pilgrim a range bonus. If you think curse will be unwanted because of this youll need to nerf pretty much all other force recons aswell to get inline with pilgrim. And I dont think anyone wants that...
Then let us fix the curse by giving it a cloak bonus so it can fit covert ops cloaks. Would you then fly Pilgrims ever?
|
|
|
Amira Shadowsong
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 13:39:00 -
[671]
Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 17/03/2008 13:40:42
Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 17/03/2008 13:40:25
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Then let us fix the curse by giving it a cloak bonus so it can fit covert ops cloaks. Would you then fly Pilgrims ever?
Did you even understand my post?
There is no reason to not give pilgrim a range bonus because ALL other force recons have it aswell. If you got a problem with force recon vs combat recon then its a seperate problem not unique to pilgrim and curse.
The curse also would do more damage then the pilgrim even if pilgrim got range bonus. So it would be just like all other recons. You lose a bit of dps when getting the cloaked one. So what?
No one said, give pilgrim range bonus without removing drone damage.
|
SirDanceAlot
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 14:22:00 -
[672]
Give us range on pilgrim instead of damage! FIX PILGRIM!
|
Pax Tranquilitae
Grey Technology Research
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 15:49:00 -
[673]
Greetings,
I have been watching this thread ever since its creation and witnessed it develop from a source of a number of rational suggestions into a joint and common cry of desperation.
Curb your emotions just for a moment to notice, just how much the nature of this very thread has changed into the negative.
So much to the introduction - now to actually contribute...
CCP have stated they do not wish to turn a "fixed" Pilgrim into a cloaking Curse - a range bonus for the Pilgrim isn't happening and to be frank and contrary to the currently most popular idea for the "fix" I completely agree with said motion. Giving the Pilgrim range would render the Curse obsolete except for those, who prefer a pitch black ship to a -good- ship.
The concept of point blank battle makes the Pilgrim so excitingly unique and if you could move your attitude away from fighting to win towards fighting to get a jolly good fight just for a moment I'm quite certain you too would agree that giving the Pilgrim range isn't the most desirable way to "fix" it. Although, frankly, possibly the easiest - current Curse pilots wouldn't even need to change their fighting style, they'd just need to get used to the function of a new module in their highs.
Jokes aside, an easy fix is never worthwhile and to preserve the Pilgrim's unique style of play we might want to concentrate on wanting to see it excell at what it does poorly right now. Competitively fight at its current range.
The ideas are all there in the previous posts, so I won't deliver anything new.
It is not the lack of range that killed the Pilgrim for the lot of you, you know much better than me that it used to be an awesome ship before the Nos nerf, because it was able to tank in its range of engagement. I, for one, would -love- to see it regain this ability. While not through feeding dual reps with Nos anymore due to reasons we all know about, but through resist/hit point/whatever boost to give it its survivability back, it might actually start to shine again for those who dared to commit to their fights -back then- as well.
It's all been said before and all credits go to everyone who came up with valid suggestions. Now, how about we put our killboard ambitions back where they belong and try to actually help the ship again? :)
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 15:56:00 -
[674]
Sirdancealt, you sir, are a complete newb. I refuse to have my drone damage removed so that i can nos/nuet 25 more km. I laugh at everyone of you whinners who cant fly a pilgrim properly. I have adapted my style with the pilgrim and now have a ton of fun killing with it. Im not going to tell you a setup because the whinners here dont deserve to hear how simple it is, and how effective the pilgrim is when you hunt SOLO (yea I said solo).
Pilgrim is not perfect, and it's not even on the same page as other force recons, but dont you dare remove my only damage bonus for range with a pilgrim.
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 16:04:00 -
[675]
Sorry for the insults, I was very angry that people would suggest removing drone bonus from the pilgrim ( which is based on the arbitrator, the only drone ship the amarr have)
|
SirDanceAlot
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 16:49:00 -
[676]
Originally by: Pax Tranquilitae
Giving the Pilgrim range would render the Curse obsolete except for those, who prefer a pitch black ship to a -good- ship.
If you think range bonus on rapiers webs DONT obsolete huginn youre dead wrong.
If you think falcons DONT obsolete rooks because of basically zero drawback youre dead wrong.
If you think arazus DONT obsolete lachesis' youre dead wrong.
CCP has already screwed over the combat recons because non of them have enough up sides to compensate for the lack of a cloak.
The only case were this has been true is pilgrim vs curse but no one cared because both owned and pilgrim could tank and neut at same time in its limited range. It was ok back then.
Now they nerfed nos to the ground without fixing pilgrim.
THERE IS NO REASON TO DENY PILGRIM A RANGE BONUS. IF YOU DENY PILGRIM A RANGE BONUS BECAUSE IY WOULD OBSOLETE THE CURSE YOU NEED TO REMOVE THE RANGE BONUSES ON ALL OTHER RECONS.
|
Shira Rayborn
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.03.17 21:24:00 -
[677]
Originally by: SirDanceAlot
If you think range bonus on rapiers webs DONT obsolete huginn youre dead wrong.
If you think falcons DONT obsolete rooks because of basically zero drawback youre dead wrong.
If you think arazus DONT obsolete lachesis' youre dead wrong.
CCP has already screwed over the combat recons because non of them have enough up sides to compensate for the lack of a cloak.
The only case were this has been true is pilgrim vs curse but no one cared because both owned and pilgrim could tank and neut at same time in its limited range. It was ok back then.
Now they nerfed nos to the ground without fixing pilgrim.
THERE IS NO REASON TO DENY PILGRIM A RANGE BONUS. IF YOU DENY PILGRIM A RANGE BONUS BECAUSE IY WOULD OBSOLETE THE CURSE YOU NEED TO REMOVE THE RANGE BONUSES ON ALL OTHER RECONS.
This. Fix pilgrim, there are no excuses.
|
SirDanceAlot
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 01:53:00 -
[678]
Since all no-sayers are gone from this thread after losing every argument can we now have that pilgrim fix, ccp?
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 03:41:00 -
[679]
Signed. Enough is enough. There are some great ideas in this thread. Its really about picking which one. A simple changed like the pilgrim losing its dmg bonus for nos/neut range is one of them.
Cannot be any simplier than that.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:01:00 -
[680]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Signed. Enough is enough. There are some great ideas in this thread. Its really about picking which one. A simple changed like the pilgrim losing its dmg bonus for nos/neut range is one of them.
Cannot be any simplier than that.
/signed.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
|
|
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:29:00 -
[681]
If the Pilgrim lost it's drone damage bonus in favour of a range bonus, this forum would be full of people complaining that it had been nerfed and could no longer kill anything.
And they'd have a very good point.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
arbalesttom
Glauxian Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:44:00 -
[682]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
If the Pilgrim lost it's drone damage bonus in favour of a range bonus, this forum would be full of people complaining that it had been nerfed and could no longer kill anything.
And they'd have a very good point.
/signed, i bet this will happen when this proposed 'fix' (swapping the drone damage bonus for nos/neut range bonus), people coming to the forums whining about they cant kill anything with it. And then? Going back to the forums with 'the pilgrim cant kill anything, boost it' stuff?
Man im happy ccp has to decide wether anything will be 'fixed' about this ship. I know the range sucks, but yeah, not every ship is a long range ship (just like alot of gallente ships), so i guess you just have to deal with it.
***Sig***
Originally by: Cpt Branko
That is a JoJo, a forum troll used by Amarr whiners.
If real men fly amarr, what does a nbermensch fly then? ---> Gallente ^(>_<)^ |
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 11:54:00 -
[683]
Originally by: Rodj Blake
If the Pilgrim lost it's drone damage bonus in favour of a range bonus, this forum would be full of people complaining that it had been nerfed and could no longer kill anything.
And they'd have a very good point.
Problem is more that the recons arent balanced between eachother.
A rapier can do around 270dps while a pilgrim (with the damage bonus) only reaches 238dps.
And no, you cant count high slots for damage on a pilgrim because they are filled with cap warfare.
This is the real reason why ccp doesnt want to remove the damage bonus and give it a range bonus. Because removing the damage bonus will make the pilgrim do half the damage of the rapier for example.
They dont want to just give it range without removing something else but nothing else can be removed.
They dont want to boost the drone damage because that would make them look stupid for nerfing pilgrims bandwidth in the first place.
CCP dug a deep hole with this ship and they dont know how to fix it without embarrassing themselves.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 12:45:00 -
[684]
I can't repeat myself often enough.
Removing the dronedamage bonus is a big NoNo.
To fix the Pilgrim by giving it range and not making the Curse obsolete, you just have to switch around the NOS/Neut bonus on the Pilgrim from amount to range.
Pilgrim would do it's job perfectly fine, but the Curse would still beat it in the CapWarfare as it simply destroys tons more.
Note: A Pilgrim without the amont-bonus would still be able to run a Rep + Scram + TDs or your MWD without a CapBooster. Do the math yourself if you don't believe me.
.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:07:00 -
[685]
1) Bonuses suggest that Amarr Recons are heavily Drone Dependant.
2) TDs' and NOS/Neuts' effectiveness as ewar is heavily target dependent. Much more than other recon's racial ewar platforms.
3) Drones besides dmg, can be used for ewar: Webifing / Neuting / Jamming / Target Painting / Damping...
It's a paradox that Electronic Superiority ships like Amarr Recons, heavily drone depentant, get bonuses only for dmg and logistic drones.
Making the existing bonuses apply for Ewar Drones also, would make them very-very use full in a gang.
Not overpowered tho, since a curse could for example jam and neut 1-2 opponents MAX, unlike a Rook that can jum, or
Web 1 target and neut 1-2 more opponents, still less effectively than the much faster and more web-efficient Huginn etc.
On top of that, Amarr recons would have to sacrifice +70% of their already low dps in order to use ewar drones instead of fighting drones, unlike other recons which may currently boost a tad lower dps, tho can use their ewar in full strength on top of that.
BONUSED EWAR DRONES FOR AMARR RECONS!
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com |
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:14:00 -
[686]
Originally by: Grytok
I can't repeat myself often enough.
Removing the dronedamage bonus is a big NoNo.
To fix the Pilgrim by giving it range and not making the Curse obsolete, you just have to switch around the NOS/Neut bonus on the Pilgrim from amount to range.
Pilgrim would do it's job perfectly fine, but the Curse would still beat it in the CapWarfare as it simply destroys tons more.
Note: A Pilgrim without the amont-bonus would still be able to run a Rep + Scram + TDs or your MWD without a CapBooster. Do the math yourself if you don't believe me.
This is prolly a good idea yea.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Jaketh Ivanes
Do Or Die And Live Or Try
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 13:50:00 -
[687]
Originally by: Amira Shadowsong
Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 17/03/2008 13:40:42
Edited by: Amira Shadowsong on 17/03/2008 13:40:25
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Then let us fix the curse by giving it a cloak bonus so it can fit covert ops cloaks. Would you then fly Pilgrims ever?
Did you even understand my post?
There is no reason to not give pilgrim a range bonus because ALL other force recons have it aswell. If you got a problem with force recon vs combat recon then its a seperate problem not unique to pilgrim and curse.
The curse also would do more damage then the pilgrim even if pilgrim got range bonus. So it would be just like all other recons. You lose a bit of dps when getting the cloaked one. So what?
No one said, give pilgrim range bonus without removing drone damage.
I don't care if you dump the drone bonus, cyno bonus or Nos/Neut amount bonus. Having the option to completely chose target and be able to stay out of web range, is just to powerful. That is MY point. Only way a Pilgrim should get a nos/neut range bonus is by losing it's cloak bonus so it can't fit a covert ops.
If you look at the Curse and Pilgrim, one give great combat abilities but not so good target selection ability, but the other have great target select ability but bad combat ability. It's the perfect balance as you have to chose. The "fixed" Pilgrim would just be the preference as it would do both.
And I don't care about any other races recon, this is a balance between the 2 Amarrian recons.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 14:02:00 -
[688]
Actually you are right. Losing the dmg bonus is not a great idea.
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 20:48:00 -
[689]
Ok let me understand this: you want to remove the AMOUNT my pilgrim removes from a ship for a range modifier? OK so let's get this straight: Im gonna uncloak at 37 KM, turn on my nos/nuets, and orbit you in my armor plated pilgrim for, say... 2 hours as i slowly, EVER SO SLOWLY, suck 1% of your cap every 12 seconds, from your cap. YEA, let's remove that amount drained bonus so that I can do that, whilst the target leisurely finishes off his rats, goes and get's a coke, come's back and see's me still slowly orbiting him, then out of boredom calls for a frig or two to pop me as he moves off to another belt.
THINK BEFORE YOU ASK FOR CHANGES............. THINK!!!!!
Originally by: Grytok
I can't repeat myself often enough.
Removing the dronedamage bonus is a big NoNo.
To fix the Pilgrim by giving it range and not making the Curse obsolete, you just have to switch around the NOS/Neut bonus on the Pilgrim from amount to range.
Pilgrim would do it's job perfectly fine, but the Curse would still beat it in the CapWarfare as it simply destroys tons more.
Note: A Pilgrim without the amont-bonus would still be able to run a Rep + Scram + TDs or your MWD without a CapBooster. Do the math yourself if you don't believe me.
|
Amira Shadowsong
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 20:52:00 -
[690]
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Having the option to completely chose target and be able to stay out of web range, is just to powerful
Are you proposing a nerf to rapier, arazu and falcon aswell?
Oh btw, a rapier outdamages a pilgrim. He can pick his target with cloaks and has 40km web. Hypocrite much?
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
And I don't care about any other races recon, this is a balance between the 2 Amarrian recons
Thats because you have no idea what balance means. Either you nerf the other force recons so they lose their range aswell or you give the pilgrim its range bonus.
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Only way a Pilgrim should get a nos/neut range bonus is by losing it's cloak bonus so it can't fit a covert ops
Would you do the same to a rapier then?
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
If you look at the Curse and Pilgrim, one give great combat abilities but not so good target selection ability, but the other have great target select ability but bad combat ability
Same thing with huginn and rapier, except that rapier isnt gimped like pilgrim is.
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
It's the perfect balance as you have to chose. The "fixed" Pilgrim would just be the preference as it would do both
Uhm, why is everyone in a falcon and not a rook or arazu instead of a lachesis or rapier instead of a huginn. Either you fix all recons or you stfu about hindering pilgrim its deserved range boost.
|
|
|
Amira Shadowsong
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 20:58:00 -
[691]
Originally by: Confessor
Ok let me understand this: you want to remove the AMOUNT my pilgrim removes from a ship for a range modifier? OK so let's get this straight: Im gonna uncloak at 37 KM, turn on my nos/nuets, and orbit you in my armor plated pilgrim for, say... 2 hours as i slowly, EVER SO SLOWLY, suck 1% of your cap every 12 seconds, from your cap. YEA, let's remove that amount drained bonus so that I can do that, whilst the target leisurely finishes off his rats, goes and get's a coke, come's back and see's me still slowly orbiting him, then out of boredom calls for a frig or two to pop me as he moves off to another belt.
THINK BEFORE YOU ASK FOR CHANGES............. THINK!!!!!
Originally by: Grytok
I can't repeat myself often enough.
Removing the dronedamage bonus is a big NoNo.
To fix the Pilgrim by giving it range and not making the Curse obsolete, you just have to switch around the NOS/Neut bonus on the Pilgrim from amount to range.
Pilgrim would do it's job perfectly fine, but the Curse would still beat it in the CapWarfare as it simply destroys tons more.
Note: A Pilgrim without the amont-bonus would still be able to run a Rep + Scram + TDs or your MWD without a CapBooster. Do the math yourself if you don't believe me.
Well both pilgrim and curse need a slight capacitor boost to field neuts better in cap warfare.
|
Pax Tranquilitae
Grey Technology Research
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 08:54:00 -
[692]
Just because other races' combat recons are inferior to their stealthy versions doesn't justify breaking the Amarr combat recon in order to fix the Amarr force recon. Consistency aside, this motive is backwards.
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 09:17:00 -
[693]
Originally by: Pax Tranquilitae
Just because other races' combat recons are inferior to their stealthy versions doesn't justify breaking the Amarr combat recon in order to fix the Amarr force recon. Consistency aside, this motive is backwards.
Noone is saying anything about any changes to curse. Since nothing changes about curse, it can't become "broken".
It can become just inferior to new pilgrim in many situations, but that's the case with all recons.
And putting consistency aside when we are talking about balancing things out is a HUGE no-no.
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 09:22:00 -
[694]
Originally by: Grytok
I can't repeat myself often enough.
Removing the dronedamage bonus is a big NoNo.
To fix the Pilgrim by giving it range and not making the Curse obsolete, you just have to switch around the NOS/Neut bonus on the Pilgrim from amount to range.
Pilgrim would do it's job perfectly fine, but the Curse would still beat it in the CapWarfare as it simply destroys tons more.
Note: A Pilgrim without the amont-bonus would still be able to run a Rep + Scram + TDs or your MWD without a CapBooster. Do the math yourself if you don't believe me.
QFT.
And yet I still think that a 20%/level (instead of 40%/level) range bonus on pilgrim can be done without killing it's amount bonus.
Maybe just lower it to 15%/level, so that curse would get 5%/level of "damage" (and 20%/level more range) over pilgrim, as all combat recons do.
|
Juana Morlaine
MX3 Development
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 10:12:00 -
[695]
Originally by: Depp Knight
[<snip>
A good start would be that Tracking disruptors causes a dysfunction in drone usage. Which means if you are being tracking disruptor your drones cannot be used. That way Tracking disruptors can be used in an unusual and most importantly itĘs a mod that can only be used in this situation. Another example could be an effect on FOF missiles. Again its a mod that is different from no other and is useful.
This is imho a grand idea - unique feature, unique result, unique addition to groups/gangs and highly effective (even if chance based). There is more to this idea when you think about sentry drone tactics, ECM drones vs your gang mates and the like. But it is already enough food for thought.
|
Amira Shadowsong
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 10:45:00 -
[696]
Originally by: Pax Tranquilitae
Just because other races' combat recons are inferior to their stealthy versions doesn't justify breaking the Amarr combat recon in order to fix the Amarr force recon. Consistency aside, this motive is backwards.
It is justified if ccp isnt going to rebalance the other broken recons compared to their stealthy versions.
If they are you are right, its not good to break balance.
BUT BOTH YOU AND I KNOW CCP ISNT GOING TO REBALANCE THE OTHER RECONS SO THERE IS NO REASON FOR KEEPING PILGRIM NERFED.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 10:46:00 -
[697]
Dear reader,
dear fellow Pilgrim/Amarr Recon pilot,
I actually gave the whole thread - once more - a long thought depending on the answers so far. Considering the recent changes my suggestion on Amarr Recons is by now as follows:
1. General change
The change to tracking disruptors was a move in the right direction. Still there are shortcomings. Basically EWAR should be as follows: the more ships/targets are affected, the less effective the EWAR in general should be and vice versa. That said, tracking disruption is never 100% effective (more like one of the least effective ones) and thus should/must affect all ship/target types. This esspecially includes drone and missile ships.
General change: apply tracking disruptor bonus for all missiles by applying the TD bonus to missile and drone damage, thus drastically reducing drone and missile damage.
Consequence: TDs are then a viable alternative to other EWAR on Amarr Recons.
2. Curse change
The tournament suggests, that Curse is perfectly fine, which is not entirely true. I repeat my former Curse suggestion:
- incorporate the above mentioned TD change
- add app. 100 grid and
- increase cargo by 250 m¦
3. Pilgrim change
Preserve the Pilgrim's original style, but allow it to survive without castrating its own cap and without loosing its own defense.
- incorporate the above mentioned TD change
- remove Cyno role bonus
- add a new role bonus: 15% reduction of cap usage of Energy Neutralizers per Amarr Recon level and 95% reduction of large Energy Neutralizer CPU and Grid fitting requirements.
A lot of things are achieved by that:
1. Amarr Recons are unique
2. Fitting becomes "flexible" again - there are fitting alternatives, esspecially for the Curse, without overpwoering it.
3. EWAR offers a tank the way it was always meant to be.
4. Pilgrim unique fighting style is preserved AND its weaknesses receive a trade-off in sorts of effectiveness. Remember: it is still close combat.
5. Pilgrim is less affected by the need for a cap booster - resp. wont need one in most cases.
A lot more to mention...
Comments?
__
- click here - |
Killer Haze
Legion of Prophets
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 12:19:00 -
[698]
save the pilgrim
signed!! |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 12:20:00 -
[699]
Recon level and 95% reduction of large Energy Neutralizer CPU and Grid fitting requirements is a bit high.
I actually dont have a fitting problem with the pilgrim. Infact since the 100pg increase, I dont have a fitting problem at all, unless I want to fit a cap booster, which is just stupid as It only has 5 mid slots.
1 for scram, 1 for web, 1 for mwd. Leaving two others for EW. Which is what its suppose to be.
And in saying that, the 100pg increase cheeses me off big time, because a cap booster cost 150pg.
Now i am all for the pilrgim having the role as it should. A close range recon, get in their dirty, type of a ship. But at the same time, a range bonus is also a nice boost. Either way, i wont lose sleep on what ccp decides, as long as it become an affective ship once again.
Mind you, the reason why I trained for amarr recons, was for the pilgrim, because of the style it could fly.
Also its difficult for ccp to removed the cyno bonus on the pilgrim, because thats one of the key bonuses for cloaking recons, and if that has been taken away from then, then you in a situation where the amarr race doesnt have an affecitve cyno ship.
I believe that for one, ccp need to increase small and med neuts. Med neuts going to about 15km.
Another change should be a larger increase in cap rehcarge rate for both the curse and the pilgrim. The pilgrim of course should get a higher recharge rate and total cap.
The changes to TD's as I suggest above would also work.
From those changes, you can tell, there is a lot to be done. Which says something. The pilgrim is totally broken.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 14:01:00 -
[700]
Removing the Cyno Role Bonus is not applicable, cause its key on the CCP's idea around Force Recons the first place...
It's like asking for a 100% dmg bonus on Black OPs BSs: surely a cloaked Marauder with more than 4 guns would be nice, still...
Recons are supposed to be Electronic Superiority ships - no-one commented my suggestion for modifying the Drone Bonus on the Pilgrim or even the Curse to affect Ewar Drones...
On the other hand ppl keep on suggesting ways to make Nano-Pilgrims etc more viable - forget it...you keep on asking for a solo ship wtfpwning BSs 1vs1, and that won't going to happen. Think a bit more creatively for our loved Recons plz...
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 14:17:00 -
[701]
Because amarr recons are (were) designed to be solo ships, because simply, they are pathetic in fleet. Just like the falcon blows in solo but is amazing in fleet.
There needs to be a balance.
|
Kal'Kalagan
Aggressive Tendencies
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 15:27:00 -
[702]
Edited by: Kal''Kalagan on 19/03/2008 15:31:05
On the face of it the pilgrim does indeed need a Nos/neut range bonus like the Curse.
The Curse is a great ship becuase it fits its bonus assisted modules in its high slots and still has all its mid slots available for MWD, point, tracking distrupts etc and its low slots free for tank or nano. Damage from drones can be effective but a good pilot can counter this relatively easily if he keeps his wits in 1v1 situations. Kill the drones first! This makes the curse a great ship but not overpowered since the nos nerf as damage is limited. In effect its a great small gang warefare ship.
If you give the Pilgrim a Nos/neut range bonus (which I believe it does need), it wil be overpowered as it will have tank crippling neut abilities from safe ranges and enough mid slots to fit a a massive array of EW. You probably couldn't nano it effectively but 6 mids would give it insane EW strength on top of its ability to warp and position while cloaked.
I'd give the Pilgrim its nos/neut in place of its nos/neut amount bonus. I'd also remove at least one and possible 2 mid slots and add 1 low slot while gimping its base speed.
Results:-
It will be effective at range like other recons and can warp cloaked. It will have the ability to hold a point on a target but will not have the ability to damp it down to hell or to tracking distrupt it beyond any ability to fight back. It will not be able to nano due to the gimped base speeds but will have a nice tank ability. Like other recons it probably couldn't solo a BS unless you fitted exspensive faction gear and without the nos/neut amount bonus it will take an age to kill anything - just liek the other race recons.
Comments?
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 15:47:00 -
[703]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 19/03/2008 15:46:52
Originally by: Depp Knight
Recon level and 95% reduction of large Energy Neutralizer CPU and Grid fitting requirements is a bit high.
I actually dont have a fitting problem with the pilgrim. Infact since the 100pg increase, I dont have a fitting problem at all, unless I want to fit a cap booster, which is just stupid as It only has 5 mid slots.
<snip>
Hi Depp Knight,
in fact the 100pg increase is mentioned for the Curse, not the Pilgrim. This simply since the Curse has fitting issues esspecially in a non-nano setup.
On the fitting of large Neutralizers please consider the following:
1. maybe fitting req bonus needs to be "adjusted" - might be a lil bit too easy to fit.
2. The trade off for a Pilgrim's lack of range would be the immense power of Large Neutralizers with the Pilgrim bonus. Most importantly: it would be close to impossible to "outneut" a Pilgrim, which is a definite requirement for its risk to be a close-quarter-combat only ship with a weak tank.
3. Range vs. power: from my previous posts it becomes obvious, that I am not that much a fan of a Pilgrim with range. Simply since the playstyle would be too close to the Curse. Whereas the close quarter combat assassin type would be really unique. That said - considering current Pilgrim design - the "suckage" of medium NOS and Neuts with only 3 high slots with cap issues is simply too low. My suggested change eliminates severe issues: (i) the need for cap booster to fuel the offensive weapon, (ii) the need for cargo for cap boosters, (iii) the subpar "suckage" and (iv) the massive high risk for engaging close combat vs. any ship.
In the end: please take the time and figure scenarios for this Pilgrim design. A Drake will easily trash it anytime, similar for blasterthrons and NOS/Neut ships with enough dps and smart maneuvering. Simply since the Pilgrim retains its vulnerability to enemy NOS and Neutralizers and its weak tank, thus needing to still perform tight energy managements. Since the Cap booster is obsolete, a Pilgrim is able to perform its role by using: AB/MWD, Disruptor/Scrambler, Webber and 2xTD. Dump the AB/MWD for a cap recharger or for a third TD. Tank in low and Neut + Cloak in high. To be effective, high skills are still needed, also pilot's mistakes still hurt, but way less than before where a mistake or a "well rounded" opponents setup normally results in insta-death.
__
- click here - |
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 15:57:00 -
[704]
Originally by: Kal'Kalagan
Results:-
It will be effective at range like other recons and can warp cloaked. It will have the ability to hold a point on a target but will not have the ability to damp it down to hell or to tracking distrupt it beyond any ability to fight back. It will not be able to nano due to the gimped base speeds but will have a nice tank ability. Like other recons it probably couldn't solo a BS unless you fitted exspensive faction gear and without the nos/neut amount bonus it will take an age to kill anything - just liek the other race recons.
Comments?
It would make NOS/Neuts even more useless, as with less transfering / killing Cap ammounts a strong tank cannot be sustainable.
NOS / Neuts are also a weak eWar module with limited uses: the long ranged + amount bonused Curse can intimidate cruisers and frigates by killing their cap and might help break the critical tanking point on an actively tanked BS. The pilgrim can do just the latter, as it's usually armor rigged and heavily tanked, thus too slow to get within range of fast ships.
One additional tanking slot will not work wonders: the Pilgrim will get from 300~360 dps tank with dual reppers up to...what? 400?
So? Impressive, still not enough to fend of BSs or even good HASs or BCs...And all these struggle to be fed by NOS as it is currently.
Giving range without efficiency bonuses, is worse than the current situation.
2-3x ranged NOSes without efficiency bonuses won't be able to sustain MWD + ewar + single repper long enough to do anything usefull. And ranged Medium Neuts without efficiency bonuses will trouble capping out anything bigger than a frig.
Recons use agility and ewar superiority to overcome physical tanking / ganking restrictions. Low slots could add to this should NOS/Neuts had equivalents tou ECM Amplifiers etc...And please, do not suggest fitting Cap Relays on these extra lows...plz...
Thus the Mid slot you so kindly exchange for range and tank is way more valuable than u suggest...
If you want to make a nano-abomination out of the pilgrim, go for it an nano-it...forget about NOS/Neuts and use Pulses instead...
Or try nano-ing the Devoter - it has more than enough lows and a way better tank than the Pilgrim to boot with...
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 16:19:00 -
[705]
Originally by: Diomidis
Removing the Cyno Role Bonus is not applicable, cause its key on the CCP's idea around Force Recons the first place...
<snip>
An idea which is basically obsolete since the Cap pilots I know prefer to use frigates or similar to do the job. In cases where a cov ops cloak is needed, ppl are smart enough to choose Covert Ops ships. Covert Ops ships simply since those are cheaper, more practical (due to scanning bonus) and more "sneaky", meaning: it is close to impossible to stop a Covert Ops to pass gate camps safely. This as long as the pilot knows what he does and no technical issues (CTD or similar) or bad luck (eg spawning atop a container after jumping) stop him. After all: opening a cyno results in a dead cyno-maker ship if enemys are close or dead enemy if the support (which jumps in) can help accordingly - no matter if it is a Force Recon with 50% duration reduction or not.
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 17:19:00 -
[706]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 19/03/2008 17:19:36
Originally by: Kal'Kalagan
If you give the Pilgrim a Nos/neut range bonus (which I believe it does need), it wil be overpowered as it will have tank crippling neut abilities from safe ranges and enough mid slots to fit a a massive array of EW. You probably couldn't nano it effectively but 6 mids would give it insane EW strength on top of its ability to warp and position while cloaked.
Comments?
No it wont be OP because it would barely be able to run neuts anyway without the amount bonus AND it does less dps then a rapier. I see absolutely no problem with this. The only problem is that people still have the 75m3 bandwidth pilgrim stuck in their minds.
Pilgrim has pitiful damage after the nerf. Switching the amount bonus to a range bonus for nos/neut WONT OP it.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Angelic Eviaran
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 17:25:00 -
[707]
Originally by: Diomidis
On the other hand ppl keep on suggesting ways to make Nano-Pilgrims etc more viable - forget it...you keep on asking for a solo ship wtfpwning BSs 1vs1, and that won't going to happen. Think a bit more creatively for our loved Recons plz...
No we just want a RANGED force recon like EVERYONE else has.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 17:29:00 -
[708]
If the Covert Cyno original idea is obsolete, other Races will ask for another "Role Bonus" also, and that won't OP the Pilgrim as a Recon. It will still field sub-par eWar for using in a gang. And should other Recons get a role bonus that complements their ewar bonuses aswell, the Pilgrim will be even more "use-less" for gangs.
So all-in-all you insist on meh solo-capability boosts that WOULD NEVER happen, or not-so-clever bonus changes that SHOULD NEVER happen...
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 17:32:00 -
[709]
Originally by: Diomidis
If the Covert Cyno original idea is obsolete, other Races will ask for another "Role Bonus" also, and that won't OP the Pilgrim as a Recon. It will still field sub-par eWar for using in a gang. And should other Recons get a role bonus that complements their ewar bonuses aswell, the Pilgrim will be even more "use-less" for gangs.
So all-in-all you insist on meh solo-capability boosts that WOULD NEVER happen, or not-so-clever bonus changes that SHOULD NEVER happen...
Please explain the logic behind not wanting to switch pilgrims nos/neut amount bonus to a range bonus so it gets inline with other force recons?
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Stientolical
Atomic Heroes
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 18:11:00 -
[710]
Edited by: Stientolical on 19/03/2008 18:15:35
|
|
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 18:19:00 -
[711]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Diomidis
If the Covert Cyno original idea is obsolete, other Races will ask for another "Role Bonus" also, and that won't OP the Pilgrim as a Recon. It will still field sub-par eWar for using in a gang. And should other Recons get a role bonus that complements their ewar bonuses aswell, the Pilgrim will be even more "use-less" for gangs.
So all-in-all you insist on meh solo-capability boosts that WOULD NEVER happen, or not-so-clever bonus changes that SHOULD NEVER happen...
Please explain the logic behind not wanting to switch pilgrims nos/neut amount bonus to a range bonus so it gets inline with other force recons?
Because - as I've explained above - the Pilgrim in it's current state has difficulties killing a single BS's cap, while tanking it at the same time, cause that requires huge amounts of cap. Making a Cap booster the standard fit for that purpose, brings it down to whether or not the enemy has enough cap boosters => bring it down to a cargohold capacity level => pathetic for ewar related ships.
Other recons DON'T have to micro-manage that much, and are univesaly MORE useful than the Pilgrim. So stop asking for more Cargo space - it's "cheap"...
Fighting outside web range would surely help tanking, still cap boosters would become a MUST, depriving the ship of a precious mid slot, and the Pilgrim would even then have to use Cap Boosters to kill even cruiser sized caps... = no-no...
FFS PPL: OTHER SHIPS PUT IN CAP BOOSTERS IN CASE THEY CAP OUT.
PILGRIM / CURSE = CAP WARFARE SHIPS!
ITS LIKE SUGGESTING PUTTING ECCM MODULES IN A FALCON OR ROOK, or MORE TARGETING RANGE in an ARAZU...
These ships are enjoying built in "counters" / supplementing attributes for their ewar: Caldari have enormus locking ranges and sensor strengths, Gallente out-scrams and out-damps anything further away, the Minmatar ones are pretty fast and are locking faster also etc...
Amarr Recons need to be CAP KINGS: either by stealing it, or regenerating it fast enough. The Curse looks good enough - but only when nanoed. The Pilgrim on the other hand needs more cap or cap regen, and WAY BETTER cap efficiency using NOS/NEUTs.
Giving back the win-win NOS as it was - even for just the pilgrim - it's not fair IMHO. Tho efficiency should be boosted considerably non-the-less. The balancing to that "fix" should remain, as the Pilgrim would still fight within web range, tho it would be feared even webbed.
That's a "fix" suggestion...goes too far? maybe...
Range over efficiency bonus suggestions are missing MANY-MANY points, and will lead to nothing but a sub-parred nano Pilgrim or what? Buy some faction NOS / Neuts / Webs to get the same effect your "fixes" would make = fighting outside web range.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Stientolical
Atomic Heroes
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 18:28:00 -
[712]
Edited by: Stientolical on 19/03/2008 18:28:46
Originally by: Hydrogen
3. Pilgrim change
Preserve the Pilgrim's original style, but allow it to survive without castrating its own cap and without loosing its own defense.
- incorporate the above mentioned TD change
- remove Cyno role bonus
- add a new role bonus: 15% reduction of cap usage of Energy Neutralizers per Amarr Recon level and 95% reduction of large Energy Neutralizer CPU and Grid fitting requirements.
A lot of things are achieved by that:
1. Amarr Recons are unique
2. Fitting becomes "flexible" again - there are fitting alternatives, esspecially for the Curse, without overpwoering it.
3. EWAR offers a tank the way it was always meant to be.
4. Pilgrim unique fighting style is preserved AND its weaknesses receive a trade-off in sorts of effectiveness. Remember: it is still close combat.5. Pilgrim is less affected by the need for a cap booster - resp. wont need one in most cases.
A lot more to mention...
Comments?
1) Amarr recons are already unique in using TD and nos
2) "If you feel like it you can now fit a pilgrim like a mini neut BS with a bonus to tracking distruptors too!"
3) fit an ECM burst if you want EWAR tank @ pilgrim nos range...
4) how is 25km short range (for large neut)- curse only reaches just over 10km more with a bonus to it....
Conclusion
These changes will make a mini neut BS which will pwn anything's capacitor including probably a carrier within minutes
Stop saying pilgrims need help when its BOTH gallente recons that need atleast a 10% bonus to damps, or damps to be un-nerfed cos they suck big time
Stien
P.S. Pilgrim can fit a cap sustainable fitting with 2 neuts and a nos plus tons of armor HP and 4 EW mods...(while doing 238 dps to a tank with no abiltiy to rep or turn hardeners on...)
|
Stientolical
Atomic Heroes
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 18:40:00 -
[713]
Edited by: Stientolical on 19/03/2008 18:41:47
Originally by: Diomidis
Edited by: Diomidis on 19/03/2008 18:29:37
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Diomidis
If the Covert Cyno original idea is obsolete, other Races will ask for another "Role Bonus" also, and that won't OP the Pilgrim as a Recon. It will still field sub-par eWar for using in a gang. And should other Recons get a role bonus that complements their ewar bonuses aswell, the Pilgrim will be even more "use-less" for gangs.
So all-in-all you insist on meh solo-capability boosts that WOULD NEVER happen, or not-so-clever bonus changes that SHOULD NEVER happen...
Please explain the logic behind not wanting to switch pilgrims nos/neut amount bonus to a range bonus so it gets inline with other force recons?
Because - as I've explained above - the Pilgrim in it's current state has difficulties killing a single BS's cap, while tanking it at the same time, cause that requires huge amounts of cap. Making a Cap booster the standard fit for that purpose, brings it down to whether or not the enemy has enough cap boosters => bring it down to a cargohold capacity level => pathetic for ewar related ships.
Other recons DON'T have to micro-manage that much, and are univesaly MORE useful than the Pilgrim. So stop asking for more Cargo space - it's "cheap"...
Fighting outside web range would surely help tanking, still cap boosters would become a MUST, depriving the ship of a precious mid slot, and the Pilgrim would even then have to use Cap Boosters to kill even cruiser sized caps... = no-no...
FFS PPL: OTHER SHIPS PUT IN CAP BOOSTERS IN CASE THEY CAP OUT.
PILGRIM / CURSE = CAP WARFARE SHIPS! = Other ships should be feared of them and fit Cap Boosters in case they get jumped by Amarrian Recons...
ITS LIKE SUGGESTING PUTTING ECCM MODULES IN A FALCON OR ROOK...
These ships are enjoying built in "counters" / supplementing attributes for their ewar:
*Caldari have enormous locking ranges and sensor strengths = cannot be easily jammed and ruled out of the fight. ECM is NOT the way to fight an ECM ship.
*Gallente out-scrams and out-damps anything further away, and with sufficient targeting range so NOTHING in their scram range can use damps better than they do.
*Minmatar ones are pretty fast and are locking faster also etc, so can dictate range and have initiative advantages.
*Amarr Recons are the only recons which are SO WEAK vs. their own Ewar, even against un-bonuced ships...totally unfair. A nano-Curse can be screwed by a single Heavy Unstable Neut, and even Medium NOS / Neuts trouble the Pilgrim, while e.g. a Rook laughs against multiple unbonused ECM modules and a Rapier should be stupid or heavily blobbed to ever get webbed by a slower ship and a 10km module...
Amarr Recons need to be CAP KINGS: either by stealing it, or regenerating it fast enough. The Curse looks good enough - but only when nanoed. The Pilgrim on the other hand needs more cap or cap regen, and WAY BETTER cap efficiency using NOS/NEUTs.
Giving back the win-win NOS as it was - even for just the pilgrim - it's not fair IMHO. Tho efficiency should be boosted considerably non-the-less. The balancing to that "fix" should remain, as the Pilgrim would still fight within web range, tho it would be feared even webbed.
That's a "fix" suggestion...goes too far? maybe...
Range over efficiency bonus suggestions are missing MANY-MANY points, and will lead to nothing but a sub-parred nano Pilgrim or what? Buy some faction NOS / Neuts / Webs to get the same effect your "fixes" would make = fighting outside web range.
^^ Cap amount + Cap recharge time is the most pilgrim should get imo- don't mess with it's bonuses imo theyr's spot on- this isn't to run it's own mods- an area i think is balanced with other recons in terms of sustainability but to make it more resistant to other neuts/ nos used against it
Stien
|
Angelic Eviaran
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 20:16:00 -
[714]
Originally by: Stientolical
^^ Cap amount + Cap recharge time is the most pilgrim should get imo- don't mess with it's bonuses imo theyr's spot on- this isn't to run it's own mods- an area i think is balanced with other recons in terms of sustainability but to make it more resistant to other neuts/ nos used against it
Stien
No it needs range aswell. But both pilgrim and curse need also more cap recharge inherently.
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 20:16:00 -
[715]
Repeating myself, but still:
There is no need for a complete recon overhaul to fix pilgrim.
Just give it range on NOS/neut. And, likewise, there is no need for some insane tradeoff's. Just give it a fair 20%/level to range on NOS/neut, while lowering it's amount bonus to 15%/level.
It's vital to understand that all other force recons are "cloaking combat recon", in essense.
Have you even seen actual bonuses combat recons get over force recons ? They are pathetic. PATHETIC.
It's always a 5% damage bonus on a spilit weapon platform.
If curse would get a 5% amount bonus and 20% range bonus per level over pilgrim, it would be in line with all other combat recons with regard to bonuses over force counterpart.
So just boost pilgrim to be more curse-like, leave curse alone, and learn to live with the fact that all force recons are "cloaking combat recon".
P.S. The "pilgrim is not a cloaking curse" argument no longer holds. No other role was implemented for over a year, while all other force recons clearly enjoy being "cloaking combat counterpart".
|
Angelic Eviaran
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 20:21:00 -
[716]
Originally by: Vadimik
P.S. The "pilgrim is not a cloaking curse" argument no longer holds. No other role was implemented for over a year, while all other force recons clearly enjoy being "cloaking combat counterpart".
Exactly, why should amarr force recon be gimped with an excuse that doesnt apply to the other races cloak-combat *hmmmm* I mean force recons?
|
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.19 23:32:00 -
[717]
Originally by: Vadimik
Repeating myself, but still:
There is no need for a complete recon overhaul to fix pilgrim.
Just give it range on NOS/neut. And, likewise, there is no need for some insane tradeoff's. Just give it a fair 20%/level to range on NOS/neut, while lowering it's amount bonus to 15%/level.
It's vital to understand that all other force recons are "cloaking combat recon", in essense.
Have you even seen actual bonuses combat recons get over force recons ? They are pathetic. PATHETIC.
It's always a 5% damage bonus on a spilit weapon platform.
If curse would get a 5% amount bonus and 20% range bonus per level over pilgrim, it would be in line with all other combat recons with regard to bonuses over force counterpart.
So just boost pilgrim to be more curse-like, leave curse alone, and learn to live with the fact that all force recons are "cloaking combat recon".
P.S. The "pilgrim is not a cloaking curse" argument no longer holds. No other role was implemented for over a year, while all other force recons clearly enjoy being "cloaking combat counterpart".
The combat recons need a dps boost to make them viable.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 09:33:00 -
[718]
Originally by: Stientolical
1) Amarr recons are already unique in using TD and nos
Unique with the Curse being viable in one configuration and the Pilgrim plain broken. This is unique, since I fail to find a lot more ships being broken as much.
Originally by: Stientolical
2) "If you feel like it you can now fit a pilgrim like a mini neut BS with a bonus to tracking distruptors too!"
Really? It is not that you listed some breaking news - being able to fit a Pilgrim with Neuts and TDs
Originally by: Stientolical
3) fit an ECM burst if you want EWAR tank @ pilgrim nos range...
Dont assume - I didnt include some range increase comparable to Curse. Also the Pilgrim fields only 3 high slots to fit NOS/Neut since the Cov Ops cloak needs a high slot. The viable Curse setup - Nano-Curse that is - comes with five high slots AND with range. That infact is a drastic difference.
Additionally it has been stated by CCP that EWAR actually is a Recon's defense. Esspecially in the case of the Pilgrim the choice for tracking disruption fails:
- weak tank
- close quarter combat only (atm max 12-15 km)
- limited targets where TDs are effective
- limited targets which offer the weapons where TDs are fully effective (target with guns and drones or targets with guns and missile launchers or or or...)
- lack of "suckage" aka Neut/NOS power
The combination of reduced TD efficiency, weak tank, lack of applicable targets for TDs and lack of "suckage" (keeping the lack of viable group/gang features in mind) is what makes the Pilgrim broken.
Burst ECM is due to lack of strength and cap usage no alternative (in some weird form of arrogance you act as if no Pilgrim pilot ever tried and tested that).
Originally by: Stientolical
4) how is 25km short range (for large neut)- curse only reaches just over 10km more with a bonus to it....
Please refrain from using numbers you got no clue of:
1. Curse Neutralizer range is up to 42 km
2. Curse NOS range is up to 58.5 km
Both are actually mid range.
In fact I do consider 25km and less short range (but no longer close quarter combat).
Originally by: Stientolical
Conclusion
These changes will make a mini neut BS which will pwn anything's capacitor including probably a carrier within minutes
Correct - a ship being able to pwn any capacitor within minutes. That was the exact goal of my suggestion. Close to no BS nor any orther ship would be able to out-Neut or out-NOS a Pilgrim except Bhaalgorn. Something which is fine since the line: EAF => Recon => Bhaalgorn for suckage or Black Ops also fits very well.
Originally by: Stientolical
Stop saying pilgrims need help when its BOTH gallente recons that need atleast a 10% bonus to damps, or damps to be un-nerfed cos they suck big time
I actually couldnt care less. If you read the start fo the thread you would have noticed the remark about other races. This thread is solely about the viability of Amarr recons - their strengths and shortcommings. If you dont like it, dont post here or make your own thread for different stuff.
Originally by: Stientolical
P.S. Pilgrim can fit a cap sustainable fitting with 2 neuts and a nos plus tons of armor HP and 4 EW mods...(while doing 238 dps to a tank with no abiltiy to rep or turn hardeners on...)
This statement plain shows your lack of comprehension and knowledge on Amarr Recons. That said:
1. you apparently dont know anythign about viable fittings
2. you apparently got no clue about what neutralizers and NOS do to an enemy in which timeframe
3. you got apparently no clue about cap jigsaw
4. you are apparently able to click Recon and Pilgrim in EFT
bottom line: clueless
Why do you post at all here?
__
- click here - |
SirDanceAlot
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 10:57:00 -
[719]
^^ QFT ^^
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 11:56:00 -
[720]
Nice to see, that this discussin still goes on, but gawd how many people of you claiming that it's fine actually fly the ship? I guess none of you.
The facts have been stated over and over again...
- you can't run Neutralizers on a Pilgrim, because you've too little Cargo for CapBooster charges
- you can't effectively use TDs within webrange, as there is little to no transversal speeds. Against Missile-Platforms and Drones TDs are totally useless (read 50% of all ships outthere)
- you can't fuel your tank with NOS, as they've got changed this way.
- that the Pilgrim is the only Force Recon, that is not up par with it's Combat Recon counterpart
Just wanted to remind you peeps, who have no clue.
Still I like the Pilgrim, but I can't do much more in it, then ganking some lonely ratter, when I'm in a gang with others.
If a real fight is inbound, then I switch for the Curse or log in another character, who's able to fly a Rapier.
.
|
|
|
Confessor
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 12:07:00 -
[721]
I think pilgrim is broken, BUT: with the right rigs fitted, Im able to kill raven's ratting with almost no threat to my tank. I can disable and drop a raven's shield tank in less than 2 minutes. I will not tell you my setup, so get your asses off EFT and figure it out for yourself, then go make the pilgrim feared for what it is, the silent vampire!
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 12:16:00 -
[722]
It's not viable to ask for a double bonus for the pilgrim, aka : both range and efficiency in "one slot"...
we have to give up TD's, cloak, or drones for Energy Emission Range...why? Cause that's how it is...
I wish it was different as a Pilgrim pilot, but...
TD's are the Arbitrator's line eWar. In fact Amarrian Fleet's main ewar - cannot be "neglected", and all T2 ships are true to their T1 counterparts bonuses = Drones + TDs for Curse / Pilgrim.
Now, please explain how could the range bonus SAVE the pilgrim?
Give me one good scenario / setup that would make range > efficiency.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
SirDanceAlot
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 12:33:00 -
[723]
Originally by: Confessor
I think pilgrim is broken, BUT: with the right rigs fitted, Im able to kill raven's ratting with almost no threat to my tank.
Oh please, I can kill a ratting raven in an omen.
|
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 12:38:00 -
[724]
Originally by: Diomidis
Now, please explain how could the range bonus SAVE the pilgrim?
Give me one good scenario / setup that would make range > efficiency.
Because when you have range you dont need to put so much cap into cap wich in turn gives you more cap over to compensate for neut usage.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 12:59:00 -
[725]
Originally by: sdthujfg
Originally by: Diomidis
Now, please explain how could the range bonus SAVE the pilgrim?
Give me one good scenario / setup that would make range > efficiency.
Because when you have range you dont need to put so much cap into cap wich in turn gives you more cap over to compensate for neut usage.
OK, I admit I was a bit hasty on my quoted post...
I know of good scenarios like : capping out ceptors and other frigs...but...still I'd prefer efficiency...
But I don't get you at all sdthujfg....
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 14:42:00 -
[726]
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: sdthujfg
Originally by: Diomidis
Now, please explain how could the range bonus SAVE the pilgrim?
Give me one good scenario / setup that would make range > efficiency.
Because when you have range you dont need to put so much cap into cap wich in turn gives you more cap over to compensate for neut usage.
OK, I admit I was a bit hasty on my quoted post...
I know of good scenarios like : capping out ceptors and other frigs...but...still I'd prefer efficiency...
But I don't get you at all sdthujfg....
I think a pilgrim with range bonus could bleed bigger stuff of cap tbh. Would take a bit longer maybe. But Id increase the cap of pilgrim and curse a tiny bit so they can use neuts easier.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 19:25:00 -
[727]
Originally by: sdthujfg
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: sdthujfg
Originally by: Diomidis
Now, please explain how could the range bonus SAVE the pilgrim?
Give me one good scenario / setup that would make range > efficiency.
Because when you have range you dont need to put so much cap into cap wich in turn gives you more cap over to compensate for neut usage.
OK, I admit I was a bit hasty on my quoted post...
I know of good scenarios like : capping out ceptors and other frigs...but...still I'd prefer efficiency...
But I don't get you at all sdthujfg....
I think a pilgrim with range bonus could bleed bigger stuff of cap tbh. Would take a bit longer maybe. But Id increase the cap of pilgrim and curse a tiny bit so they can use neuts easier.
3x Unbonused for efficiency Medium Unstable Neuts are comparable to a single Heavy Unbonused Medium Neut with similar "Energy Emission Systems" Skill lvl in cap usage vs. cap killing capabilities. Range is also a bit "scram limited" so the 24km range of the Heavy Unstable Neut is enough unless a faction scram is used to tackle the BS.
The average BS has much higher capacitor capacity and way higher cap recharge rate than the average pilgrim. Top skills cannot change that...in fact the pilgrim needs no less than 30+ % more capacitor capacity (with max skills) to reach the same recharge rate...that's more or less asking for a built-in Medium Capacitor Battery II...that's not "a bit"...its 30+ % more!
Even then, the Pilgrim will have to kill 3.5x times it's own capacitor with the same efficiency the BS does, will tanking it at the same time...unless we are talking about a short range turret BS with 2x TD's on it, that won't happen...
Even with the "built in" Medium Cap Battery II, the Pilgrim with max skills can barely run 2x Unstable Neuts. Add scram + ewar consumption and it's unstable already...no cap for armor reppers...
2x Medium Unstable Neuts will need more than 3.5 minutes to kill a 6500 units capacitor...with max skills that is...
So how do you tank it for so long? Nano the pilgrim and speed-tank it? Get real - how are you going to run your MWD?
Add Cap boosters to fix that = it's down to cargo hold capacity for cap charges and the BS wins 3 times up there too...
What more can I say to make obvious that un-bonused neuts cannot effectively kill anything bigger than you? In any situation?
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Nina Roncheli
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 21:29:00 -
[728]
Showing some basic bonuses from force recon ships
Gallente:
5% bonus to Remote Sensor Dampener effectiveness per level 20% bonus to warp disruptor range.
Caldari:
10% reduction in ECM Target Jammer capacitor use and 20% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal range per level, 10% bonus to ECM Target Jammer strength.
Minmatar:
7.5% bonus to target painter effectiveness per level, 60% bonus to stasis webifier range.
Amarr:
5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness, 20% bonus to Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer transfer amount.
Lets see some basic understanding of ships here, all 3 races (Gal,Cald,Minm.), effect every race in eve (no mater what race u are and what ship u have), Amarr bonuses effect only turrent and active tanking ships, plus u need to get in 12 km range to ōstartö neut or nos target, which is to damm close for recon ship (recons are not mention to be tank-close range or web range). So here is all we need to know that CCP really NEED to boost at least Pilgrim. Is not fun to pay such money for ship which is not in competition with others recons.
Please, consider about it
|
Vadimik
|
Posted - 2008.03.20 21:44:00 -
[729]
Edited by: Vadimik on 20/03/2008 21:49:55
Originally by: Diomidis
It's not viable to ask for a double bonus for the pilgrim, aka : both range and efficiency in "one slot"...
we have to give up TD's, cloak, or drones for Energy Emission Range...why? Cause that's how it is...
I wish it was different as a Pilgrim pilot, but...
TD's are the Arbitrator's line eWar. In fact Amarrian Fleet's main ewar - cannot be "neglected", and all T2 ships are true to their T1 counterparts bonuses = Drones + TDs for Curse / Pilgrim.
Now, please explain how could the range bonus SAVE the pilgrim?
Give me one good scenario / setup that would make range > efficiency.
Capacitor E-war is unlike other types of E-war.
It has SIZES (small, medium, large).
That alone means that you can't apply same bonus criteria to capacitor E-war as you would apply to non-sized mods.
Now, what other non-weapon systems have sizes ?
Oh, right, it's logistic mods.
And right here with a mere glance on logistic ships we can see that all logistics ship have all bonuses needed to run their mods, from capacitor to range to CPU/grid reduction. The bonuses that don't "fit" into 4 base bonuses just go into role bonuses.
Perfectly same things can apply to capacitor E-war - ship should get all bonuses needed to run them, even if it would mean a bonus that effects two stats of a module istead of just one.
Curse would just get bigger bonuses for amount and range than pilgrim.
In essense, both range and amount bonus would just be the same thing as a solo amount bonus + a role bonus to fit large NOS/neut. Except, both of these bonuses are already coded and tested on the very same hull, and thus would be much easier to implement.
|
Depp Knight
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 00:32:00 -
[730]
This last page has some great points. The main being is that the pilgrim cannot out cap a bs. If that is not proof that the pilgrim its not broken, then what is?
|
|
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 02:48:00 -
[731]
Originally by: Depp Knight
This last page has some great points. The main being is that the pilgrim cannot out cap a bs. If that is not proof that the pilgrim its not broken, then what is?
The main being is that a Pilgrim can be out-capped by almost every BS with a single heavy neut and MAYBE a cap booster
Nothing (Scorpion is not "just a BS") can out-ECM the Caldari Recons
Nothing can out-damp the Gallente Recons (tho Damps DID get nerfed a lot), and 40ish km scram range is awesome.
Nothing can out-range Minmatar Webbers.
The Pilgrim is nothing more than a cloaker nowadays.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
zeho
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 04:09:00 -
[732]
excellent post Hydrogen. nicely done.
Amarr hardware & tech are being looked at currently and I applaude your efforts to put foward possible solutions to these broken ship issues.
I was one of those who was training for a Curse/Pilgrim just before the "nos nerf" changes were announced and opted to stop training for them all together upon reading the news.
Maybe my long wait to spec the recon ship skill is nearing its end?..
|
Depp Knight
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 06:15:00 -
[733]
Only thing we can do as pilgrim fans and pilots, is to keep this thread going, remaining on the front page, like a flag in CCP's face, with the msg: FIX THE ****IN PILGRIM
|
Diomidis
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 11:24:00 -
[734]
Edited by: Diomidis on 21/03/2008 11:28:25
Radical Idea to make Pilgrim UniqueÖ:
Neuts and NOSes are very weak now ū surely you can cap ū dry a fast inty instantly, or even cruiser class ships with a few activations (neuts).
But that means nothing: the scram has duration and doesnĘt deactivate instantly. The same goes for hardeners, Webbers etc. Only heavily cap dependant modules are Neut/NOS weak, and these are pretty rare in the modern PvP world of plated BSs and EAMNs. But itĘs not THAT easy to claim that you can break tackling or disable cap-using weapons with NOS/Neuts. Not even remotely compared to the effectiveness of webbing, damping, scramming or even jamming.
Should the duration of each and every ewar and active resistance module be changed to 1-2 sec at most, a cap killing ship could cause more frustration, but that would bring it down to a matter of interface, connection latency etc. ThatĘs not a ōfixö, and alone cannot hide the fact that Amarr Recons have trouble capping out their opponents at the first place, only to find that in very few occasions thatĘs a ōwinö for their gang - . Not even remotely compared to the effectiveness of webbing, jamming, damping, or even ranged scramming effects other Recons introduce. A webbed / jammed / damped opponent is ōas-good-as-deadö or at least ruled out of the fight instantly after the call / module activation.
Something new to add? Yes! A new Module!
HEAT EMITTERS
Alter Neut effects/bonuses for the Pilgrim or introduce a new energy emission (thus bonused for amarr recons) module so that instead of killing cap, introduces massive HEAT effects on the targeted Vessel.
So that way, there should be a random CHANCE of modules going off-line in the targeted vessel. Which would go out etc should be random or almost random. That way ALL ships, passively or actively, drone / missile / turret equipped etc would be affected by it.
But that would be in a random order / chance so that you couldnĘt for example go for taking out a ceptorĘs MWD or an active tankerĘs repper/booster straight out. It should be chance based, tho IĘd love to get remotely close to jamming ships ōchancesö (stop wining ppl, ECM Recons simply own, chance based or not).
The module should be ALMOST USELESS in non-bonused ships and have comparable strength to a Multispectral ECM in non-bonused ships = pretty weak. Still on a Pilgrim with good (still not perfect All-2-V etc) skills should be really strong.
Cap Usage should be VERY mild for the Pilgrim tooąnot NEUT-like.
Range should still be the limiting factor for the pilgrim tho: itĘs a close range ship.
An in all we should get a module that actually DISABLES sth. Not partially disrupts etc. Going into web range = risking should be rewarding for the Pilgrim, unlike every other Recon that fights comfortably out of it.
Oh, and before the no-counter arguments starts, pack some nanite paste and forget about it for small ships: unless you believe speed mods can counter webbers on a cruiser or frigate, ECCM can "save" a frig/ceptor - T1 cruiser or even HAS from jamming by a SINGLE bonused racial ECM or that sensor boosters are enough to counter damps on anything without huge range (BS, Recons) or sig rez (ceptors, Recons etc). Ewar DOESN'T have "counters"...you just can reduce their effect a bit...and admit that just like damps post nerf, Amarr Recons HAVE TO FOCUS their ewar on a single ship. Dual webbed / 3-4x focused+bonused damps etc mean INCAPACITATION...I cannot even think what 4-5x focused - bonused ECM could actually jam...caps maybe? LOL - that's why these are immune to ECM.
Oh, you could introduce a "radiator" mid-slot module, with insane fitting needs so that noone could fit it "just to perma overheat" without losing the ability to fit cap booster or shield extenders etc. Even then it could not sustain / cool down a MWD etc...it would work ONLY for Heat Emitter introduced heat = sth like ECCM usefulness.
Have fun...I did
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 12:52:00 -
[735]
I like it, because its unique. Instead of it being random, maybe this module can use scripts. Low, Med, Hi; scripts so it will effect those modules, and it will be random to which one it destroys.
But tbh, I believe this module should be what Target painters are. Just a thought though.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.21 14:50:00 -
[736]
I like radical ideas. Sad thing is though that it takes ccp several years to even try a radiacal change. At most the just change a few values here and there in the code for each patch. This is the reason why AFs are STILL not fixed. Anything that requires more then just a number tweaking will take atleast a year or two for them to manage. Wich is sad face.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare |
Depp Knight
|
Posted - 2008.03.22 11:32:00 -
[737]
Which means, we are in a situation where if we do get a pilgrim boost, it will be small. In-fact the boost patch gave TD's are boost. From the patch notes, prior the patch, It was said that this is a boost for amarr recons.
No joke, I cant remember the exact line, but if you read between the lines, it was suggesting that this was the amarr recon boost that was needed.
No it was a TD boost, (Maybe not even a boost, as TD's should have always affect falloff prior to the patch)
So if we get a change in the near future, it may be small. A huge cap/recharge increase would the be simplest option.
|
No21
|
Posted - 2008.03.22 12:46:00 -
[738]
My view into this, hopefully i won't iterate something that has already been mentioned:
Nos Change: Severly affected the Pilgrim and its ability to perform effectively. It has really become a necessity for it to fit a Cap inj in order to fuel its tank. I find it highley problematic due to the clear mid slot deficiency it creates. And that is its ability to reduce or nullify damage from the guns of the target with the help of a another TD. I think it's pretty evident why and who Nos is mostly for and why its there.
Scripts: Serverly messed the ships up and their effectiveness. Why: As you can either choose full effect of one or half and half. I don't think they were intended to be so, because it plays along with guns set tracking and optimal. Surely CCP must of thought it out pretty well before introducing them. I think its more of a EXTREME way for them to reduce lag/strain on the server. But i can only guess on this matter i suppose. But i don't seem to find it far fetched.
Why: Before when the target ship tried to mwd away in order to reduce transversal by making you follow the target, he would most likely get out of his guns optimal pretty fast. Now....its a totally different story, he will remain in his for a much greater time while toasting you. Now, you have to switch and do it real fast while watching your cap, tank and the targets speed.
Nano: I don't find it was the prominent way of using these ships at the introduction. As a mwd will significally increase your sig radius and make your target hit you. Also before the change, it had a half as less drone bay as it has now. A very limited number of drones, few to waste, had to be close to scoop fast.
So....the Afterburner is a mod that can be very useful on the ships. As it can help you maintain range to some extent and increase transversal towards the target without increasing your sig radius at the expense of a mid slot and some cap. So...comparing the Curse towards the Pilgrim. The Pilgrim got the advantage of getting close to the target and within web range with the help of the cloak. And then there is nano/mwd.
Fix?: Remove the fking scripts. If not, increase the TD bonus or value. If not, move a low slot to mid on the Pilgrim. Nos duration reduction?
And there is other ways to use the Curse. If you go thru Amarrs ships slot layout you will find something distinct and a pattern in the high slot layout on some ships. And maybe even why and what.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.22 14:49:00 -
[739]
A fix to TD's is not the answer. The pilgrim is still a close range ship with no cap, and a ab is not an option these days. If you got an ab then you must get in web range, as the target would just run. So then you may as well not use any speed boost and more TD's, or increase your cap recharge rate. whatever you choose, its still a dodgy ship.
|
No21
Malevolent Intervention
Reavers.
|
Posted - 2008.03.22 17:04:00 -
[740]
Originally by: Depp Knight
A fix to TD's is not the answer. The pilgrim is still a close range ship with no cap, and a ab is not an option these days. If you got an ab then you must get in web range, as the target would just run. So then you may as well not use any speed boost and more TD's, or increase your cap recharge rate. whatever you choose, its still a dodgy ship.
The Pilgrim can cloak. And get within web range.
Its part of the problem. Even if you fix the cap problem. You have to be able to nullfiy/reduce the damage to a good extent. At the same time, protect your drones.
Care to explain how it aint part of the problem? I think the problem i wrote about is very real and reccurent.
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 04:13:00 -
[741]
Because pre nos nerf, the pilgrim was not broken, because it could fuel its tank with nos up until the target cap has been depleted, which nullifies their dmg output and their tank.
There is no doubt that TD's are not effective, even with its recent boost. People dont realise that the pilgrim got nerfed three times.
1st was the ecm nerf. Often a pilgrim pilot would have a ecm burst on its ship.
2nd was the nos nerf
3rd was scripts
Even when the ecm nerf came, the pilgrim could still do its job, it was until the nos nerf took place that killed the pilgrim. If the pilgrim can fuel its tank and a tank is needed for the ship, as its a close range ship, then the pilgrim can be close to what it was.
Thats why a cap/cap recharge boost, (and a big increase at that) would help the pilgrim alot. T
d's being broken is a seperate issue. IMO they are a mod that are easy to fit, use little amount of cap per cycle yet no one uses it. There is a reason for that. Scary thing is, you are seeing more Target painters than TD's, on ships.
The pilgrims problem is the nos nerf/cap problems.
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 10:29:00 -
[742]
Edited by: Vadimik on 23/03/2008 10:34:32
Originally by: Depp Knight
Because pre nos nerf, the pilgrim was not broken, because it could fuel its tank with nos up until the target cap has been depleted, which nullifies their dmg output and their tank.
There is no doubt that TD's are not effective, even with its recent boost. People dont realise that the pilgrim got nerfed three times.
1st was the ecm nerf. Often a pilgrim pilot would have a ecm burst on its ship.
2nd was the nos nerf
3rd was scripts
Even when the ecm nerf came, the pilgrim could still do its job, it was until the nos nerf took place that killed the pilgrim. If the pilgrim can fuel its tank and a tank is needed for the ship, as its a close range ship, then the pilgrim can be close to what it was.
Thats why a cap/cap recharge boost, (and a big increase at that) would help the pilgrim alot. T
d's being broken is a seperate issue. IMO they are a mod that are easy to fit, use little amount of cap per cycle yet no one uses it. There is a reason for that. Scary thing is, you are seeing more Target painters than TD's, on ships.
The pilgrims problem is the nos nerf/cap problems.
You are forgeting to mention two other "changes" that nerfed pilgrim even deeper into oblivion and were never accounted for:
 RSD nerf insured that even RSD-rigged pilgrim with 3 meta 4 RSD was unable to damp anything above a frig below neut range, and left pilgrim's drones without a great defense provided by the long lock times on them after being hit by RSD's.
Overheating increased web range to 13km. Do I even need to say more ? In case I do: medium neut/nos have up to 12 km range. That means that pre-overheating pilgrim had 2 km buffer before getting into webrange. Now it must dive 1 km into it before it can even start using nos and neut, giving him zero chances to work outside of webrange.
P.S. And I do think that being forced into webrange was as much of a nerf as was nos nerf itself. Pilgrim is a recon after all, not a cloaking HAC. Recons were never supposed to get into webrange and just gang the **** out of enemies.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 11:33:00 -
[743]
Originally by: No21
Originally by: Depp Knight
A fix to TD's is not the answer. The pilgrim is still a close range ship with no cap, and a ab is not an option these days. If you got an ab then you must get in web range, as the target would just run. So then you may as well not use any speed boost and more TD's, or increase your cap recharge rate. whatever you choose, its still a dodgy ship.
The Pilgrim can cloak. And get within web range.
Its part of the problem. Even if you fix the cap problem. You have to be able to nullfiy/reduce the damage to a good extent. At the same time, protect your drones.
Care to explain how it aint part of the problem? I think the problem i wrote about is very real and reccurent.
Most ppl thing that Pilgrims are meant to sneak on ratting BSs and bring them down...
There aren't many different situations in pvp where you could "sneak" on a pilot at <200m/s cloaked and take advantage of them, unless we are talking of really fresh / unexperienced toons...
The Pilgrim should be useful in a gang = that requires either speed (to get into range) and to ensure survivability to a certain extend and a highly capable ranged ewar - TDs fail to provide the later, and IMHO ranged NOS/Neuts are nothing without efficiency bonuses as all BSs with Heavy Modules can simply out NOS/Neut medium sized Modules on a Cruiser = the Piglrim.
So the "solo-pwn" ship is not just a player's wet dream - CCP forces the Pilgrim to be a not so useful gang ship that can do less more than defend itself and it's drones = focuses on a 1vs1 or 2vs1 situations.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
No21
Malevolent Intervention
Reavers.
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 13:26:00 -
[744]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Because pre nos nerf, the pilgrim was not broken, because it could fuel its tank with nos up until the target cap has been depleted, which nullifies their dmg output and their tank.
There is no doubt that TD's are not effective, even with its recent boost. People dont realise that the pilgrim got nerfed three times.
1st was the ecm nerf. Often a pilgrim pilot would have a ecm burst on its ship.
2nd was the nos nerf
3rd was scripts
Even when the ecm nerf came, the pilgrim could still do its job, it was until the nos nerf took place that killed the pilgrim. If the pilgrim can fuel its tank and a tank is needed for the ship, as its a close range ship, then the pilgrim can be close to what it was.
Thats why a cap/cap recharge boost, (and a big increase at that) would help the pilgrim alot. T
d's being broken is a seperate issue. IMO they are a mod that are easy to fit, use little amount of cap per cycle yet no one uses it. There is a reason for that. Scary thing is, you are seeing more Target painters than TD's, on ships.
The pilgrims problem is the nos nerf/cap problems.
Ur not deliberately forgetting something now are you? Autocannons dont use cap. And some ppl cap inj. But yes, it surely helps against those.
The Pilgrim and the Curse dont tank that well. It needs help with reducing the dmg somehow. And that help would be the Tracking Disruptor CCP got for it. They wont tank for too long when a hard hitting BS starts to hit them for high dmg. Unless you start to fit armor rigs on it or plate it. But then it would only make it even more slower and reduce its ability in increasing transversal towards the target.
TD issue is part of the ships problem as it gives a bonus to em. And its part of the ships way to use em and the tactics that involves them.
To Vadimik: Can you tell me how you would protect your drones when the ship got introduced? As it had a pretty limited amount of them.
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.23 22:30:00 -
[745]
Originally by: No21
To Vadimik: Can you tell me how you would protect your drones when the ship got introduced? As it had a pretty limited amount of them.
I pretty much answered it: I prefered a triple (meta 4) RSD's with 2 RSD rigs fit. 1-2 mins lock time on drones really made it hard for enemy to pop them (unless with a smartbomb).
|
No21
Malevolent Intervention
Reavers.
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 14:57:00 -
[746]
Originally by: Vadimik
Originally by: No21
To Vadimik: Can you tell me how you would protect your drones when the ship got introduced? As it had a pretty limited amount of them.
I pretty much answered it: I prefered a triple (meta 4) RSD's with 2 RSD rigs fit. 1-2 mins lock time on drones really made it hard for enemy to pop them (unless with a smartbomb).
Mmm, it would work. But rigs werent available when it got introduced. And your not on point to scoop the drones. You cant stay close for too long. His web will be on your drones also. Can you understand how they correlate and it designed?
No doubt it was effective, but hardley the way the creators intended it to be used. At least the most prominent way.
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 15:28:00 -
[747]
Edited by: Vadimik on 24/03/2008 15:39:09
Originally by: No21
Mmm, it would work. But rigs werent available when it got introduced. And your not on point to scoop the drones. You cant stay close for too long. His web will be on your drones also. Can you understand how they correlate and it designed?
No doubt it was effective, but hardley the way the creators intended it to be used. At least the most prominent way.
Don't forget that RSD also nerfed targeting range below 24 km, often even below 12km, so you were able ro recall drones once every minute to force him to lock gain.
Of cause, that was, like, a -30% to dps due to traveling time, but it was a quite an option.
Granted, if your enemy really knew what he was doing, chances were pretty high for him to pop some of your drones (if he still had cap to do it). But I never said that pilgrim was an end-all-be-all solopwnmobile.
And, to ne honest, I'm not sure if CCP ever gave much of a thought as to how amarr recons would defend their drones. They just assumed pilots will figure something out, and that was the case until pilgrim was "nerfed"... what, four times in a raw ? (Nos nerf, drone shield recharge on scoop nerf, RSD and TD nerf, 13km web range with overheating).
|
Cailais
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 15:41:00 -
[748]
At least part of the problem, as I see it, is that CCP dont seem to be sure what the role of the force and combat recons have.
With the exception of the Curse all of the other factions use their Force Recon equivalent over their Combat Recon. The combat recons dont appear to be particulary great in a 'combat role': i.e dishing out dps or tanking damage: at least not in comparision with HACS.
My personal view is CCP tried to cram to much onto one hull: Cloaking, EW and a 'specialisation' (nos, web, scam etc). This problem is exacerbated by the fact that not all of the EW modules are equally useful. ECM is clearly at an advantage over damps and TDs and Target Painters seem right out there on the left field.
The nos nerf was a diabolical one in my view, and implemented without a seconds thought to how it would effect either the Amarr Recon platforms or the Faction ships that gain a nos/neut bonus. CCP in their infinite wisdom and limitless stubborness just refuse to admit they 'forgot' about these ships and even more damningly refuse to do anything about it.
C.
Improved Low Sec Idea!! |
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 16:06:00 -
[749]
Originally by: Cailais
CCP in their infinite wisdom and limitless stubborness just refuse to admit they 'forgot' about these ships and even more damningly refuse to do anything about it.
This. Its always the same. Instead of just admitting theyve made a mistake and promise that they are looking into it asap they just go mute instead. Hence this super long thread that is still going.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
sdthujfg
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 21:48:00 -
[750]
When is this ship going to get fixed? Its been broken ever since ccp took a wild swing with the nerf bat on nos.
|
|
|
Juana Morlaine
MX3 Development
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.03.24 23:36:00 -
[751]
It is really cool on how this thread once more turned into constructiveness.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 11:21:00 -
[752]
Very good points on the past few pages again. Thank you all and it would be cool if you could keep the suggestions coming.
Thank you to everyone who added.
Yours
Hydrogen
__
- click here - |
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 12:07:00 -
[753]
I bought and fitted a full talisman high grade set for my alt who would fly the nano curse. 24hrs later, the nos nerf was announced and turned my precious implant set into the most expensive +3's in the history of EVE.
Can't they increase the capacitor in conjunction with giving the amarr recons a bonus so they don't have to spend as much cap to use neutralizers or something?
|
No21
Malevolent Intervention
Reavers.
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 15:46:00 -
[754]
Edited by: No21 on 25/03/2008 15:52:14
Originally by: Vadimik
Edited by: Vadimik on 24/03/2008 15:52:07
Don't forget that RSD also nerfed targeting range below 24 km, often even below 12km, so you were able ro recall drones once every minute to force him to lock gain.
Of cause, that was, like, a -30% to dps due to traveling time, but it was a quite an option. Granted, if your enemy really knew what he was doing, chances were pretty high for him to pop some of your drones (if he still had cap to do it). But I never said that pilgrim was an end-all-be-all solopwnmobile.
Aye. The big problem is that the target would possibly hit the drones hard with the turrets. Especially medium ones,large ones would have a harder time hitting them. But as you are outside web range, the web will be on the drones and them out of reach for you to scoop. But not a problem with swooping in and scooping them with that setup.
Originally by: Vadimik
And, to be honest, I'm not sure if CCP ever gave much of a thought as to how amarr recons would defend their drones. They just assumed pilots will figure something out, and that was the case until pilgrim was "nerfed"... what, four times in a raw ? (Nos nerf, drone shield recharge on scoop nerf, RSD and TD nerf, 13km web range with overheating).
Well, something like this i would think:
As the Pilgrim has the ability to fit a Cov op cloak, it then can get close. With an Afterburner it can maintain some range "without" consuming as much cap as the MWD, getting the cap penalty and blowing up its sig radius. Not only for maintaining range, but can also be used to increase transversal towards the target.
The Afterburner and the cap would help against Autocannons and tanking the drones from the target to some extent when the target had no longer any cap. Compared to a mwd that is. But wont be able to keep up if you urself is webd and the target got an mwd and tries to escape.
The Nos would help fuel the tank and make it harder for the target to run his ****. But in order to make use of the nos you have to be within web range or close to it. As the Pilgrim only gets a amount bns and not range like the Curse. Promoting close play.
To help the Pilgrim tanking and protecting the drones it got the Tracking Disruptor. The double affect, which is essential in its effectiveness was the Tracking and Optimal negating affect on turrets. By messing up the targets tracking and you orbiting close, he would either miss you or hit you for light dmg. Also this would help the drones.
Messing up his optimal would help in the way if the target tried to minimize the transversal by mwding away from you he would overshoot and go beyond his turret optimal range. Your orbit command would obviously turn into a pursuit and minimize the transversal towards the target, thats why it plays as an essential part of its effectivenss.
So by this the target would have to predict/analyse your direction and then maintain the same speed as you while being within optimal range for the turret to hit you well or drones. Obviously, the Autocannnons with its great tracking and falloff would be one of the hardest one to overcome among the turret types i think. But ammo of choice and tactic would determine much of it. Like Pulse have a greater optimal etc.
Jumping to procedure/scenario(drone defense): Pilgrim bumps target, uncloaks and makes him unable to align and warp. web, scram etc him. Unable to hit you he tries to destroy your drones. To do that, he would have to web the drones at the point where they are furthest away from you. Which would make it so that you wouldn't be webd anymore(think Chess - Check). You orbiting, will make you pass by the drone fairly quick if you have your AB on. Unless he put some distance between. His drones will obviously be on your drones. But he wont be able to use his turret to hit them easily, as he got TD,s on him. So, depends on drone dmg and such. Thats about how it would defend the drones. Obviously, it got some serious holes.
|
No21
Malevolent Intervention
Reavers.
|
Posted - 2008.03.25 16:49:00 -
[755]
To cover them you would have to look at whats Amarr and bring in another ship. The Armageddon would be a great choice due to its fairly nice dmg output, but also its large drone bay. There to be used as auxiliary or more dmg. Either for whatever your try to gap, expect or for greater effect. Heavy Armor maintenance drones for tank, EC-900,s, TD-900,s or the idiot drones SW-900(dumb drones =/) for hampering his ability to escape and maintaing range towards a new target while exceeding the new targets turret optimal but not your Pulze Lazerz and such. Possibly.
It would help in covering other holes of the Pilgrim too. Destroying that Battleship much faster before backup arrives, helping it with cap. Several Amarr ships have this hi slot layout. X turret slots and one open. In that open slot you could put a Large Energy Transfer and cover that cap hole when the Pilgrim got nothing more to suck from the target. Or interlink with some other similar Arma and create some magic cap. Or something else instead and let the Pilgrim nos the Arma for cap.
The Pilgrim and the Arma serve each other well and makes use of those benefits Amarr have and gap some of the ships deficencies. Pilgrim thru its stealhty means tackle the unsuspecting target and then let the big d**k come and pound the target while satisfying the Pilgrim with what it needs. So dirty........
Hmm yeah, Amarrs lack of mid slots, uber dmg from the Pilgrim etc. Seemed pretty nice back then when it could at least decrease the beating to some extent than now slipping and getting it in the.....
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 09:48:00 -
[756]
Considering the current discussion:
What are your five most favored proposed changes in descending priority?
Mine are:
1. Increase effectiveness of TDs, increase Curse PG by app. 95, increase Neut/NOS efficiency for Pilgrim (without Curse range)
2. Revert NOS nerf and increase TD efficiency
3. Heavily increase Pilgrim armor tank, "tune" Pilgrim and Curse capacitor usage
4. Increase Pilgrim and Curse cargo bay, increase Pilgrim and Curse grid, give both a better tank (mroe tank for Pilgrim and maybe take "nanobility" of Curse), add a mid slot to both Curse and Pilgrim,...
5. Increase Pilgrim NOS/Neut range (I really really dotn like that option at all)
__
- click here - |
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 10:21:00 -
[757]
My favourite, by far, it giving pilgrim range on NOS/neut, without touching anything else about it (or curse).
(Well, maybe lower amount bonus to 15%/level for pilgrim, just to give curse it's 5%/level bonus it should have as a combat recon.)
I prefer it cause:
a)it's simple, we already have this bonus coded and, best of all, tested, on curse.
b)pilgrim is a recon, not a HAC, it must never be forced to go into webrange just to use it's main E-war system.
|
Alex Harumichi
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 10:28:00 -
[758]
Originally by: Hydrogen
1. Increase effectiveness of TDs, increase Curse PG by app. 95, increase Neut/NOS efficiency for Pilgrim (without Curse range)
I think TDs are fine now after the boost (in fact, they may be almost too good). But I'd sign the other points there: more grid, more nos/neut efficiency. That would let the Pilgrim brawl it out at close-range with better chance of survival (and of killing opponent before help arrives).
With TDs and Pilgrim, my current suspicion is that the best strategy would be to go ultra-close-range and use the tracking speed scripts. When you're really close, that should stop the guns hitting even if you're webbed yourself. Just a theory though, have yet to test it in practice.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 10:43:00 -
[759]
Originally by: Alex Harumichi
<snip>
I think TDs are fine now after the boost (in fact, they may be almost too good). But I'd sign the other points there: more grid, more nos/neut efficiency.
<snip>
There is imho still a distinct problem with TDs: lack of suitable targets, efficiency and design. TDs are plain not able to offer an EWAR tank combined with the weak Pilgrim tank. The reasons yet again:
1. secondary weaponry not influenced by TDs, namely missiles, drones, but also EWAR including NOS/Neut, jammers,...
2. TDs still do not completly disable a turret ships ability to inflicht damage. It can decrease damage inflicted (and by now in almost all cases does) but still: TDs are not a tank. Also keep the - in comparison to other Cruiser types - huge signature radius of Pilgrim in mind.
3. I still favor my statement: the more viable EWAR targets, the less effective EWAR should be. As it stands now, TDs are still the second least effective or even least effective EWAR with the most narrow target range WHILE not being 100% effective.
Considering 1.-3., there is still somethign really wrong with TDs - that is why I mention TD changes.
__
- click here - |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 11:27:00 -
[760]
1. change the NOS/Neut bonus from amount to range
This would allow the Pilgrim to be a perma-MWDing cruiser with 3 or 4 TD's to mess up the opposing Turret-platforms, while not having the same ability of destroying cap like the Curse.
2. increasing cargo to double it's current size
This would allow the Pilgrim to fuel it's Neutralizers and tank with cap boosters for a reasonable time.
.
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 12:10:00 -
[761]
then the pilgrim can not drain ones cap, as its own cap is low.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 12:11:00 -
[762]
Instead of amount bonus to range bonus, make it, neut cap reduction cost 20% per lvl. Making it 0 cap at lvl 5, and increase the pilgrims total cap/cap recharge rate.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 12:31:00 -
[763]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 26/03/2008 12:31:26
Originally by: Depp Knight
Instead of amount bonus to range bonus, make it, neut cap reduction cost 20% per lvl. Making it 0 cap at lvl 5, and increase the pilgrims total cap/cap recharge rate.
Originally by: Hydrogen
What are your five most favored proposed changes in descending priority?
@Depp: THIS ^^
Which are yours?
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.26 15:01:00 -
[764]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Edited by: Hydrogen on 26/03/2008 12:31:26
Originally by: Depp Knight
Instead of amount bonus to range bonus, make it, neut cap reduction cost 20% per lvl. Making it 0 cap at lvl 5, and increase the pilgrims total cap/cap recharge rate.
Originally by: Hydrogen
What are your five most favored proposed changes in descending priority?
@Depp: THIS ^^
Which are yours?
Yeah ill get on it. For now, I sleep.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 08:33:00 -
[765]
Anyone else with his top5 of possible changes?
__
- click here - |
Juana Morlaine
MX3 Development
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 11:36:00 -
[766]
I favor less than 5:
1. huge Pilgrim tank increase and cap recharge/cap size increase
2. Unerf NOS for Pilgrim
3. Further increase of TD efficiency and ability to fit bonused large Neut/NOS (none needs cyno bonus on Pilgrim really)
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 11:41:00 -
[767]
K, my top five has no influence over the curse nor tracking disruptors, because they are a total separate issues.
First thing is first. My entire top 5, which are in no order at all, will also result in an increase the pilgrims total cap and cap recharge rate, and cargo space, with a slight increase in pg and cpu. Also some of these 5 ideas can be used together.
1. The nos nerf is lifted and does not affect pilgrims.
2. Pilgrim loses dmg bonus for neut range bonus, and increase the drone bandwidth to use more heavy drones, to make up for the loss of dmg, and becomes another nano recon.
3. Pilgrim gets a much larger increase in cap and cap recharge rate, swaps a low for a mid slot, and gets a 40% bonus to neut drain per lvl.
4. Pilgrim loses dmg bonus, gets an increase in drone bandwidth (see number 2) and gets a very large cap recharge rate per level bonus. Say 20% per level. So it can be hard to drain out the pilgrims cap.
5. Pilgrim loses dmg bonus, and gains more drone bandwidth(look above) and gets a 20% to cap booster effectiveness and cap battery effectiveness per lvl. Giving it a 100% increase in effectiveness at lvl V. Swaps two lows for two mid slots and gains more cargo space. Again making it hard to kill the pilgrims cap.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 12:04:00 -
[768]
Originally by: Depp Knight
K, my top five has no influence over the curse nor tracking disruptors, because they are a total separate issues.
First thing is first. My entire top 5, which are in no order at all, will also result in an increase the pilgrims total cap and cap recharge rate, and cargo space, with a slight increase in pg and cpu. Also some of these 5 ideas can be used together.
1. The nos nerf is lifted and does not affect pilgrims.
2. Pilgrim loses dmg bonus for neut range bonus, and increase the drone bandwidth to use more heavy drones, to make up for the loss of dmg, and becomes another nano recon.
3. Pilgrim gets a much larger increase in cap and cap recharge rate, swaps a low for a mid slot, and gets a 40% bonus to neut drain per lvl.
4. Pilgrim loses dmg bonus, gets an increase in drone bandwidth (see number 2) and gets a very large cap recharge rate per level bonus. Say 20% per level. So it can be hard to drain out the pilgrims cap.
5. Pilgrim loses dmg bonus, and gains more drone bandwidth(look above) and gets a 20% to cap booster effectiveness and cap battery effectiveness per lvl. Giving it a 100% increase in effectiveness at lvl V. Swaps two lows for two mid slots and gains more cargo space. Again making it hard to kill the pilgrims cap.
QFT...my enemy gives some good points.
I'd like to add: "Pilgrim gets bonus for ewar drones effectiveness (web/neut/damp etc), not just dmg and hitpoints for fighter drones - inline with the T1 arbitrator having a bonus for mining drones!"
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 12:22:00 -
[769]
what ppl want for the amarr recons is simply to juicy. you want to suck away a bc's cap in 30 secs, jam and gun it down and cloak afterwars while also being almost immune to other kinds of EW.
it is simply not alright and gives you too much advantages and almost no single disadvantage.
whining is dumb in this case and wont change anything even if you make this thread twice as big. ccp isnt dumb and does not give in to large whine threads but reasonable and fair ideas.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r
"Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|
Doctor Mabuse
Republic University
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 12:45:00 -
[770]
Originally by: Reto
...ccp isnt dumb and does not give in to large whine threads but reasonable and fair ideas.
so you never read the 'Nerf the Carrier!' thread then...
|
|
|
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 18:43:00 -
[771]
Edited by: Vadimik on 27/03/2008 18:46:12
Originally by: Reto
what ppl want for the amarr recons is simply to juicy. you want to suck away a bc's cap in 30 secs, jam and gun it down and cloak afterwars while also being almost immune to other kinds of EW.
it is simply not alright and gives you too much advantages and almost no single disadvantage.
whining is dumb in this case and wont change anything even if you make this thread twice as big. ccp isnt dumb and does not give in to large whine threads but reasonable and fair ideas.
Erm, sorry, but something like a 40%/level to nos/neut range with 15%/level to amount (5% less than curse) [or a 20%/level to range and 20%/level to amount] is exactly consistent with all other recons in this game. All force recons get exactly the same bonuses to E-war and only lack a pathetic 5% damage bonus on one of their split weapon systems.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 19:09:00 -
[772]
Originally by: Vadimik
Edited by: Vadimik on 27/03/2008 18:46:12
Originally by: Reto
what ppl want for the amarr recons is simply to juicy. you want to suck away a bc's cap in 30 secs, jam and gun it down and cloak afterwars while also being almost immune to other kinds of EW.
it is simply not alright and gives you too much advantages and almost no single disadvantage.
whining is dumb in this case and wont change anything even if you make this thread twice as big. ccp isnt dumb and does not give in to large whine threads but reasonable and fair ideas.
Erm, sorry, but something like a 40%/level to nos/neut range with 15%/level to amount (5% less than curse) [or a 20%/level to range and 20%/level to amount] is exactly consistent with all other recons in this game. All force recons get exactly the same bonuses to E-war and only lack a pathetic 5% damage bonus on one of their split weapon systems.
Yeah but all other recons use non sized modules. There is no small/medium/large damp, web, ecm, tp nor scram.
THATS why amarr recons cant be shoved into the same logic and the amounts per level. ok?
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.27 19:20:00 -
[773]
Edited by: Vadimik on 27/03/2008 19:22:35
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Yeah but all other recons use non sized modules. There is no small/medium/large damp, web, ecm, tp nor scram.
THATS why amarr recons cant be shoved into the same logic and the amounts per level. ok?
Sure, and that's why pilgrim should retain it's amount bonus and get a range bonus on top of that. Even if it would mean "two" bonuses. Cause, in essense, it's the same thing as just getting an E-war one size larger.
Plus, yes they can. Curse have been "shoven into this logic" and it's fine by now. What we need now is to make pilgrim consistent with all other recons by giving it all vital bonuses of a curse (leaving it only a tiny bit weaker than curse bonus-wise).
P.S. Hey-hey, post # 777, maybe we won a pilgrim boost at last ? Please, CCP...
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.28 09:56:00 -
[774]
Originally by: Vadimik
P.S. Hey-hey, post # 777, maybe we won a pilgrim boost at last ? Please, CCP...
I doubt it - the perception of the Pilgrim as being broken is apparently different.
For example it seems we got consensus about Pilgrim being a broken ship in this thread (except the obligatory troll, who has no experience, cant read or both). Yet again people compare Pilgrim with Curse (tournament, PvP, camps,...) and have the impression it is "the same ship" or at least similar.
It seems, that this is the exact same perception of the CCP balancing team too. It needs exeperience and in depth knowledge, which simple requires time. Time which the CCP balancing team apparently is not willing to devote to the Pilgrim since the perception shows a "fine ship" - more or less broken like any other Recon.
This is a plain bad joke by CCP and also a proof on apparent lack of knowledge and/or time to get the job done. As always I guess it is both....
__
- click here - |
Vadimik
Misty Weave
|
Posted - 2008.03.28 19:39:00 -
[775]
Edited by: Vadimik on 28/03/2008 19:41:33
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Vadimik
P.S. Hey-hey, post # 777, maybe we won a pilgrim boost at last ? Please, CCP...
I doubt it - the perception of the Pilgrim as being broken is apparently different.
For example it seems we got consensus about Pilgrim being a broken ship in this thread (except the obligatory troll, who has no experience, cant read or both). Yet again people compare Pilgrim with Curse (tournament, PvP, camps,...) and have the impression it is "the same ship" or at least similar.
It seems, that this is the exact same perception of the CCP balancing team too. It needs exeperience and in depth knowledge, which simple requires time. Time which the CCP balancing team apparently is not willing to devote to the Pilgrim since the perception shows a "fine ship" - more or less broken like any other Recon.
This is a plain bad joke by CCP and also a proof on apparent lack of knowledge and/or time to get the job done. As always I guess it is both....
I really pinned my hopes on "boost patch", but now, as I see a number of old bugs beening resurrected... or, rather, reanimated after 1.1, I have reasons to believe that's the next 2 months would not have much of content patches (And that's not a bad thing, most annoying bugs do need to die before we move on).
I would say that the next "boost patch", aka "AF boost", maybe contain pilgrim love. Hopefully within 2 or 3 months.
But atm I'm just about to set a new skill for training... And I'm really tempted to make it minmatar cruisers to level 5.
|
LoganFire
Quam Singulari
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 03:58:00 -
[776]
Amarr are dead as ccp employees do no play with this race so to them why fix it
I am so cool |
Vadimik
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.03.29 10:20:00 -
[777]
Originally by: LoganFire
Amarr are dead as ccp employees do no play with this race so to them why fix it
So how would you explain that about half of the latest patch was about fixing amarr in general and boosting some amarr ships in particular ?
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 05:25:00 -
[778]
Trying to fit the curse. Was flying a good setup but still didnt like it. Wasnt bringing enough to the gang. But it got me thinking. People who say the curse isnt broken is totally wrong. Yes it can still be dangerous but you name another recon that has to fit a cap injector or cap battery so it can be flown, and I will agree with you. It will still lose in a cap war.
Nos nerf sucks. And on top of that I would like to say that the nos nerf didnt need to happen. People who complain for the nerf were not whining about nos in general but Heavy nos. You didnt hear. 'omg med nos so overpowered.'
Ok thats the end of my rant.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.10 08:19:00 -
[779]
Originally by: Vadimik
I really pinned my hopes on "boost patch", but now, as I see a number of old bugs beening resurrected... or, rather, reanimated after 1.1, I have reasons to believe that the next 2 months would not have much of content patches (And that's not a bad thing, most annoying bugs do need to die before we move on).
Well tbh the first to happen for Pilgrim would be CCP to acknowledge they are on the Pilgrim. Except a Dev convo on SiSi a long time ago, I received nothing else indicating CCP-awareness.
Let us put it this way: they plain got another view on the issue. I just dont have a clue which...
__
- click here - |
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 10:30:00 -
[780]
Bumpin dis cause the pilgrim is garbage.
|
|
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 13:38:00 -
[781]
I think the real tragedy is these *should* be good, cool, useful, etc ships by all rights. But they're just wastes at the moment because they are underpowered, expensive, and fragile.
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
Wardeneo
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 13:52:00 -
[782]
this thread got big eh!
wardeneo
If brute force doesn't work..... your not using enough :) |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 14:05:00 -
[783]
And is still going, haven't seen a fix yet.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik
Gallente
aurorae pacificas
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 14:45:00 -
[784]
I dont fly the amarr recons and I know im weighing in quite late in this thread but the problems discussed also effect the Gallente recons with the damp nerf, particularly the arazu.
In saying that, ive fought quite a few curse's in both TQ and sisi. The nano/neut setup is still quite viable, and tbh is very effective. The problem I see is that this is THE ONLY viable setup ive seen for this ship.
I think both the amarr and gallentee recons need to be reassessed. The Caldari and Minnie recons are both fine ships (I also fly falcons and rooks often) so I dont think they need any further buffs, but it would be nice to see the lach's and curse starting to refill specialist roles in small and med sized gangs.
I dont think the answer is complete immunity to the nos nerf but I really cant provide an alternative to that atm.
Aussie TZ pvp corp AuPac is recruiting |
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.11 14:52:00 -
[785]
Edited by: Brother Welcome on 11/04/2008 14:56:25
Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik
I dont think the answer is complete immunity to the nos nerf but I really cant provide an alternative to that atm.
Now that I've driven a Curse (flown one, whatever) a bit, my feeling is that the Nos nerf is a poor fix. The first issue I have with Nos in general is that you get very little feedback and nothing to indicate what you are doing to your opponent. Guns at least creep the little red bar. My second issue is that having to run your cap close to zero so your Noses work means you have to have a booster or risk the odd moment sitting dead in space. With the Curse being a fragile sort of ship, those dead moments can (as I discovered) prove fatal.
Now the issue with a booster is that they're heavy and make the Curse a difficult fit. It's kind of hard to get your head around the idea that a ship set up for sucking cap from its opponent must fit a cap booster!
I'm not arguing for or against Noses needing nerfing, but only the implementation. It's too dicey. It might be fixed by giving feedback, perhaps a little green light when the unit is usefully sucking or perhaps a cap bar for the enemy ship...
-vk
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 01:01:00 -
[786]
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Edited by: Brother Welcome on 11/04/2008 15:00:06
Edited by: Brother Welcome on 11/04/2008 14:56:25
Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik
I dont think the answer is complete immunity to the nos nerf but I really cant provide an alternative to that atm.
Now the issue with a booster is that they're heavy and make the Curse a difficult fit. It's kind of hard to get your head around the idea that a ship set up for sucking cap from its opponent must fit a cap booster!
Exactly
|
Lil Mule
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 01:44:00 -
[787]
Edited by: Lil Mule on 19/03/2008 17:57:47
I agree the curse does need some love, it is partially broken.
My curse can perma run its 2 Neuts and the MWD doing 2.9 KM/s. This isnt super fast, and I could use some additional sp's in the navigation department so Im not going to blame that on the ship.
In order to get it to run the 2 Neuts and MWD perma (1 Medium NOS and 2 Heavy Missile launchers round out my high's), I do have to put in 3 Cap recharger 2's in the Mids. This effectively limits any additional Ewar such as web or scram in the mids. This means that this ship has to team up with others in order to have any chance at killing anything. IMO it should run just fine with 2 Cap Recharger II's in the mids, instead of 3.
Sure I could but in 2 NOS's in the high to balance out the 2 Neuts, but the problem with that is as other posters have indicated, it creates a situation where when your opponent is out of CAP, so are you. What good is that? The point of the weapon shouldnt be to drain my cap and yours too making us both crippled, that isnt a weapon. Thats like designing a gun that shoots my ship as well as shooting the opponent at the same time.
Throttling the Neut at the end to ensure that you have some cap to finish off your opponent also isnt feasible. There is no indicator, its all guestimate as to whether your Neut module is working. Other Ewar mods get an indication that they are working, and what the status of the enemy is, but Neutralizers dont. Thats a second handi-cap against the curse.
The ship isnt entirely broken, its just...incapacitated. Its like a person missing both of their legs. In this analogy, I currently have mine running a sweet electric wheelchair setup, and ya its sure fun to do some wheelies in it, but lets face it, its not as cool as having 2 legs.
-----------------------------------------------
People enjoy flying Amarr for the same reason they like being tied up in leather, whipped and called names
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 01:49:00 -
[788]
One possibility could be diverging the bonus for neuts and NOS. For NOS, decrease the amount bonus or scrap it. For neuts, change bonus from amount to activation cost. For both, a duration bonus. That way it would be easier to manage the neutralizers and the nos would suck more frequently to prevent long gaps at near 0 cap.
Wouldnt fix the one-viable-set-up problem but it would be something.
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
Lili Lu
Victory Not Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 04:23:00 -
[789]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Trying to fit the curse. Was flying a good setup but still didnt like it. Wasnt bringing enough to the gang. But it got me thinking. People who say the curse isnt broken is totally wrong. Yes it can still be dangerous but you name another recon that has to fit a cap injector or cap battery so it can be flown, and I will agree with you. It will still lose in a cap war.
Nos nerf sucks. And on top of that I would like to say that the nos nerf didnt need to happen. People who complain for the nerf were not whining about nos in general but Heavy nos. You didnt hear. 'omg med nos so overpowered.'
Ok thats the end of my rant.
Yes, it all goes back to the nos nerf. The stupidest solution was what CCP chose. Why couldn't they have created limited nos hardpoints instead. Or more precisely, only amarr recons could have fit more than one (or maybe two) nos. This would have got rid of the nos domi, etc, and allowed the amarr recons to actually engage in cap warfare with battleships.
But but it would have kept them too powerful . . . blah blah. If you want to see overpowered recons look no further than what Caldari recons have become with that recent unneeded over the top ecm re-buff. One curse or pilgrim might have capped out one battleship, but Caldari recons can neuter/remove MULTIPLE battleships from a fight and at extreme range.
I still think the Pilgrim should have a range bonus instead of an amount bonus, and with other ships limited to one energy emission module hardpoint the pilgrim would still be viable with range instead of amount.
Nosferatu is now a rediculous mod. Energy "Vampire" my a**. What self-respecting vampire would stop sucking when his blood amount equalled his victim's. CCP, your solution "sucked"
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 05:53:00 -
[790]
The problem with the range bonus over the amount bonus is the pilgrim wont be able to nuke anyoneĘs cap.
Another option would be scripts. Remove large and small nos/neuts from the game, and only have 1 size, and increase their amount drain for both. The nos should have a range of 12km standard, neuts the range of 24km.
For nos insert two scripts; range script at the cost of amount drained, and amount script at the cost of range.
For neuts insert two scripts; cap reduction script at the cost of amount drained, and amount script at the cost of cap and range.
Just an estimate. Neglecting nos nerf.
Best named
Nos. 175pg, 25 cpu. 12 sec cycle time.
Nos standard. 80 cap drained 12km range
Range scrip. 40 cap drained 24km range
Amount. 160 cap drained 6 km range
Best Named.
Neuts 200pg, 25 cpu, 12 sec cycle time.
Neuts standard. 250 cap drained, 24km range, 200 cap usage
Cap Script. 125 cap drained, 24km range, 50 cap usage.
Amount. 750 cap drained, 6km range, 600 cap usage.
The idea is that there is only one size. Some may disagree but cap warfare is ew. Without cap the target cannot do much. It disables their abilities. So in saying that, have one size but add scripts.
The nos 80 cap drain without nos nerf maybe to steep but remember its only 12km with a 12 sec cycle time. Not the 24km, 120 cap drained for heavy nos.
For neuts, it still be recognised as the offensive cap warfare module. The range bonus over nos and amount drained is evident of that. The downside is cap usage and pg. (Ok this may not effect bs or capitals however Bs should be more potent.) This will allow cap ships and bs to still be able to defend themselves from support.
Lower the range at 6km and you can seriously do some dmg to hostiles capacitor. This will be handy for capital warfare, (if you wish to get in web/smartbomb range), or for close range BS. This isnĘt ideal for standard capitals or bs, but just an option. The cap reduction cost is idle for cruisers.
For nos itĘs not ideal for fleet BSĘs or capitals. The 12km range is evident of that, and the range script is pointless unless you want to drain 40 cap with 12sec cycle time. If a bs wishes to use nos it would be best advised to use the amount script. Get in close under 6km. A bs would be better off fitting neuts, as it only drains a small amount of cap from its huge capacitor with a much better range on the module.
So Nos is for mission runners and cruisers, with the flexibility to choose your range. A cruiser might want to get in close and fuel its tank, or he might be speed fitted so it increases the range and fuel its mwd.
The curse would become viable in fleet battles, being able to neut at around 75km.
As for the sentinel. Take away the range bonus and give it pg/cpu bonus for fitting neuts and nos.
Now obviously itĘs a bit late to nuke the nos nerf that so many people love and add a simular idea to this. But its fun to come up with interesting ideas. These numbers are just estimates.
Comments?
|
|
|
Lili Lu
Victory Not Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.04.12 13:52:00 -
[791]
Originally by: Depp Knight
elegant suggestions
Excellent suggestions, and yeah the numbers could be tweaked. However, that alone might put us back to nos domis. But combining that solution with limited nos/neut hardpoints (or possibly energy emission hardpoints) for all ships might fix the whole messed up situation. Obviously amarr recons (and if energy emission - caldari/amarr logistics) would have the ability to fit all or almost all high slots with them.
The sentinel would still be sort of distant cousin to the caldari EAF, but frankly they all are pretty weak except the caldari one because the range and effectiveness of ecm is so much more powerful than the other ew types.
If they fix amarr recons thru something like this we shouldn't forget what they've done with the extreme damp nerf to the gallente recons. But that is another thread, amarr's been waiting longer.
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.04.13 07:06:00 -
[792]
Bumping this because the pilgrim is still ******* garbage.
Pick a suggestion. ANY SUGGESTION. Just make the damn ship flyable.
Thanks :) |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.13 11:41:00 -
[793]
Just someone suggest on why CCP does not acknowledge (dev blog) or post in here for clarification?
Alternatives:
1. They know its bad but are not willing to do it since they believe it would have a huge impact on other stuff too.
2. Someone in CCP has a "Super-Uber" grand plan, which will solve it automatically thus they dont do anything. Only that grand plan got delayed by more than a year... Well go figure...
3. They did some testing and cant see a problem.
4. One CCP member posted on an alt in here for clarification but got flamed away due to his lack of knowledge (I suspect several posters in here).
5. They got no clue.
1,2,3,4 or 5 - what is it?
__
- click here - |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.13 12:59:00 -
[794]
Edited by: Kingwood on 13/04/2008 13:00:22
Would increasing the cap recharge of the Pilgrim (and Curse) to simulate at least 1 medium bonused NOS running be a good idea? I'm still trying to find a valid solo setup for my Pilgrim, the ship's not impressing me at the moment.
I'm still skilling for the Pilgrim (and by extension, the Curse; 30 days for Recon 5, yay), because I hope they will get a sensible boost soon. Knowing CCP's track record, I am probably betting on a dead and beaten horse.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.13 14:21:00 -
[795]
just cannot give up. There are some great ideas in this thread and some interesting ideas as well.
I will say this again. Nos was not an issue, Heavy nos was though.
|
Dristra
Amarr
Shadows of the Dead
Vae Victis.
|
Posted - 2008.04.13 15:24:00 -
[796]
At least the amarr recons are cheap :P
Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions!
I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them. |
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.13 17:47:00 -
[797]
Edited by: Brother Welcome on 13/04/2008 17:47:30
Originally by: Depp Knight
There are some great ideas in this thread and some interesting ideas as well.
The OP was right in observing the Curse is short 100pg or so, but the issue is the Nos/Cap situation. Amarr recons fit their ewar in weapon slots, so what about that?
*What other ewar asks you to jam yourself before you jam your enemy?
*If we're giving up weapons for ewar, would it be a crime to give us a cap bar on our enemies so we know we're doing something?
Fix Nos. If necessary make 'em like cov-op cloaks, or make 'em take turret slots to stop them being de rigeur on every fit.
-vk
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Tread Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 11:46:00 -
[798]
So against my better judgement, I gave the Curse another chance tonight.
Lost to 2 Vagabonds. Yep.
The Curse is too slow to compete in the nano world, too fragile to tank properly, not enough cap to deny the enemy cap without shutting itself down, and despite the patch the tracking disrupters still arnt enough to compensate for all of the other problems.
It's really rather depressing...
Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.14 12:29:00 -
[799]
Well in all honesty, you were facing two hacs. Ok yeh a falcon could flee but not kill them. Thats a different issue. Mainly ECM over any other ew.
|
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 11:41:00 -
[800]
Have the devs even acknowledged this thread exists? All I know is CCP Zulu mentioning that "the curse is fine, the Pilgrim might need some love". If this love involves screwing every other ship in the game again (haha resist change), please don't. Please increase cap recharge rate of the Curse and Pilgrim, or give them a role bonus so that medium NOS works like before. And please, for the love of god, forget the idea to make the Pilgrim a gang ship. It's a solo roamer, not a damn gang ship. |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:04:00 -
[801]
Originally by: Kingwood
Have the devs even acknowledged this thread exists? All I know is CCP Zulu mentioning that "the curse is fine, the Pilgrim might need some love".
<snip>
Curse is Khanid and as such should be an armor tanker too. Yet again the Nano-Curse is considered the only viable setup.
Or what do you think, when suddenly (a few month ago) a CCP employee stepped up and told us that Curse is fine?
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:05:00 -
[802]
I like this new sig Hydro.
OT: Fix curse and pilgrim. YES curse also needs a fix.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:07:00 -
[803]
I don't agree with Zulu's assessment of the Curse, maybe you misunderstood me. Especially with the incoming nano nerf, you gotta wonder how much the price of the Curse will drop.
|
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:07:00 -
[804]
Originally by: Kingwood
Please increase cap recharge rate of the Curse and Pilgrim, or give them a role bonus so that medium NOS works like before. And please, for the love of god, forget the idea to make the Pilgrim a gang ship. It's a solo roamer, not a damn gang ship.
Fix the Nos. Fix the Curse. Suggestions
*Undo the previous nerf, then make cap gained less than amount drained. That will address the issue described in notes to build 36191. The algorithm for cap gained should incorporate relative capacitor regain rates of the ships over one another, times the cap drained. The idea is to use that rather lovely and mysterious cap recharge curve so that when their capacitor is recharging more strongly than your own (at around 2/3rds depletion) it is much harder for you to gain cap from it, and in any case you can't gain more than you drain. Note that we don't care about the actual numerical amount recharge per tick, but the %age recharge, so as not to penalise small ships over large. A Curse at 1/3rd cap would therefore gain near to 1:1 of drain from their target.
*Make noses deactivate whenever they drain exactly zero cap. That will only happen where you are both at 100%, or they are at 0%, giving the minimum feedback needed to work these modules correctly. It will make fitting one Nos alongside Neuts a helpful way to measure their capacitor in 6-second dip-tests.
Are these any good? Worth posting to the dev ideas forum?
-vk
|
Umar Khattab
Amarr
Clown Punchers.
Clown Punchers Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:11:00 -
[805]
Edited by: Umar Khattab on 15/04/2008 13:11:39
Originally by: Depp Knight
Well in all honesty, you were facing two hacs. Ok yeh a falcon could flee but not kill them. Thats a different issue. Mainly ECM over any other ew.
Yeah, falcons are just fa*ggy ships, let's face it.
DUDEISM.COM |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:13:00 -
[806]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 15/04/2008 13:14:06
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
I like this new sig Hydro.
Standard to most A-WAR members and as such not my idea but Timaios's.
Since CCP prohibits the excessive use of blood and gore, we had to do something completly different to deliver the message ...
__
- click here - |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 13:30:00 -
[807]
Originally by: Umar Khattab
Yeah, falcons are just fa*ggy ships, let's face it.
QFT.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.15 16:19:00 -
[808]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 15/04/2008 16:20:25
Originally by: Kingwood
I don't agree with Zulu's assessment of the Curse, maybe you misunderstood me. Especially with the incoming nano nerf, you gotta wonder how much the price of the Curse will drop.
Scrolling back in thread I realize that I already hinted at an incoming Nano-Curse nerf. Apart from that this shows that a previous point is a major drawback for Amarr Recons: lack of versatility.
There are simply no alternate setups. Thus the NOS-nerf did a horrible thing, which the Devs were not aware of and which most did not realize. A full range of different playstyles has been eliminated (or should I say obliterated?). Mark me: viable and balanced playstyles those were.
In the end it leaves us with a bitter taste: Amarr Recons slowly nerfed to hell. Zulu's remark about "taking something away from players afterwards is no option" or "fun in the game" does indeed sound like mockery in this context geared towards the Amarr Recon community.
__
- click here - |
Horny girl1
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 11:33:00 -
[809]
haha, after nano nerf... curse will be only good in station....
Amar recons are really bad LOL
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 12:48:00 -
[810]
Well it depends on the nature of the nano-nerf. If smaller ships are still able to move quickly in relation to larger ships and their ability to track and hit smaller vessels, whilst preventing larger heavier ships from doing so it wont be an issue - but Im not holding my breath.
C.
New Scanner Idea!
|
|
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 14:08:00 -
[811]
Originally by: Horny girl1
haha, after nano nerf... curse will be only good in station....
Amar recons are really bad LOL
lol, yeah seriously. Curse and Pilgrim = Hangar Decoration |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 14:18:00 -
[812]
Originally by: Horny girl1
haha, after nano nerf... curse will be only good in station....
Amar recons are really bad LOL
It's not like nano curse was such a winner in the first place after years of nerf bat abuse.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.16 23:02:00 -
[813]
A Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly, but once you get it right there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly.
I agree about your points on the Pilgrim, though.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 00:00:00 -
[814]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 17/04/2008 00:00:31
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
A Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly, but once you get it right there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly.
I agree about your points on the Pilgrim, though.
You know that's a classic. What you mean is that with top skills the curse doesn't suck while other recons are ok with ok skills, good with good skills and awsome with awsome skills. Curse is just ok with awsome skills. It doesn't mean it is balanced with the power of caldari and minmatar recons.
This is exactly what people claimed about other amarr ships. They were wrong. Amarr got boosts left and right, because they were wrong. Wrong.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Julius Romanus
Fatalix Inc.
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 02:36:00 -
[815]
The Lyria I agree with is back. Dark times ahead. |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 07:13:00 -
[816]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 07:15:44
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You know that's a classic. What you mean is that with top skills the curse doesn't suck while other recons are ok with ok skills, good with good skills and awsome with awsome skills. Curse is just ok with awsome skills. It doesn't mean it is balanced with the power of caldari and minmatar recons.
This is exactly what people claimed about other amarr ships. They were wrong. Amarr got boosts left and right, because they were wrong. Wrong.
I think anyone with half a brain would draw a more reasonable conclusion from a post that doesn't even contain the word "skill". Let me rephrase for the sake of those who don't:
The Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly in terms of player skill, since it relies entirely on manipulating something you cannot monitor. Once you get it right, however, there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly. Most people seem to be living in the past and insisting on a NOS-oriented fit, and it's a ridiculously bad idea. The Curse remains powerful.
Here's a little something to get you started - fit at least two Neutralizers, no Nosferatu and certainly no capacitor booster. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 08:33:00 -
[817]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 17/04/2008 08:34:01
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 07:15:44
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You know that's a classic. What you mean is that with top skills the curse doesn't suck while other recons are ok with ok skills, good with good skills and awsome with awsome skills. Curse is just ok with awsome skills. It doesn't mean it is balanced with the power of caldari and minmatar recons.
This is exactly what people claimed about other amarr ships. They were wrong. Amarr got boosts left and right, because they were wrong. Wrong.
I think anyone with half a brain would draw a more reasonable conclusion from a post that doesn't even contain the word "skill". Let me rephrase for the sake of those who don't:
The Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly in terms of player skill, since it relies entirely on manipulating something you cannot monitor. Once you get it right, however, there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly. Most people seem to be living in the past and insisting on a NOS-oriented fit, and it's a ridiculously bad idea. The Curse remains powerful.
Here's a little something to get you started - fit at least two Neutralizers, no Nosferatu and certainly no capacitor booster.
Some facts to make it simple:
1. If you have falcons/rooks and huginns/rapiers you DO NOT NEED A CURSE.
2. Curse sucks for solo because sacrilege will outperform it by huge margins
3. Wich means curse is just a poor mans gang and solo ship. There simply is no reason to fly a curse. Minmtar and caldari recons do the anti nano/disrupting better and hacs are better solo ships.
gg curse.
Do you realise how pathetic curses are? I've seen curses lose against injected zealots and even harbingers. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:00:00 -
[818]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 17/04/2008 09:04:06
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I think anyone with half a brain would draw a more reasonable conclusion from a post that doesn't even contain the word "skill". Let me rephrase for the sake of those who don't:
The Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly in terms of player skill, since it relies entirely on manipulating something you cannot monitor. Once you get it right, however, there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly. Most people seem to be living in the past and insisting on a NOS-oriented fit, and it's a ridiculously bad idea. The Curse remains powerful.
Here's a little something to get you started - fit at least two Neutralizers, no Nosferatu and certainly no capacitor booster.
Just dont take EFT warriors serious.
Caelum Dominus is a well experienced character and of course he does for sure take advantage of player skill, since he needs it (he does have average to good Amarr Recon skills, but faaaar from perfect):
http://ineve.net/skills/character.php?charID=ODkwNzM0Mjky
Now one daresay: Hydrogen! Caelum is jsut an alt and there is a great PvPer hidden inside. Yes, I am aware so I started to learn from a properly fitted Curse:
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Caelum+Dominus&id=2294621&page=1&filter=losses#mail
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Caelum+Dominus&id=2294621&page=1&filter=losses#fitting
Thus it becomes obvious, that Caelum Dominus is the Pro and - at least - myself is the n00b. Considering this, I am happy and feel comfortable with that, since I heavily refrain from taking Caelum serious or even consider him on a similar level (Yeah I know I know, he is waaaaayy above).
EDIT: lots of edits, since I had so many typos while laughing so hard.
__
- click here - |
Opertone
Caldari
Simtech Productions
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:11:00 -
[819]
people under estimate the curses power with tracking disruptors
tracking disruptors shut down the best of the best turrets
nowadays the tracking disruptors affect the falloff... with 3 tracking disruptors on a non specialized ship i could effectively stop enemy turret fire... by limiting their range to 10 km
curse can limit enemie's range on turrets to 8 kms, shut down small ships with neutralizers and feed on large ship's capacitor with vampires...
missile boats are shield tanked, shield tank is fragile and cap intensive, normally missile boats do not have room or power grid for cap booster, so it is easy to shut down a smaller missile boat
the only ship which curse will have problems with is the sacrilege - non shield tanked, cap injected missile boat and drake - massively tanked missile boat, tank of which can not be broken by cap warfare
what concerns a curse versus a raven - the curse can break the ravens active tank with ease, but it can not withstand incoming fire, some possible way is feeding on the ravens tank and tanking the curse as a response
curse can solo all frigates, all turret ships and majority of industrials
curse only can't take - Ravens, sacrileges, drakes
curse role is not so bad, what do you think?
|
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:13:00 -
[820]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
A Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly, but once you get it right there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly.
That's good news. What = 'fitted properly' in your view?
-vk |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:14:00 -
[821]
Originally by: Opertone
people under estimate the curses power with tracking disruptors
tracking disruptors shut down the best of the best turrets
nowadays the tracking disruptors affect the falloff... with 3 tracking disruptors on a non specialized ship i could effectively stop enemy turret fire... by limiting their range to 10 km
curse can limit enemie's range on turrets to 8 kms, shut down small ships with neutralizers and feed on large ship's capacitor with vampires...
missile boats are shield tanked, shield tank is fragile and cap intensive, normally missile boats do not have room or power grid for cap booster, so it is easy to shut down a smaller missile boat
the only ship which curse will have problems with is the sacrilege - non shield tanked, cap injected missile boat and drake - massively tanked missile boat, tank of which can not be broken by cap warfare
what concerns a curse versus a raven - the curse can break the ravens active tank with ease, but it can not withstand incoming fire, some possible way is feeding on the ravens tank and tanking the curse as a response
curse can solo all frigates, all turret ships and majority of industrials
curse only can't take - Ravens, sacrileges, drakes
curse role is not so bad, what do you think?
You are invited to run with a blasterthron. Then again I do invite you to make a load of solo experience in a Curse first and verify your statements.
/emote shakes head |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:14:00 -
[822]
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
A Curse is a demanding ship to fit and fly, but once you get it right there's no going back. It's an awesome ship, and I daresay that anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly.
That's good news. What = 'fitted properly' in your view?
-vk
Apparently this - yeah, I had to learn too, when I saw it:
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Caelum+Dominus&id=2294621&page=1&filter=losses#fitting |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:15:00 -
[823]
Originally by: Opertone
people under estimate the curses power with tracking disruptors
tracking disruptors shut down the best of the best turrets
nowadays the tracking disruptors affect the falloff... with 3 tracking disruptors on a non specialized ship i could effectively stop enemy turret fire... by limiting their range to 10 km
curse can limit enemie's range on turrets to 8 kms, shut down small ships with neutralizers and feed on large ship's capacitor with vampires...
missile boats are shield tanked, shield tank is fragile and cap intensive, normally missile boats do not have room or power grid for cap booster, so it is easy to shut down a smaller missile boat
the only ship which curse will have problems with is the sacrilege - non shield tanked, cap injected missile boat and drake - massively tanked missile boat, tank of which can not be broken by cap warfare
what concerns a curse versus a raven - the curse can break the ravens active tank with ease, but it can not withstand incoming fire, some possible way is feeding on the ravens tank and tanking the curse as a response
curse can solo all frigates, all turret ships and majority of industrials
curse only can't take - Ravens, sacrileges, drakes
curse role is not so bad, what do you think?
All those points are moot.
Dual long range webs nail a target in mid space to almost a halt. No injection is going to save you.
Falcons/rooks can jam several battleships out of combat, eccm or not. If a falcon wants to jam a BS he will. ECCM is not enough.
There is no point in flying the curse unless you can't fly other ships that fill the role you're looking for. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:18:00 -
[824]
@Dominus Caelum
In all due respect I do not have anything against you personally. But (here it comes - the big BUT) there are a lot of players with semi to non-existant experience in this thread who claim to know something. Somehow trying to brag and gloat to...
After all this attitude somehow spoils the goal of this thread, the work of all involved, leaves a bad taste and makes you look like an @$$. Read this thread, learn, improve and make your own experience and if you really try hard, you might become competent with Amarr Recons. |
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 09:55:00 -
[825]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
...anyone who doesn't agree have yet to fly one that's fitted properly.
That's good news. What = 'fitted properly' in your view?
-vk
Apparently this - yeah, I had to learn too, when I saw it:
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Caelum+Dominus&id=2294621&page=1&filter=losses#fitting
Surely that's a delivery fit? Not all slots are filled.
-vk |
Opertone
Caldari
Simtech Productions
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 10:05:00 -
[826]
you haven't tried a DISRUPTING on a MEGATHRONE
go try for yourself, you will see that you can keep megathrone outside of the turret range with an overheated web, you can MWD out of megathrones range
you just never use turret disruptors, and you should
curse >>> all turret ships
webbs >> MWD zealot
go learn something before saying bad things |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 10:21:00 -
[827]
Originally by: Opertone
you haven't tried a DISRUPTING on a MEGATHRONE
go try for yourself, you will see that you can keep megathrone outside of the turret range with an overheated web, you can MWD out of megathrones range
you just never use turret disruptors, and you should
curse >>> all turret ships
webbs >> MWD zealot
go learn something before saying bad things
You have no clue about real combat. Why?
Tracking disrupted mega will kill anything that tries to web it (unless its a huginn) if he tries to get back to a gate. TD fail nr 1 because a falcon and rook can protect their sub 10km tacklers against the mega by jamming it.
Webs > mwd zealot? What does this have to do with the curse? Do you seriously mean that the curse should web the zealot while holding 2 TDs on it? hahahaha, wait.....hahahaha. You sure you know what you're talking about?
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Opertone
Caldari
Simtech Productions
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 10:32:00 -
[828]
check the tracking distruptors again, use the range disruption again
curse MWDs faster than a MEGA
curse can bring MEGA's range to 12 km, it can stay 30 km away...
it is simple |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 10:59:00 -
[829]
Originally by: Opertone
check the tracking distruptors again, use the range disruption again
curse MWDs faster than a MEGA
curse can bring MEGA's range to 12 km, it can stay 30 km away...
it is simple
Not it's not simple.
THIS is simple:
To be able to prevent ANY lock at all on the MEGA eventhough it has ECCM from 150km distance.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 11:04:00 -
[830]
Originally by: Opertone
check the tracking distruptors again, use the range disruption again
curse MWDs faster than a MEGA
curse can bring MEGA's range to 12 km, it can stay 30 km away...
it is simple
Actually - when thinkign about it - I shouldnt have mentioned any ship. Simply because it is a moot point - since a smart mega pilot either is prepared or with a gang. You wont kill any mega in 100% of the cases in any setup. That easy. The same goes for most other ships also.
After all I plain dislike your attitude and also got the impression you lack experience. Example:
- Which Curse pilot cares orbiting a mega at 30 km anyways, except someone who can pin it down with webs and scrambler/disruptor aka another gang? It wont score you a kill.
- About MWD speed - read above posts and you will realize that we are about to see a nano-nerf, where you can most likely shove the speed of the Nano-Curse to where the sun never shines.
- ... so much more
Think twice. Either you are the typical type of troll (weeeep - they try for a Amarr Recon boost - **** them) or you are a EFT warrior out to troll and gloat or... so much more.
Its not only abotu what you say, but also the constructive attitude - the latter you totally lack.
__
- click here - |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 11:08:00 -
[831]
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Surely that's a delivery fit? Not all slots are filled.
-vk
It sure is a travel fit - except he forgot the WCS.
Hmmm, no testing fit for... nm
Well, uhmmm a ratting fit... err next!
Must be a ... "I do not hae a clue" fit.
__
- click here - |
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 14:07:00 -
[832]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Surely that's a delivery fit? Not all slots are filled.
-vk
It sure is a travel fit - except he forgot the WCS.
Hmmm, no testing fit for... nm
Well, uhmmm a ratting fit... err next!
Must be a ... "I do not hae a clue" fit.
Cue opportunity to post a fit.
Other ewar is either absolute, or it's tackle which is vital to PvP. The one thing neuts do uniquely is hit repping.
I suppose the synergy between neuts and TDs lies in the way they both help your drones. TDs keep them safe, and neuts make them more dangerous.
-vk
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 16:06:00 -
[833]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 16:07:47
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Some facts to make it simple:
1. If you have falcons/rooks and huginns/rapiers you DO NOT NEED A CURSE.
2. Curse sucks for solo because sacrilege will outperform it by huge margins
3. Wich means curse is just a poor mans gang and solo ship. There simply is no reason to fly a curse. Minmtar and caldari recons do the anti nano/disrupting better and hacs are better solo ships.
gg curse.
Do you realise how pathetic curses are? I've seen curses lose against injected zealots and even harbingers.
Electronic Counter Measures and Stasis Webifiers are not nearly as disabling to most ships as an empty capacitor. I'd much rather fly a Neutralizer-fitted Curse over a Sacrilege for purposes of solo PvP anyday, because the sheer destructive power of a perma-running Neutralizer and 300+ DPS is far more effective than a Sacrilege doing 400-some DPS but lacking the many abilities of a Curse to stay out of harm's way and shut his opponent(s) down entirely.
I think it's reasonable to assume that the Curse pilots you've seen lose to cap-injected Zealots and even Harbingers have been unable to fit their ship properly and/or fly it correctly alltogether. As I said earlier, it's a far more demanding ship to pilot than most others because it relies entirely on something you cannot monitor.
NOS no longer being an IWIN-button doesn't mean the Curse now sucks, you just have to adapt and actually put some thought into flying it.
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 16:12:00 -
[834]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 16:15:39
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 16:13:05
Originally by: Hydrogen
Just dont take EFT warriors serious.
Caelum Dominus is a well experienced character and of course he does for sure take advantage of player skill, since he needs it (he does have average to good Amarr Recon skills, but faaaar from perfect):
http://ineve.net/skills/character.php?charID=ODkwNzM0Mjky
Now one daresay: Hydrogen! Caelum is jsut an alt and there is a great PvPer hidden inside. Yes, I am aware so I started to learn from a properly fitted Curse:
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Caelum+Dominus&id=2294621&page=1&filter=losses#mail
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Caelum+Dominus&id=2294621&page=1&filter=losses#fitting
Thus it becomes obvious, that Caelum Dominus is the Pro and - at least - myself is the n00b. Considering this, I am happy and feel comfortable with that, since I heavily refrain from taking Caelum serious or even consider him on a similar level (Yeah I know I know, he is waaaaayy above).
EDIT: lots of edits, since I had so many typos while laughing so hard.
I purchased this character some months ago, so if it interests you I'm sure you could dig up the thread in Character Bazaar to confirm it. I haven't lost my first Curse yet, but with the amount of encounters coming my way my wallet twitches to know it probably won't be long. While I do appreciate your enthusiasm to attempt to turn this into a more personal flame war, I'm afraid I'm not willing to return the favour.
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 16:29:00 -
[835]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I'd much rather fly a Neutralizer-fitted Curse over a Sacrilege for purposes of solo PvP anyday, because the sheer destructive power of a perma-running Neutralizer and 300+ DPS is far more effective than a Sacrilege doing 400-some DPS but lacking the many abilities of a Curse to stay out of harm's way and shut his opponent(s) down entirely.
How do you get 300 dps out of a curse? |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 16:32:00 -
[836]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 16:33:26
Originally by: Brother Welcome
That's good news. What = 'fitted properly' in your view?
-vk
I quite like the one I've been using for the past few weeks:
Quote:
2x Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator
3x 'Arbalest' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher
10mn Microwarpdrive
Shadow Serpentis Warp Disruptor (Warp Disruptor II fits just fine, but I like the somewhat extended range)
Balmier-series Tracking Disruptor
Medium Capacitor Battery II
Cap Recharger II
Large Shield Extender II
2x Capacitor Power Relay II
2x Overdrive Injector System II
2x Polycarbon Engine Housing II
I've found it to be a nice balance between speed, buffer and offensive power. If you'd rather be faster and you're willing to sacrifice the buffer of the Large Shield Extender (nearly cuts your effective HP in half, mind you), you can exchange the Large Shield Extender for another Cap Recharger. This allows you to fit a Large Capacitor Battery and eliminate the need for a second Capacitor Power Relay (increases your speed from 3100m/s to 3500m/s). You will be able to perma-run one Neutralizer (which is obviously plenty to keep anyone dry) and both for a solid two minutes.
Give it a whirl. =)
Originally by: Madla Mafia
How do you get 300 dps out of a curse?
Decent drone and missile skills - nothing spectacular, you could achieve more with perfect skills. |
BobMoo22
Yarrrateers
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 16:35:00 -
[837]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Opertone
check the tracking distruptors again, use the range disruption again
curse MWDs faster than a MEGA
curse can bring MEGA's range to 12 km, it can stay 30 km away...
it is simple
Not it's not simple.
THIS is simple:
To be able to prevent ANY lock at all on the MEGA eventhough it has ECCM from 150km distance.
and do 0 damage in the process...
The curse is totally safe from a normal thron at 30k that it might as well be at 150k. The thron's guns can't hit it. The thron's drones (ogre's) can't get near it. At the same time, the curse is killing the thron, while the caldari recon is what, trying to stare then to death?
The curse is balanced. It is by far the best solo recon. It is a great ship to fly. It is perfect as it is.
The pilgrim on the other hand... |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 17:06:00 -
[838]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
While I do appreciate your enthusiasm to attempt to turn this into a more personal flame war, I'm afraid I'm not willing to return the favour.
Dont just assume - show your kills with your setup. Actually I am happy if you proove me wrong and you add valuable input. I did not find a single kill by you on any killboard so far with a Curse.
What I found was Malediction, Maller, Zealot,... all in a group, but not a single kill with you in a Curse. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 17:17:00 -
[839]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I purchased this character some months ago, so I'm sure the thread still exists in the Character Bazaar if it interests you to dig it up for confirmation.
To be exact: you sold a character called Xiang Zao and there is no sell/buy thread of Caelum Dominus to be found on Character bazaar. And I still do not see any of your "Uber" kills with a Curse. So where are the facts?
__
- click here - |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 17:32:00 -
[840]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 17/04/2008 17:34:59
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I purchased this character some months ago, so I'm sure the thread still exists in the Character Bazaar if it interests you to dig it up for confirmation.
To be exact: you sold a character called Xiang Zao and there is no sell/buy thread of Caelum Dominus to be found on Character bazaar. And I still do not see any of your "Uber" kills with a Curse. So where are the facts?
That's a shame, it must've been pruned by now (either that, or it exists somewhere deep within Timecode Bazaar before the separation of these two forums). I don't consider any of my Curse kills to date to be "uber", but I hope they can at least go some way towards proving some people in this thread wrong. Here's one from a few days ago:
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=wortax&filter=losses&id=3309715#mail
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Lord%20Ira&filter=losses&id=3309716#mail (nevermind the "Civilel" guy, I have no idea who he is)
I hope you realize that requesting killmails from me has preciously little to do with the topic of this thread. I'd rather you didn't continue your attempts to turn this into a flame-war between the two of us, because you will not succeed. |
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 23:10:00 -
[841]
Originally by: BobMoo22
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Opertone
check the tracking distruptors again, use the range disruption again
curse MWDs faster than a MEGA
curse can bring MEGA's range to 12 km, it can stay 30 km away...
it is simple
Not it's not simple.
THIS is simple:
To be able to prevent ANY lock at all on the MEGA eventhough it has ECCM from 150km distance.
and do 0 damage in the process...
The curse is totally safe from a normal thron at 30k that it might as well be at 150k. The thron's guns can't hit it. The thron's drones (ogre's) can't get near it. At the same time, the curse is killing the thron, while the caldari recon is what, trying to stare then to death?
The curse is balanced. It is by far the best solo recon. It is a great ship to fly. It is perfect as it is.
The pilgrim on the other hand...
You're taking things out of context. Curse is worthless in a gang if you have options to field ecm and web recons. Curse is worthless solo if you can fly hacs like sacrilege. Yeah it is a pretty worthless ship.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 23:10:00 -
[842]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I'd much rather fly a Neutralizer-fitted Curse over a Sacrilege for purposes of solo PvP anyday, because the sheer destructive power of a perma-running Neutralizer and 300+ DPS is far more effective than a Sacrilege doing 400-some DPS but lacking the many abilities of a Curse to stay out of harm's way and shut his opponent(s) down entirely.
How do you get 300 dps out of a curse?
He is making stuff up like the majority of the anti amarr squad.
--------------------------------------
[Video]Skirmish Warfare II |
Etho Demerzel
Gallente
Holy Clan of the Cone
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 23:36:00 -
[843]
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 17/04/2008 23:37:37
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You're taking things out of context. Curse is worthless in a gang if you have options to field ecm and web recons. Curse is worthless solo if you can fly hacs like sacrilege. Yeah it is a pretty worthless ship.
Look at the bright side, the Curse is not an Arazu or a Lachesis. THOSE are worthless ships for real... |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 23:40:00 -
[844]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 17/04/2008 23:37:37
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You're taking things out of context. Curse is worthless in a gang if you have options to field ecm and web recons. Curse is worthless solo if you can fly hacs like sacrilege. Yeah it is a pretty worthless ship.
Look at the bright side, the Curse is not an Arazu or a Lachesis. THOSE are worthless ships for real...
That is also true. |
Ihlarin Egar
|
Posted - 2008.04.17 23:46:00 -
[845]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Look at the bright side, the Curse is not an Arazu or a Lachesis. THOSE are worthless ships for real...
I hope that's sarcasm.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 00:06:00 -
[846]
Originally by: Etho Demerzel
Edited by: Etho Demerzel on 17/04/2008 23:37:37
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You're taking things out of context. Curse is worthless in a gang if you have options to field ecm and web recons. Curse is worthless solo if you can fly hacs like sacrilege. Yeah it is a pretty worthless ship.
Look at the bright side, the Curse is not an Arazu or a Lachesis. THOSE are worthless ships for real...
Curse and pilgrim have been broken for a lot longer than the gal recons and the gal recons are still better than what amarr recons can offer.
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 08:17:00 -
[847]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 18/04/2008 08:18:33
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
He is making stuff up like the majority of the anti amarr squad.
Right.
The lack of research you've put into the Curse before you commenced your whining crusade is blatantly obvious.
It isn't as straightforward to fly as the Sacrilege. I guess that makes it hard on some people.
I'm done here, this isn't going anywhere. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 08:19:00 -
[848]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 18/04/2008 08:18:48
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 18/04/2008 08:17:51
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
He is making stuff up like the majority of the anti amarr squad.
Right.
The lack of research you've put into the Curse before you commenced your whining crusade is blatantly obvious.
The Curse isn't as straightforward to fly as the Sacrilege. I guess that makes it hard on some people.
I'm done here, this isn't going anywhere.
I'll destroy your nano curse in a zealot even. That's how crappy curse is. Want to bring your curse to orvolle and have a go? |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 08:25:00 -
[849]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 18/04/2008 08:26:53
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
He is making stuff up like the majority of the anti amarr squad.
Right.
The lack of research you've put into the Curse before you commenced your whining crusade is blatantly obvious.
It isn't as straightforward to fly as the Sacrilege. I guess that makes it hard on some people.
I'm done here, this isn't going anywhere.
Just a Troll from the anti-Amarr-squad.
You Sir will hear from me in future. Cyas ingame.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 08:37:00 -
[850]
There is somethign, which I just dont get and which happened several times in this thread: someone has average Amarr Recon skills, maybe even has a blast in blobbing/ganking stuff with several of his mates vs a single target, comes over here and gloats, trying to explain how much others suck.
Caelum Dominus is a nice example. Imho the setup he posted is not bad, but not brand new either - not at all. Suggested he really is into Amarr Recons (and not member of the anti-amarr Troll squad) by then his "fun" will most likely be over, when a Nano-nerf hits the road.
I dont understand the attitude behind it, nor do I understand what keeps those chaps going.
Back to facts:
- Curse still offers a viable setting (Caelum Dominus example being the last example of several) but is threatened to be broken upon a nano-nerf
- Pilgrim is plain broken - failboat.
Ohhh well back to business I guess :(
__
- click here - |
|
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 08:52:00 -
[851]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 18/04/2008 08:54:31
I prefer solo PvP, and you of all people should know that I am not a member of your so-called "anti-amarr squad" (presumably anyone who dares to disagree with you and invoke the flamewar that always seems to ensue) since you actually took the trouble to dig up my inEVE profile and should know I fly exclusively Amarr... |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:04:00 -
[852]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 18/04/2008 08:54:31
I prefer solo PvP, and you of all people should know that I am not a member of your so-called "anti-amarr squad" (presumably anyone who dares to disagree with you and invoke the flamewar that always seems to ensue) since you actually took the trouble to dig up my inEVE profile and should know I fly exclusively Amarr...
If you got the time - then read the thread to its fullest. You will realize, how much "made up", incompetent, "trolling",.... comments and "flamewars" ensued. Only to realize in the end someone without a clue, from a gang setting,... posted his experience.
Mark me: everyone got a different perception and a different way of anjoying a ship or being with mates. Thus it is natural, that something, which one considers "a blast" is a no-go for another.
What remains? Apparently the playstyle you enjoy so much is a viable playstyle - it is not mine, but you got my full support to continue with it. Except: when a possible nano-nerf htis the road, by then it is likely your playstyle is history too. I would hate to see the last possible playstyle of one of the two Amarr recons go. It cant happen to me, since I consider nano-ship users as nano-fagg.... but thats only me - nano is not my world ;).
Want to keep your playstyle?
Want the option of the second ship, the Pilgrim being a viable ship?
Want fair/even odds when soloing?
You are invited to join in, keep this thread going, voice your opinion and keep this thread troll-free :)
__
- click here - |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:15:00 -
[853]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 18/04/2008 09:16:32
Originally by: Hydrogen
What remains? Apparently the playstyle you enjoy so much is a viable playstyle - it is not mine, but you got my full support to continue with it. Except: when a possible nano-nerf htis the road, by then it is likely your playstyle is history too. I would hate to see the last possible playstyle of one of the two Amarr recons go. It cant happen to me, since I consider nano-ship users as nano-fagg.... but thats only me - nano is not my world ;).
You are invited to join in, keep this thread going, voice your opinion and keep this thread troll-free :)
I'm sorry, I thought you regarded me as a member of the "anti-amarr squad" for having opinions that differ from your own?
Quote:
What remains? Apparently the playstyle you enjoy so much is a viable playstyle - it is not mine, but you got my full support to continue with it. Except: when a possible nano-nerf htis the road, by then it is likely your playstyle is history too. I would hate to see the last possible playstyle of one of the two Amarr recons go. It cant happen to me, since I consider nano-ship users as nano-fagg.... but thats only me - nano is not my world ;).
Sorry, but you can't have your I WIN-button back. NOS was nerfed for a reason.
Quote:
Want to keep your playstyle?
Certainly, and I don't think it will change after the infamous "upcoming nano-nerf" that everyone seems to speculate in arrives. My Curse travels at 3000m/s, which is considered very slow these days. At the very worst, I'd have to purchase a set of snakes to keep it.
Quote:
Want the option of the second ship, the Pilgrim, being a viable ship?
Absolutely, and I already stated that I think the Pilgrim is broken.
Quote:
Want fair/even odds when soloing?
Sure, I wouldn't mind others having a chance when they are faced with the sheer destructive power of a Curse. ^^
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:18:00 -
[854]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 18/04/2008 09:18:33
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Sure, I wouldn't mind others having a chance when they are faced with the sheer destructive power of a Curse. ^^
I'm still waiting in orvolle. You can grab that nano curse of yours and have a go at my zealot. It would be quite pathetic if you lost because zealot uses very cap depended weaponry and only turrets.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:19:00 -
[855]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 18/04/2008 09:18:33
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Sure, I wouldn't mind others having a chance when they are faced with the sheer destructive power of a Curse. ^^
I'm still waiting in orvolle. You can grab that nano curse of yours and have a go at my zealot. It would be quite pathetic if you lost because zealot uses very cap depended weaponry and only turrets.
Is that so? I had no idea. Either way it's not going to happen, since I'm deep in 0.0 and so is my Curse.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:20:00 -
[856]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Is that so? I had no idea. Either way it's not going to happen, since I'm deep in 0.0 and so is my Curse.
How convenient.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:21:00 -
[857]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Is that so? I had no idea. Either way it's not going to happen, since I'm deep in 0.0 and so is my Curse.
How convenient.
I know!
|
Riho
Gallente
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:25:00 -
[858]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 18/04/2008 09:18:33
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Sure, I wouldn't mind others having a chance when they are faced with the sheer destructive power of a Curse. ^^
I'm still waiting in orvolle. You can grab that nano curse of yours and have a go at my zealot. It would be quite pathetic if you lost because zealot uses very cap depended weaponry and only turrets.
i probably would kill your zealot or make you run in my curse :P but... still 7 days to amarr cruiser 5... so it has to wait a while :P
----------------------------------
Yes... this is my main.
Extreme Troll Slayer...
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:34:00 -
[859]
Originally by: Riho
i probably would kill your zealot or make you run in my curse :P but... still 7 days to amarr cruiser 5... so it has to wait a while :P
You have to fit it like he said he fitted it. Single TD and nano. No cheating. |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:34:00 -
[860]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 18/04/2008 09:34:37
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Sorry, but you can't have your I WIN-button back. NOS was nerfed for a reason.
That is the Troll-like comment I refered to before. NOS on Curse or Pilgrim never was unbalanced. In fact prenerf-NOS enabled NOS-fueled shield tanks, dual-armor repped Curse's and so much more. Alot of different playstyles, which added variety and excitement to the game and of course for the pod-pilot. The combination of unnerfed ECM, unnerfed Dampeners paired with NOS in case of the Curse ticked it off to an unbalanced ship.
In case of NOS, the NOS-Domi was unablanced as well as any BS with several heavy NOS - enabling them to kill any ship below BS/BC size with ease. That imho was the main reason for the NOS nerf and it was needed. Whereas the ECM-nerf, scripting, drone bandwidth nerf and NOS nerf together nerfed the Pilgrim to nothing and the Curse down to one possible setup, which is fragiel and got its drawbacks.
In all due respect: you got a viable setup, but that's about it. It is not "uber", it is not unbalanced, but aimed at a single type of targets. And furthermore: please keep your "I-WIN" button claims to somewhere, where the sun... go figure.
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I'm sorry, I thought you regarded me as a member of the "anti-amarr squad" for having opinions that differ from your own?
It is not about differing opinions - that is ok. It is about statements, which are not thought through to the end or statements, where the user apparently lacks experience, but acts "as-if". That is the exact point, where I put my heavy flamer to use, since nothign else seems to work (and I do train to raise my flaming to flaming specialization soon )
|
|
|
Riho
Gallente
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 09:37:00 -
[861]
Edited by: Riho on 18/04/2008 09:37:15
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Riho
i probably would kill your zealot or make you run in my curse :P but... still 7 days to amarr cruiser 5... so it has to wait a while :P
You have to fit it like he said he fitted it. Single TD and nano. No cheating.
my fit is nano and 1 td :) what is fine as i know exactly how to fight a zealot :P |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 10:30:00 -
[862]
Originally by: Riho
my fit is nano and 1 td :) what is fine as i know exactly how to fight a zealot :P
Great :-) |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 13:51:00 -
[863]
I'm not gonna enter the Curse discussion, as I will fly that ship only after I have maxed the skills for Pilgrim. What I can say, however, is that the Curse is underwhelming, and will only become more so after the Nano-nerf hits. A Sacrilege does everything a Curse does better either solo or in a small gang, in a larger gang a Curse is redundant, because the target will have died before it caps out.
The NOS-Nerf broke the Pilgrim, because it eliminated the only thing this ship was good at: a solo (or in a very very small gang) roamer, which had the ability to tank 1 or at max 2 ships at once, due to the cap drained to sustain it's tank. It now has a wasted mid-slot, because I have to fit a Cap booster. Forget a dual rep setup, because it doesn't work. So you have to use 1 MAR II, a plate, hardeners/EANM and a DC II (with recon 5). I have 1 mid-slot now instead of 2 to play around with, which I use a TD in. (Please don't argue that you don't need to fit a MWD, I will laugh at you). Viability? Low-Sec. Please try to solo a ratter in 0.0. Backup will have arrived before you kill your target. A solo-rep plus buffer is not enough.
Please note I am still low-skilled (2 months for DI 5/Recon 5), but I think I am qualified enough to argue my point. Why am I still skilling for this ship, even though I see it as being totally underwhelming? Because I love this ship, I love the playing style it supports. I am not a fleet person, I am not a large gang person, I enjoy roaming solo or with 1 or 2 buddies. If not for this ship I wouldn't have returned to Eve after a friend asked me to, and without this ship I will leave Eve. There's nothing like this ship, and I want it back. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 14:52:00 -
[864]
In my view the curse is a viable PVP ship. I do fly it, almost exclusively, and its ability to neutralize cap at range is a bonus to any gang and is equally an effective option in solo pvp.
Is it the best combat recon for small gangs? Probably not. Is it the best combat recon for solo pvp? Probably not. But in both cases its very situationaly dependant - sometimes it will be a devastating ship, in other cases it will fail hard . However it is a fun ship to fly and thats good enough for me.
The pilgrim on the other hand has very few redeeming features. Its weak in EW terms having only 5 mid slots compared with the rapier (6) falcon (7) and (6) - and yet EW is supposed to be a major element of a force recon ship?
But its primary problem is that its bonuses are imcompatible. Its nos/neuts are for close range combat, its Tracking Disruptors for medium to long range. Utilise one set of bonuses and you loose the benefit of the other.
In essence the pilgrim is a ship that has only one applicable recon bonus, and thus is half as effective as any comparable ship.
The solution must therefore come in one of the following formats:
1. Adjust its bonuses so that both are applicable at the same time: most likely by extending its nos/neut range.
2. Discard one bonus and maximise the other beyond its current level so that it compensates for the split of abilities: most likely by making it 'perma neut' capable, increased drone damage - or something similar.
3. Adjust the modules themselves (TDs / nos / neuts) so that option 1 or 2 is met.
C.
|
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 15:13:00 -
[865]
The Pilgrim/Curse are intended as cap warfare ships, with the EW as support. This is why the Pilgrim epecially is broken right now. The cap warfare role is what puts it into the solo roamer role (face it, in a gang I'd rather bring a high DPS ganker, because the target will die faster. Why would I need to drain it's cap first?) It is impossible to run a dual armor rep setup, so armor rep and buffer it is. It basically has 4 mid-slots, because 1 is used by the cap booster. This ship is gimped in all aspects after the NOS-nerf, and I want CCP to fix it while keeping it's niche role.
I don't want a range bonus, I just want NOS working on the Amarr recons as before. I'd also like to keep the current bonuses, because a TD does help you if someone decides to go for your drones first.
|
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 15:25:00 -
[866]
Edited by: Kingwood on 18/04/2008 15:25:56
Originally by: Cailais
Is it the best combat recon for small gangs? Probably not. Is it the best combat recon for solo pvp? Probably not.
I am really not sure whether it is a good idea to compare the Curse/Pilgrim to other races' Combat/Force recons. The Amarr recons follow an entirely different play style.
Edit: And don't ever change this, CCP. Please. |
Roidpwning101
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 15:36:00 -
[867]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Is that so? I had no idea. Either way it's not going to happen, since I'm deep in 0.0 and so is my Curse.
How convenient.
I know!
Thats why god made sisi. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 15:44:00 -
[868]
Originally by: Kingwood
Edited by: Kingwood on 18/04/2008 15:25:56
Originally by: Cailais
Is it the best combat recon for small gangs? Probably not. Is it the best combat recon for solo pvp? Probably not.
I am really not sure whether it is a good idea to compare the Curse/Pilgrim to other races' Combat/Force recons. The Amarr recons follow an entirely different play style.
Edit: And don't ever change this, CCP. Please.
Whether you think its possible to compare them people will, simply because they sit within the same class of ship. But Id agree with you, flying the various races recons is very different experience and they each go about conducting their role in slightly differing ways.
The curse remains effective because it can cripple an active tank and thus kill its target, whilst reducing damage done to it by speed tanking, EW or a combination of the two. The Pilgrim has no such option.
C.
|
StarTrekReference
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 17:07:00 -
[869]
Edited by: StarTrekReference on 18/04/2008 17:06:51
Giving the Pilgrim a bonus to armor resists, either by replacing the Tracking Disruptor bonus or giving it HAC resists would improve its viability in close range so it could make use of its Neut/Nos bonus while up close. An extra midslot to fit a cap booster and ewar and a a little extra grid to fit a tank would make the Pilgrim useful in close quarters.
However none of this fixes the fact that the Pilgrims role has been patched out. The Nos nerf was well intended, seeing as ships like the Dominix could just nuke everything nearby to get away. Every turret in the game is as follows: big guns cannot hit small fast ships unless they are going slow because they cant track them. Why is the nos/neut not the same?
Reverting the Nos modifications and giving the neuts/nos equipment tracking like any other turret would fix half the problems with both the Curse and the Pilgrim, as well as re-adding their role to the game.
Just my thoughts.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.18 17:49:00 -
[870]
Originally by: StarTrekReference
Edited by: StarTrekReference on 18/04/2008 17:06:51
Giving the Pilgrim a bonus to armor resists, either by replacing the Tracking Disruptor bonus or giving it HAC resists would improve its viability in close range so it could make use of its Neut/Nos bonus while up close. An extra midslot to fit a cap booster and ewar and a a little extra grid to fit a tank would make the Pilgrim useful in close quarters.
However none of this fixes the fact that the Pilgrims role has been patched out. The Nos nerf was well intended, seeing as ships like the Dominix could just nuke everything nearby to get away. Every turret in the game is as follows: big guns cannot hit small fast ships unless they are going slow because they cant track them. Why is the nos/neut not the same?
Reverting the Nos modifications and giving the neuts/nos equipment tracking like any other turret would fix half the problems with both the Curse and the Pilgrim, as well as re-adding their role to the game.
Just my thoughts.
I cant see the nos nerf ever being rolled back, even for the amarr recons. It was certainly a badly thought out idea though, some suggesting that it was brought in at the rush for the Alliance Tourney. Either way it makes both the idea of an energy 'vampire' and the pilgrim pretty laughable.
C.
New Scanner Idea!
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 00:10:00 -
[871]
No the nos nerf will never get a roll back. It was the worst nerf ever. Large nos did need a nerf but the way they did it was a shocker, and they did it just before the alliance tourney. We all know it was rushed just for the tourney
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 09:09:00 -
[872]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 19/04/2008 09:09:51
Actually I do not like the attitude of CCP balance team:
1. things are changed inconsistently (esspecially in case of cloaks)
2. to patch a major problem, they apparently do not consider the impact on small groups, eg. NOS to Amarr Recons
3. apparent mistakes result in silence by CCP if only the group of people voicing the fact is small enough
4. patches rush in fast, fixes to patches take loooooong, up to 1-2 years, eg. lower EM resist on ships after Laser nerf - how long did they take for the fix?? 3 years? Or was it 4?
5. ...
The attitude by CCP towards the affected players really bothers me.
__
- click here - |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 17:12:00 -
[873]
I'm still hoping that CCP realizes what this ship means for players, and react accordingly and fast. (Hey, one can always hope) |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.19 23:31:00 -
[874]
Originally by: Hydrogen
Edited by: Hydrogen on 19/04/2008 09:09:51
Actually I do not like the attitude of CCP balance team:
1. things are changed inconsistently (esspecially in case of cloaks)
2. to patch a major problem, they apparently do not consider the impact on small groups, eg. NOS to Amarr Recons
3. apparent mistakes result in silence by CCP if only the group of people voicing the fact is small enough
4. patches rush in fast, fixes to patches take loooooong, up to 1-2 years, eg. lower EM resist on ships after Laser nerf - how long did they take for the fix?? 3 years? Or was it 4?
5. ...
The attitude by CCP towards the affected players really bothers me.
I agree. It is quite pathetic how little effort is put into balancing. Other mmo's do balance changes in every patch basically. Here it seems to take years. Fail.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 02:01:00 -
[875]
Current crying at my curse setup. It just isnt effective anymore. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 04:50:00 -
[876]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Current crying at my curse setup. It just isnt effective anymore.
Wait for nano nerf for the final nail....
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Julius Romanus
Fatalix Inc.
Phalanx Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 06:07:00 -
[877]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Depp Knight
Current crying at my curse setup. It just isnt effective anymore.
Wait for nano nerf for the final nail....
As zulu has described his intentions, yep. He might as well have said "like the curse" at the end of his description of his plan for ships to unnano. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 06:59:00 -
[878]
Originally by: Julius Romanus
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Depp Knight
Current crying at my curse setup. It just isnt effective anymore.
Wait for nano nerf for the final nail....
As zulu has described his intentions, yep. He might as well have said "like the curse" at the end of his description of his plan for ships to unnano.
They actually broke the curse long before this. Both recons are broken. The only reason they have survived so many nerfs is because they were terribly imbalanced to begin with. It's why for example the armageddon has survived so many nerfs. Lasers with rof bonus is extremely powerful.
Sad thing is that ccp balances stuff once every two years while other mmo's put in balance changes in EVERY patch.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 09:56:00 -
[879]
Whats the nano nerf? Wasnt there just a nano nerf only a year ago? It stopped nano domi's, what next?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.22 10:05:00 -
[880]
Nano's and OD's and PolyCarbs won't speed stack for example.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
|
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 11:16:00 -
[881]
very good read hydrogen, some good ideas there.
for curse these are ways i think it should be boosted (a lot the same as hydrogens)
an extra 1kms max speed in a nano fit. atm it can only do 3kms, and most things still hit you pretty easy at that speed.
at least double the cargo - atm you can only hold 6 charges which is enough for just one kill - pretty bad for a long roam.
a boost to cap amount, and a reduction in neut cap needs. this would make a passive recharge neut setup viable instead of the cap booster setup (the only option atm)
but i think the best idea is to REMOVE THE NOS NERF FROM THIS SHIP. this would fix all of its problems in one go, but not make it invincible.
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 11:19:00 -
[882]
btw, the nano nerf wont effect this ship too much as it only has 2 of each speed mod. it will have the biggest effect on things like nano phoons that rely on 3 or 4 OD and 3 polys etc
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 11:42:00 -
[883]
Originally by: Red Thunder
btw, the nano nerf wont effect this ship too much as it only has 2 of each speed mod. it will have the biggest effect on things like nano phoons that rely on 3 or 4 OD and 3 polys etc
I think you misunderstand the nerf. If you put in 2xpolycarb + 1xspeedmod, that is going to be it. More then that will too harsh penalty on.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 12:47:00 -
[884]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Red Thunder
btw, the nano nerf wont effect this ship too much as it only has 2 of each speed mod. it will have the biggest effect on things like nano phoons that rely on 3 or 4 OD and 3 polys etc
I think you misunderstand the nerf. If you put in 2xpolycarb + 1xspeedmod, that is going to be it. More then that will too harsh penalty on.
so is this the death of all nano ships? i know every nano hac (except vaga) will be broken and useless ccp please dont do this nerf :S
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 12:51:00 -
[885]
Originally by: Red Thunder
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Red Thunder
btw, the nano nerf wont effect this ship too much as it only has 2 of each speed mod. it will have the biggest effect on things like nano phoons that rely on 3 or 4 OD and 3 polys etc
I think you misunderstand the nerf. If you put in 2xpolycarb + 1xspeedmod, that is going to be it. More then that will too harsh penalty on.
so is this the death of all nano ships? i know every nano hac (except vaga) will be broken and useless ccp please dont do this nerf :S
Now you see, why we are so ... bothered ;)
__
- click here - |
Stork DK
Minmatar
Synthetic Frontiers
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:01:00 -
[886]
Originally by: Red Thunder
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Red Thunder
btw, the nano nerf wont effect this ship too much as it only has 2 of each speed mod. it will have the biggest effect on things like nano phoons that rely on 3 or 4 OD and 3 polys etc
I think you misunderstand the nerf. If you put in 2xpolycarb + 1xspeedmod, that is going to be it. More then that will too harsh penalty on.
so is this the death of all nano ships? i know every nano hac (except vaga) will be broken and useless ccp please dont do this nerf :S
Will be balanced not broken, note the word "Heavy" assault ships. Not "Light-and-super-fast" assault ships of solo pwn.
___________
- Stork DK |
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:11:00 -
[887]
we need nano ships in the game...they are the ships which rely a lot on player skill, as pvp is very fast and you must process a lot of infomation. Removing nano ships is just promoting the boring bs slugfights which requires 0 player skill, and will be the death of small corps as they cannot possibly fight.
CCP will not fully nerf nano ships, as they would lose thousands of players, including myself.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:13:00 -
[888]
Originally by: Red Thunder
we need nano ships in the game...they are the ships which rely a lot on player skill, as pvp is very fast and you must process a lot of infomation. Removing nano ships is just promoting the boring bs slugfights which requires 0 player skill, and will be the death of small corps as they cannot possibly fight.
CCP will not fully nerf nano ships, as they would lose thousands of players, including myself.
Skill? Don't make me laugh. Flying nano's is NOT hard. Really, it's not.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Endless Subversion
Club Bear
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:28:00 -
[889]
Originally by: Red Thunder
we need nano ships in the game...they are the ships which rely a lot on player skill, as pvp is very fast and you must process a lot of infomation. Removing nano ships is just promoting the boring bs slugfights which requires 0 player skill, and will be the death of small corps as they cannot possibly fight.
CCP will not fully nerf nano ships, as they would lose thousands of players, including myself.
Nano gangs don't favor small alliance or large alliance. Guom regularly makes this point extrememly well in a multitude of threads both here and on scrapheap.
Basically to kill a nanogang you need more nano and the bigger the corp the more nano they can field at anytime. In other words, a small corp flying nano just gets nano blobbed by a larger corp. If you reduce overall speed you haven't changed the alliinace/alliance balance at all.
I'm all for a nano nerf, I want a reason to fly my curses again and if they nerf nano-curses they're going to HAVE to buff something else, which in all likelyhood will also buff the pilgrim.
Self Destruct & LogOffs |
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:44:00 -
[890]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Red Thunder
we need nano ships in the game...they are the ships which rely a lot on player skill, as pvp is very fast and you must process a lot of infomation. Removing nano ships is just promoting the boring bs slugfights which requires 0 player skill, and will be the death of small corps as they cannot possibly fight.
CCP will not fully nerf nano ships, as they would lose thousands of players, including myself.
Skill? Don't make me laugh. Flying nano's is NOT hard. Really, it's not.
you obviously dont have much expirience in decent nano gangs trying to take on larger gangs....engagements like this are far from easy.
|
|
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:49:00 -
[891]
Edited by: Red Thunder on 24/04/2008 13:48:55
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 13:54:00 -
[892]
Originally by: Endless Subversion
Originally by: Red Thunder
we need nano ships in the game...they are the ships which rely a lot on player skill, as pvp is very fast and you must process a lot of infomation. Removing nano ships is just promoting the boring bs slugfights which requires 0 player skill, and will be the death of small corps as they cannot possibly fight.
CCP will not fully nerf nano ships, as they would lose thousands of players, including myself.
Nano gangs don't favor small alliance or large alliance. Guom regularly makes this point extrememly well in a multitude of threads both here and on scrapheap.
Basically to kill a nanogang you need more nano and the bigger the corp the more nano they can field at anytime. In other words, a small corp flying nano just gets nano blobbed by a larger corp. If you reduce overall speed you haven't changed the alliinace/alliance balance at all.
I'm all for a nano nerf, I want a reason to fly my curses again and if they nerf nano-curses they're going to HAVE to buff something else, which in all likelyhood will also buff the pilgrim.
I'm saying that nano gangs are the only thing keeping small pvp corps alive, as they allow them to chose when to fight. If nanos are nerfed, then the small corps will be forced to fight every blob they land in, meaning the small corp is no longer able to fight.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 14:54:00 -
[893]
Originally by: Red Thunder
you obviously dont have much expirience in decent nano gangs trying to take on larger gangs....engagements like this are far from easy.
I've done my share of nano-faggin. It isn't all that hard. I've done all kinds of different warfare. I'm not making alot of these things up. Nano's are overpowered and are breaking the game.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 15:08:00 -
[894]
so you prefer blob warfare where you win out of sheer numbers instead of skill?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Home 0f Bored Occultists
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 16:20:00 -
[895]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 24/04/2008 16:20:34
Originally by: Red Thunder
so you prefer blob warfare where you win out of sheer numbers instead of skill?
That's who you think I am? I'm in a one man corp waging war against corps and alliances on my own. You can see my videos if you don't belive me. Fail. Blob warfare has nothing to do with this anyway because nano's blob 99% of their targets aswell. Nano is not a blob counter. Nano's are simply blobs that cannot be blobbed themselves. A K A I WIN BUTTON.
--------------------------------------
[Video] Angel of War |
Endless Subversion
Club Bear
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 18:44:00 -
[896]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 24/04/2008 16:20:34
Originally by: Red Thunder
so you prefer blob warfare where you win out of sheer numbers instead of skill?
That's who you think I am? I'm in a one man corp waging war against corps and alliances on my own. You can see my videos if you don't belive me. Fail. Blob warfare has nothing to do with this anyway because nano's blob 99% of their targets aswell. Nano is not a blob counter. Nano's are simply blobs that cannot be blobbed themselves. A K A I WIN BUTTON.
Except by even more nanos, which is the definition of a broken, imblanced game mechanic in my book.
|
Khandara Seraphim
StarHunt
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:16:00 -
[897]
Originally by: Red Thunder
I'm saying that nano gangs are the only thing keeping small pvp corps alive, as they allow them to chose when to fight. If nanos are nerfed, then the small corps will be forced to fight every blob they land in, meaning the small corp is no longer able to fight.
well, if a small gang warps into a giant blob, shouldn't they lose? I mean, superior firepower is generally deserving of victory in a battle. If anything, this proves that Nano gangs are overpowered because a small force can dictate terms to a larger one when it should always be the other way around.
If you dont want to jump into a monster blob... scout? It's not too difficult to choose your battles without relying on a speedy gang to mwd away from big fights.
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:18:00 -
[898]
Edited by: Red Thunder on 24/04/2008 19:20:04
ok, so ccp removes nanos, then how do small corps fight? if they try to form any sort of gang a larger corp can easily just blob them, so the small corp can no longer fight. As for chosing battles, alliances just use jump bridges to get behind your gang so you cant retreat, then yay we are camped in a system for hours.
|
Khandara Seraphim
StarHunt
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:21:00 -
[899]
Edited by: Khandara Seraphim on 24/04/2008 19:23:03
I'd say the smaller corp needs to figure out some intel and strike where the larger corp ISNT.
It's stupid to argue that a small corp should have the ability to take on a bigger one.
You're using buzzwords like "blob warfare" and "small corp tactics" to disguise what you really want, which is the ability for the few to defeat the many. That's foolish. In response to your point, I'd say that a small group should NOT be able to run away from or defeat a blob, especially if it's well organized. If your small corp can't adapt, move on or be consumed.
Edit- Jump Bridges? are you serious? These are only available in the sovereign space of alliances in 0.0. If you're attacking a reasonably large and well defended alliance (as they should be to maintain a jump bridge network) in their HOME SYSTEMS then of course you're looking at disaster unless you bring a lot of friends with you.
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:29:00 -
[900]
our roaming gangs of around 6 people score 20+ bs kills through sov space, a lot of that in main systems with 30+ hostiles in.
|
|
|
Khandara Seraphim
StarHunt
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:35:00 -
[901]
Good job? When you're done waving your e-peen around why don't you talk about your tactics and how you managed to pull off such dashing deeds.
If it involves the 6 of you nanoing out of trouble I think it proves my point. If it doesn't then it isn't relevant to what we're talking about anyway.
All I'm saying is that you believe small gangs should survive when they fly into a giant blob, and I don't think they should because they're outgunned. I'm assuming you're talking about blindly warping your small group into a large blob because any other situation has multiple options for getting away. Obviously if the other gang doesn't have tacklers or something stupid then you'll get away, but if the 6 of you fly into a group of 35 you shouldn't win unless you're in command ships vs. the noob mercs.
|
Red Thunder
|
Posted - 2008.04.24 19:41:00 -
[902]
Edited by: Red Thunder on 24/04/2008 19:46:32
the point is we dont win, but we arent forced to fight.
Il try and put this simply for you. If you and your 5 corpmates want to have some fun, but stand a chance at staying alive, they must take nano ships. If they take anything slow then they will die. So if we dont have nano ships, we are forced to join big alliances to be able to move through hostile space safely by out blobbing the blob. Isnt that fun
/edit
looking at your kb your corp doesnt really know what a real nanogang is and how much skill they need to fly very effectivly... |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.25 07:31:00 -
[903]
Originally by: Red Thunder
Edited by: Red Thunder on 24/04/2008 19:47:08
the point is we dont win, but we arent forced to fight.
Il try and put this simply for you. If you and your 5 corpmates want to have some fun, but stand a chance at staying alive, they must take nano ships. If they take anything slow then they will die. So if we dont have nano ships, we are forced to join big alliances to be able to move through hostile space safely by out blobbing the blob. Isnt that fun
/edit
looking at your kb your corp doesnt really know what a real nanogang is and how much skill they need to fly very effectively...
We get your point, but it is not really that simple. Eg. using a forward scout with sufficient bookmarks allows you to travel 0.0 quite safely. Actually you can easily annoy huge alliances and PvP successfully, since they mostly give up after some time of huntign you with a big gang.
It jsut requires a really really smart scout.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:06:00 -
[904]
What is your stand on MWD for Pilgrim?
My personal view:
1. It hurts your setup, thus you should not use it.
2. I drasically increases survivability when passing gate camps.
3. It is ideal when seeing an opponent, thus decloak and MWD to target and have it locked, right when you are in NEUT/NOS range.
4. If opponent is fast eg due to MWD and on border of web range, it can in some cases leave range - making a Pilgrim a sitting duck.
In the end I consider MWD a requirement. What do you think for Pilgrim?
__
- click here - |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 12:25:00 -
[905]
Originally by: Hydrogen
In the end I consider MWD a requirement. What do you think for Pilgrim?
It's too slow, and armor related rigs make it even slower. The gains by using an AB instead of a MWD are thus minimal. Tho in some scenarios 25% more cap (a lot more if you count recharge benefits) would really make Pilgrims shine, the "get into web range" part is always the hardest one - once you find a nice target to gang in a Pilgrim anyways.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 13:01:00 -
[906]
Edited by: Cailais on 26/04/2008 13:03:47
Originally by: Khandara Seraphim
well, if a small gang warps into a giant blob, shouldn't they lose? I mean, superior firepower is generally deserving of victory in a battle. If anything, this proves that Nano gangs are overpowered because a small force can dictate terms to a larger one when it should always be the other way around.
That's blatantly incorrect: smaller forces with superior tactics and methods can defeat a larger force. Go and look up concepts such as 'manouver warfare', where smaller forcers better trained, led and equiped can defeat a numerically superior force.
And thats exactly where recons should be employed; speed is an integral part of this concept - fast mobile forces defeating slow immobile forces.
C.
A new look at Local - IDEA |
QuantumPhysics
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 15:15:00 -
[907]
and what do you suppose would happen if CCP instituted these changes?
Everyone and their dog would be flying curses/pilgrims.
|
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 16:25:00 -
[908]
Edited by: Kingwood on 26/04/2008 16:30:24
Originally by: QuantumPhysics
and what do you suppose would happen if CCP instituted these changes?
Everyone and their dog would be flying curses/pilgrims.
Was everyone and their dog flying Amarr recons before the NOS nerf?
Edit: And that's the most absurd argument I've ever read on these forums, btw. Congrats, you managed to distinguish yourself as an idiot on these forums consisting of mostly idiots. |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 14:14:00 -
[909]
Pilgrim - The only recon of all races with a range limit on its main bonus. How is that fair/balanced? |
Recircuit
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 14:44:00 -
[910]
neat |
|
|
Juana Morlaine
MX3 Development
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 07:42:00 -
[911]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Pilgrim - The only recon of all races with a range limit on its main bonus. How is that fair/balanced?
The Pilgrim is meant for a completly different role, so you cant compare Amarr recons with other recons.
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 09:32:00 -
[912]
Originally by: Juana Morlaine
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Pilgrim - The only recon of all races with a range limit on its main bonus. How is that fair/balanced?
The Pilgrim is meant for a completly different role, so you cant compare Amarr recons with other recons.
No, you have to compare it on the same terms = all recons are meant to be wtfpwn-electronic superiority warriors, and they are wtfpwing their opponents in their field.
Gallente Recons are way weaker than before, still they can put out of the fight for vital length of time or completely disable 1-2 targets INSTANTLY and reliably - depended on range, while tackling targets in extreme ranges.
Minmatar Recons can insta - halt one or more targets completely reliably, and despite common thoughts around TPs, sometimes they DO count a lot.
ECM is less dependable, yet Caldari ECM recons can with some luck jam A LOT of targets. That's more than something to consider. Thus these ships are primaried more than anything else.
The pilgrim has a way weaker Ewar module - the range gimped NOS/Neut module thats too weak against bigger ships and cap idependant passive or buffer tanked ships, and the way weaker and weapon platform limited TDs to complement it.
Other Recons prevent the opponents from fighting the first place, the Amarr ones engage and cross fingers for the fight to last long enough for them and, and, and...
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 11:38:00 -
[913]
So I've been playing some more with the Pilgrim, and tried out a new setup, which worked quite well.
There are a few things which I'd like to point out:
1) A MWD is pretty much a requirement, but it gimps my cap too much, so AB II () is the answer (no speed mod at all is bad imo), which makes me really really slow and requires me to sneak up on somebody cloaked, because I'm not going to catch anything at all decloaked.
2) I went with a 2x MAR II setup and a 800mm Tungsten plate, supported by 2x E50 NOS and a cap booster. It tanks pretty good, I killed a Sabre while tanking a Rapier and 2 Falcons with it without too much trouble, so that our Falcon could jump in to save me. (14km from gate and going 10 m/s)
Problem is that with the NOS nerf I have to use a cap booster because I can't rely on the NOS. This causes me to lose a mid-slot and my cargo space.
3) It.. kills.. so.. slow.. Pilgrim kills so slow that the target has no problem calling in backup. Even worse if you know the guy is bait, but don't count on there being a lot more than you thought they were. If backup jumps in, you're dead. You have no way to escape. Other recons manage this without too much trouble, Pilgrim is the sitting duck.
Now, I don't know what others think of my setup, but it is the best one I could come up with considering the current state of the ships and game mechanics. (http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Kingwood&id=3335575&page=1&filter=losses#mail
Final thoughts? It is a sexy ship, but it desperately needs a boost. And as soon as possible.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 11:57:00 -
[914]
Originally by: Kingwood
Now, I don't know what others think of my setup, but it is the best one I could come up with considering the current state of the ships and game mechanics.
Final thoughts?
My five cents:
1. Id faction the armor repairers up: dual True Sansha Medium Armor Repairer. Imho ISK vs benefit is worth it
2. Use 1xMedium Diminishing NOS and 2 Medium Unstable Neut
3. I would reconfigure lowslots to: 2xTrue Sansha (or similar) EANM, 2x True Sansha MAR, 1xDCU II
4. Rig it up with 1 Medium Auxiliary Nanao Pump and 1x Nanobot Acc.
__
- click here - |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 12:02:00 -
[915]
Edited by: Kingwood on 30/04/2008 12:06:13
Edited by: Kingwood on 30/04/2008 12:05:10
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Kingwood
Now, I don't know what others think of my setup, but it is the best one I could come up with considering the current state of the ships and game mechanics.
Final thoughts?
My five cents:
1. Id faction the armor repairers up: dual True Sansha Medium Armor Repairer. Imho ISK vs benefit is worth it
2. Use 1xMedium Diminishing NOS and 2 Medium Unstable Neut
3. I would reconfigure lowslots to: 2xTrue Sansha (or similar) EANM, 2x True Sansha MAR, 1xDCU II
4. Rig it up with 1 Medium Auxiliary Nanao Pump and 1x Nanobot Acc.
Good advice, I am planning on rigging it as soon as I finish skilling Recon 5. (I planned on upgrading the 5w neut to a 50w, and rigging it with a Aux Nano Pump and an Anciliary Current Router.) Swapping my high slots to 2x 50w Neuts and 1x E50 NOS gives me something to think about. Probably a good idea, I'll try that. :)
Edit: Also, why no plate? If I go solo it gives me enough buffer to kill my target, IF no backup arrives, even if my cap boosters run out.
Edit2: Faction stuff is out of the question, I'm poor.
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 12:45:00 -
[916]
Originally by: Kingwood
Edited by: Kingwood on 30/04/2008 12:06:13
Edited by: Kingwood on 30/04/2008 12:05:10
Originally by: Hydrogen
Originally by: Kingwood
Now, I don't know what others think of my setup, but it is the best one I could come up with considering the current state of the ships and game mechanics.
Final thoughts?
My five cents:
1. Id faction the armor repairers up: dual True Sansha Medium Armor Repairer. Imho ISK vs benefit is worth it
2. Use 1xMedium Diminishing NOS and 2 Medium Unstable Neut
3. I would reconfigure lowslots to: 2xTrue Sansha (or similar) EANM, 2x True Sansha MAR, 1xDCU II
4. Rig it up with 1 Medium Auxiliary Nanao Pump and 1x Nanobot Acc.
Good advice, I am planning on rigging it as soon as I finish skilling Recon 5. (I planned on upgrading the 5w neut to a 50w, and rigging it with a Aux Nano Pump and an Anciliary Current Router.) Swapping my high slots to 2x 50w Neuts and 1x E50 NOS gives me something to think about. Probably a good idea, I'll try that. :)
Edit: Also, why no plate? If I go solo it gives me enough buffer to kill my target, IF no backup arrives, even if my cap boosters run out.
Edit2: Faction stuff is out of the question, I'm poor.
Dual Reppers + Speed mods pair well with 2x NOS. U kill your cap fast enough for NOSes to replenish it while effectively lowering your opponents. Dual MAR + plate is a bit of an overkill IMHO.
Using one faction EAMN (around 40mil) and a thermic mem II + meta 3-4 Damage Control and 2x "Accommodation" MAR you can also fit a named MWD while repping effectively enough.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
Kingwood
Amarr
The Greater Goon
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.30 16:17:00 -
[917]
I tried a dual MAR setup without a plate, it didn't do too well. Having a plate gives me the benefit of a good buffer, and I usually perma run 1 rep while pulsing the other when I have spare cap. Also, when attacking a Cruiser I'm not getting much benefit out of the 2 NOS and have a hard time running these reps. The buffer keeps me alive if that happens.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.01 12:56:00 -
[918]
Do you guys use 3neuts on your curse, or prefer to have at least 1 nos?
|
Mrski Okupator
Amarr
The Arrow Project
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.05.01 14:58:00 -
[919]
Originally by: QuantumPhysics
and what do you suppose would happen if CCP instituted these changes?
Everyone and their dog would be flying curses/pilgrims.
ROFL you dont get out much do you? See the vaga blob?
Pilgrim is a solo ship. Unless scouting/cynoing you won't see them outside 0.0 much. Oh farmer ratting too. Curse is a much better gang ship. And better at farmer ratting.
Just making their (amarr recons) role bonus somehow void the new nos restriction (or leessen it) would make these ships so much more.
___
|
Linnth
Amarr
Darkill Corp
|
Posted - 2008.05.01 20:39:00 -
[920]
Originally by: Mrski Okupator
Just making their (amarr recons) role bonus somehow void the new nos restriction (or leessen it) would make these ships so much more.
Agreed!!! This would simply fix it and this thread could finally end.
-------------------
Amarr: Getting screwed since 2005! |
|
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 01:12:00 -
[921]
Bumping this because the pilgrim is still garbage and you know it.
|
Kingwood
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 11:33:00 -
[922]
What the guy above me said. Bump. |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 14:17:00 -
[923]
The Pilgrim isn't quite useless for solo PvP, but I wouldn't mind it being an asset to fleets like all the other recons as well. |
Kingwood
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 18:10:00 -
[924]
If by "not being quite useless" you mean that I can kill Frigates and dumb players in T1 Cruisers with it, then yes, I totally agree. |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 18:25:00 -
[925]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 02/05/2008 18:28:08
Originally by: Kingwood
If by "not being quite useless" you mean that I can kill Frigates and dumb players in T1 Cruisers with it, then yes, I totally agree.
editing |
Daer Vechesier
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 18:35:00 -
[926]
Ironic that the cap warfare recons should have cap issues .
What "role" does that fit? |
Kingwood
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 18:46:00 -
[927]
Edited by: Kingwood on 02/05/2008 19:01:13
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 02/05/2008 18:39:28
Originally by: Kingwood
If by "not being quite useless" you mean that I can kill Frigates and dumb players in T1 Cruisers with it, then yes, I totally agree.
I agree that there are many ships that a Pilgrim stands no chance of defeating, but claiming it's utterly incapable of taking on anything but frigates and dumb players in t1 cruisers is pushing it. It's perfectly possible to take on most ships that rely on capacitor to tank and/or deal damage in a Pilgrim ( provided you're not living in the past and using exclusively NOS).
http://mod.inholdgroup.com/kb/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=3187
Mind you, I'm not saying it's fine. The Pilgrim is in dire need of some love, but I don't agree it's as useless for soloing as it seems you're making it out to be. =)
I'm sorry, I should've made my point a bit clearer. I'm just really tired of people chiming in saying the Pilgrim is perfectly fine having never flown it.
You can check my setup a few posts above. Yes, I still rely on NOS (), 2x MAR IIs, a 800mm Tungsten plate and a Cap booster, because with the NOS nerf I can't rely on sucking cap from my target. Since I only run around solo or with a buddy or 2 at most, I emphasize tank over anything else. It does work, but I sacrifice speed and warp scram range. A smart player will either run or engage me, depending on whether he feels comfortable taking me on. I'm dependent on piloting errors from my target, thus me stating the above.
Edit (examples):
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Kingwood&id=3335574&page=1&filter=kills#mail
I jumped through gate, saw him. Hit cloak, waited 1 second, then decloaked and as expected he had hit MWD and burned right into my web range. I webbed and killed him fast enough that he couldn't burn out anymore, and his support didn't jam me fast enough. I only survived after because I had a buddy in a Falcon bailing me out.
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Kingwood&id=3333587&page=1&filter=kills#mail
Quite a few errors on their part, and the guy in the Falcon knows his stuff.
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 18:59:00 -
[928]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 02/05/2008 19:04:28
I've never flown and probably never will fly the Pilgrim in a fleet (unless I for some odd reason decide to nano it, in which case I might as well go with an Arbitrator). I find the Curse to be a much more reasonable choice for this purpose.
Here's the setup I've been using for the odd bit of solo PvP.
Quote:
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
Warp Scrambler II
Cap Recharger II
Medium Capacitor Battery II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Trimark Armor Pump I
Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x10
Vespa EC-600
It perma-runs with two neutralizers active, and for a solid 4 minutes with all three. It's no more than 45 000 effective HP (which is considerably less than 1600mm + trimark-tanked HACs), so your targets become limited accordingly. It takes ages to kill anyone, but the vast majority of that time is spent sneaking within web range. ^^
Targets? Active-tanked Ishtar. Any Zealot. Any Deimos. Any Eagle. Most active-tanked battlecruisers. Any nano ship that somehow lets you sneak up on them. There are many more ships that you won't be able to take on, but that seems to be the situation for most Force Recons. |
Kingwood
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 19:07:00 -
[929]
I like your 2 web setup. Do you feel safe enough running around without even an Afterburner? You just gave me an idea how to fit out my next Pilgrim. |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.02 19:14:00 -
[930]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 02/05/2008 19:15:22
Originally by: Kingwood
I like your 2 web setup. Do you feel safe enough running around without even an Afterburner? You just gave me an idea how to fit out my next Pilgrim.
:)
MWD is out of the question, since it wtfpwns your capacitor and will render you utterly unable to run your crucial neutralizers (not to mention that you'd need to summon more power grid in some miraculous way or gimp your tank back to the stone age). You could fit an AB, but I've found that two webs are more effective at dictating range than one of each. For example, a Deimos would not have difficulties making it inside his optimal range (and that's obviously one of the last things you want to happen until he's incapacitated). |
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 14:21:00 -
[931]
Thing is with that setup, if you fight your in it to die or to kill. No flee bonus at all. ALl other recons have a ability to run. |
Kingwood
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 15:12:00 -
[932]
I think everyone who flies Pilgrims knows that. Caelum gave me the idea to just do away with the Afterburner, because it's useless anyway when I have to sneak up on somebody cloaked. I guess that means goodbye 0.0 for now, until CCP fixes this ship. |
Zinrix
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 20:42:00 -
[933]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 02/05/2008 19:04:28
I've never flown and probably never will fly the Pilgrim in a fleet (unless I for some odd reason decide to nano it, in which case I might as well go with an Arbitrator). I find the Curse to be a much more reasonable choice for this purpose.
Here's the setup I've been using for the odd bit of solo PvP.
Quote:
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
Warp Scrambler II
Cap Recharger II
Medium Capacitor Battery II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Trimark Armor Pump I
Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x10
Vespa EC-600
It perma-runs with two neutralizers active, and for a solid 4 minutes with all three. It's no more than 45 000 effective HP (which is considerably less than 1600mm + trimark-tanked HACs), so your targets become limited accordingly. It takes ages to kill anyone, but the vast majority of that time is spent sneaking within web range. ^^
Targets? Active-tanked Ishtar. Any Zealot. Any Deimos. Any Eagle. Most active-tanked battlecruisers. Any nano ship that somehow lets you sneak up on them. There are many more ships that you won't be able to take on, but that seems to be the situation for most Force Recons.
This is stupid. Any setup without an MWD is stupid. Don't use it unless you plan on losing it to the first guy you run into who has a buddy nearby. If you want to use medium neuts, use a Curse. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Trinity Nova Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 21:36:00 -
[934]
32 pages on S+M and no word from CCP on what, if any, changes they would be willing to entertain or are out of the question. Interesting... |
Kingwood
Amarr
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 21:39:00 -
[935]
Originally by: Zinrix
This is stupid. Any setup without an MWD is stupid. Don't use it unless you plan on losing it to the first guy you run into who has a buddy nearby. If you want to use medium neuts, use a Curse.
Truth, thus screams for fix, 'coz MWD gimps your setup and cap way too much. Unless you plan on downgrading to small neuts/nos and fit a 1600mm plate with MWD. |
Zinrix
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 22:52:00 -
[936]
Originally by: Kingwood
Unless you plan on downgrading to small neuts/nos and fit a 1600mm plate with MWD.
Yes, and you can also fit a Large Cap Battery to mitigate the effect of the MWD. It has worked well for me in the past, though I don't use an armor tank or any neuts anymore. I like the Pilgrim as is, though I wish CCP would just drop the nos/neut bonus and give it something else. |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 23:52:00 -
[937]
So many pages and still so many people who know **** about soloing in zero-zero.
A Pilgrim can't solo very effectively in 0.0 as every competent gatecamp will kill you, because you won't make it back to the gate or out of the Dictor-Bubble (HIC or usual Dictor).
A Pilgrim can't take on the usual Raven in the Belts, as a competent Ratter in a Raven has a Large Neutralizer fitted these days and dealing more damage with it's Cruises then you'll be able to tank for a long time.
A Pilgrim will loose against any other shortrange BS with a Heavy CapBooster and/or Heavy Neutralizer itself.
A Pilgrim can't take on nano-Ships, as you've 5 seconds targeting-delay, which is 10 times enough to get out of Web-Range.
A Pilgrim can't run away, after it has engaged, as it's simply to slow, even with a MWD to run from anything else, then a PvE-fitted Ratter without MWD. MaxSpeed for a plated Pilgrim is slower then a MWDing Blasterthron o.O
So you're reduced to soloing in low-sec, when you wanna have fun, but there you'll only find poorly fitted Cruisers or n00bs to gank, which is no competition.
Forget about using it in Fleets, where the Pilgrim is no comparison for Arazu, Rapier or Falcon in usability.
Do something CCP! |
no013
Minmatar
Stormwolf Holdings LLC
|
Posted - 2008.05.03 23:59:00 -
[938]
Originally by: Grytok
So many pages and still so many people who know **** about soloing in zero-zero.
A Pilgrim can't solo very effectively in 0.0 as every competent gatecamp will kill you, because you won't make it back to the gate or out of the Dictor-Bubble (HIC or usual Dictor).
A Pilgrim can't take on the usual Raven in the Belts, as a competent Ratter in a Raven has a Large Neutralizer fitted these days and dealing more damage with it's Cruises then you'll be able to tank for a long time.
A Pilgrim will loose against any other shortrange BS with a Heavy CapBooster and/or Heavy Neutralizer itself.
A Pilgrim can't take on nano-Ships, as you've 5 seconds targeting-delay, which is 10 times enough to get out of Web-Range.
A Pilgrim can't run away, after it has engaged, as it's simply to slow, even with a MWD to run from anything else, then a PvE-fitted Ratter without MWD. MaxSpeed for a plated Pilgrim is slower then a MWDing Blasterthron o.O
So you're reduced to soloing in low-sec, when you wanna have fun, but there you'll only find poorly fitted Cruisers or n00bs to gank, which is no competition.
Forget about using it in Fleets, where the Pilgrim is no comparison for Arazu, Rapier or Falcon in usability.
Do something CCP!
I thought Eve was a team game. And isn't recon support ships? If you want a one ship pwn all i think there are other games for that. |
Kingwood
Amarr
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 00:01:00 -
[939]
Originally by: no013
Originally by: Grytok
So many pages and still so many people who know **** about soloing in zero-zero.
A Pilgrim can't solo very effectively in 0.0 as every competent gatecamp will kill you, because you won't make it back to the gate or out of the Dictor-Bubble (HIC or usual Dictor).
A Pilgrim can't take on the usual Raven in the Belts, as a competent Ratter in a Raven has a Large Neutralizer fitted these days and dealing more damage with it's Cruises then you'll be able to tank for a long time.
A Pilgrim will loose against any other shortrange BS with a Heavy CapBooster and/or Heavy Neutralizer itself.
A Pilgrim can't take on nano-Ships, as you've 5 seconds targeting-delay, which is 10 times enough to get out of Web-Range.
A Pilgrim can't run away, after it has engaged, as it's simply to slow, even with a MWD to run from anything else, then a PvE-fitted Ratter without MWD. MaxSpeed for a plated Pilgrim is slower then a MWDing Blasterthron o.O
So you're reduced to soloing in low-sec, when you wanna have fun, but there you'll only find poorly fitted Cruisers or n00bs to gank, which is no competition.
Forget about using it in Fleets, where the Pilgrim is no comparison for Arazu, Rapier or Falcon in usability.
Do something CCP!
I thought Eve was a team game. And isn't recon support ships? If you want a one ship pwn all i think there are other games for that.
I thought only intelligent people are attracted to Eve. |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 00:04:00 -
[940]
Originally by: no013
Originally by: Grytok
*snip*
I thought Eve was a team game. And isn't recon support ships? If you want a one ship pwn all i think there are other games for that.
Sure it's a team-game, but the Pilgrim is'nt really benefiting for a gang, compared to the other races Force Recons. Curse does this far better, because of the range-advantage. |
|
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 00:53:00 -
[941]
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde
32 pages on S+M and no word from CCP on what, if any, changes they would be willing to entertain or are out of the question. Interesting...
Seriously.
Can we get them to at least acknowledge that the pilgrim is outright garbage and needs some tweaking? Come on CCP, a SINGLE dev post per 30 pages would be nice. |
Mrski Okupator
Amarr
The Arrow Project
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 05:31:00 -
[942]
Pilgrim is a solo ship. Unless scouting/cynoing you won't see them outside lowsec much.
That's what I meant to say. And new post beats editing old one as it is a bump as well.
Back to the top with this thread! |
Kingwood
Amarr
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 12:55:00 -
[943]
Pilgrim can still kill awesomely fitted ships like these. (I was with buddy, but I think I could've taken that one alone. Maybe )
Bumping this thread. |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.04 13:00:00 -
[944]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 04/05/2008 13:03:09
Originally by: Zinrix
This is stupid. Any setup without an MWD is stupid. Don't use it unless you plan on losing it to the first guy you run into who has a buddy nearby. If you want to use medium neuts, use a Curse.
Nevertheless, I've found it to be the only fit that's worthwhile in terms of solo PvP. I have escaped a few scenarios where someone has had friends nearby, seeing that it's hard to keep a point on me when I'm draining such a ridiculous amount of capacitor. You could go with a MWD, but then you're going to have a hard time running the aforementioned and you end up being an overly expensive Arbitrator. Make your pick.
EDIT: This obviously doesn't work in 0.0, as I stated earlier. |
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 00:55:00 -
[945]
I refuse to let this topic die.
The pilgrim is garbage. It is outclassed by every other recon. Compare the power of a falcon (shut down 4-5 peeps fairly reliably) to that of a god awful pilgrim. I'm not telling you HOW to boost it ccp - only that this ship is utter and complete rubbish.
1 dev post, it's all I ask. SOME kind of acknowledgment of what we all know to be true.
Oh, and laffo to all those people and these ridiculous setups. The pilgrim is crap, no way around it. |
Storm Strike
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 02:13:00 -
[946]
While I agree that the pilgrim could use some love I would have to say no to all these ideas that change the fundamental nature of the ship. The pilgrim is unique and I would rather fly it as a unique, and to some people subpar, ship than turn it into another nanofag ship making it a curse with a cloak.
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 02:34:00 -
[947]
Originally by: Storm Strike
While I agree that the pilgrim could use some love I would have to say no to all these ideas that change the fundamental nature of the ship. The pilgrim is unique and I would rather fly it as a unique, and to some people subpar, ship than turn it into another nanofag ship making it a curse with a cloak.
I don't want it to be a cloaking curse - I think there were a lot of good suggestions over the course of the 30 odd pages. Boost it. Tweak it. Whatever. I'm just tired of the pilgrim sucking, and CCP not saying a word about it.
|
Cerundir
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 07:49:00 -
[948]
Originally by: Angelonico
I don't want it to be a cloaking curse - I think there were a lot of good suggestions over the course of the 30 odd pages. Boost it. Tweak it. Whatever. I'm just tired of the pilgrim sucking, and CCP not saying a word about it.
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/pk/view.php?type=player&name=Angelonico&filter=losses&page=1#recent
16 pages of losses and not a single Pilgrim. Somehow I don't think you have any idea what you're talking about.
|
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 12:23:00 -
[949]
Originally by: Angelonico
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde
32 pages on S+M and no word from CCP on what, if any, changes they would be willing to entertain or are out of the question. Interesting...
Seriously.
Can we get them to at least acknowledge that the pilgrim is outright garbage and needs some tweaking? Come on CCP, a SINGLE dev post per 30 pages would be nice.
Yet more hours of flight behind me. No more kills, no more losses. Some pew-pew and general griefing.
Specifics:
--Curse has 50 more CPU than I ever use, and 100 Grid less than I need to have decent choice over fits.
--I never know if my TDs or Neuts are doing much. Choice of targets is limited.
--Seems like the key to winning fights is more friends or very, very careful choice of targets.
--WTF doesn't Pilgrim have the range bonus instead of the amount bonus on Cap Drain modules?
These ships feel like they no longer mesh with the game system. A little designer time could make 'em much better with trivial work.
-vk
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 12:36:00 -
[950]
Originally by: Brother Welcome
--WTF doesn't Pilgrim have the range bonus instead of the amount bonus on Cap Drain modules?
-vk
We have been through this. Nos/neuts have sizes. No one has ever been scared of an un bonused medium nos/neuts. EVER. |
|
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 12:42:00 -
[951]
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Originally by: Angelonico
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde
--WTF doesn't Pilgrim have the range bonus instead of the amount bonus on Cap Drain modules?
These ships feel like they no longer mesh with the game system. A little designer time could make 'em much better with trivial work.
-vk
Why do ppl believe that the range bonus worths more than the drain amount bonus?
Can't you see that it would be impossible for a cruiser / recon to "damage" anything bigger (read with bigger capacitor to start with, and larger cargo bay for cap boosters) after NOS changes?
Why don't you fly a Myrmidon with 2-3 Neuts and see how "effective" it is for a ship designed to active tank, sacrificing its own cap to kill it's opponents cap...? It would be more or less "the man with more cap boosters wins" against other BCs with active tanks and suicidal vs. passively or buffer tanked BCs.
Now try it against a proper BS and cry...even PVE fitted BSs could kill you, as just like the Pilgrim a BC cannot "nano" to avoid dmg effectively, and it's quite difficult trying to sustain MWD and your neuts for more than a few circles.
Range bonus instead of drain amount bonus would only be "better" should you try to nano the Pilgrim and that's not even remotely the right way to fix that ship. You would get some versatility versus other nano-cruisers or ceptors, by sacrificing the ability (possibility) to kill a stronger than yourself tanking ship. I really think that this trade off hurts way more than it helps the Pilgrim. |
Imaos
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 12:51:00 -
[952]
Originally by: Angelonico
I refuse to let this topic die.
The pilgrim is garbage. It is outclassed by every other recon. Compare the power of a falcon (shut down 4-5 peeps fairly reliably) to that of a god awful pilgrim. I'm not telling you HOW to boost it ccp - only that this ship is utter and complete rubbish.
1 dev post, it's all I ask. SOME kind of acknowledgment of what we all know to be true.
Oh, and laffo to all those people and these ridiculous setups. The pilgrim is crap, no way around it.
The falcon can't fairly reliable shut down 4-5 ships unless you have a new and novel definition of fairly reliable. It also lacks damage. The pilgrim is at an all time low, but there is no need to make ridiculous comparisions. The problem is the short range and the lack of use for the tracking disruptors.
Imaos |
Kingwood
Amarr
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 13:08:00 -
[953]
Pilgrim doesn't have the tank needed to survive in the close range it needs to engage in against a competent player. Increase resists and boost Cap. |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 14:01:00 -
[954]
Originally by: Imaos
The falcon can't fairly reliable shut down 4-5 ships unless you have a new and novel definition of fairly reliable. It also lacks damage. The pilgrim is at an all time low, but there is no need to make ridiculous comparisions. The problem is the short range and the lack of use for the tracking disruptors.
I disagree with Angelonico - the Pilgrim is not totally useless, neither are the setups posted ridiculous.
What could - understandably - seem ridiculous to some players the amount of micro-management and target selectivity required for flying the Pilgrim, compared to other Recons, and that's where the Falcon comparison could be brought up.
The Problem of the Pilgrim is the mediocrity of it's ewar. It's not the Pilgrim that's broken, it's the modules.
Amarr Recons not only use the the most "picky" ewar modules that affect way less setups and weapon platforms than other Recons, but their effect is not easy to either pre-plan or understand.
*You cannot WTFPWN an enemy's capacitor unless he is either way smaller than you or totally unpreperred for it (no cap booster).
*You cannot shut down enemy's dmg capabilities, just "disrupt" some of it IF you are far enough, IF you are moving fast enough and IF you enemy uses mainly Turrets.
There are too many "IF's" in the Amarr Recons, and especially the Pilgrim.
On the other hand a Falcon or Rook can RELIABLY shut down at least 1 target's both ewar and dmg for a considerable amount of time - even perma. You can miss, yet you get a huge range advantage over other ewar (and points), and just as you could be unlucky to fail 1 circle against a single ship, you could also be lucky enough to lock down 2-3 or more. And the later must be the norm, or ECM ships wouldn't be primaries all the time.
A Gallente Recon can RELIABLY damp (thus postpone or even shut down) a sinle ship's ewar and dps while pointing at usefull ranges, where their bonused ewar modules complement each other.
And of course each Minmatar Recon can almost insta-stop every ship in the game, independently of size, tank, cap stability etc. Even TPs are way more useful than believed or "advertised" through the forums, especially versus small targets with silly sig radius.
Surely you cannot say that the Curse is an utterly unreliable ship. But you cannot hide the fact that the way this ship is used could be described as "a nano Ishtar with silly dps yet bonused Neuts/NOS". No other ewar ships require so much fitting "resourcefulness" and racial module "crossing". No other Ewar Ship pilot could ever think putting a non-bonused ewar module apart from a warp jammer in their mid slots to make it work "better", just like Amarr Recons desperately tried with ECM, damps etc, even after these modules got massively nerfed. Yet before scripts, Damps where still better in most cases than TD's in a Curse...pathetic...
CCP has to deside:
*Does NOS assist TDs? Then make TDs WTFPWN turrets and demand huge cap, so that the NOS bonus makes up for it. The Amarrian anti-turret ships could still affect reliably just turrets, and would require huge cap ammounts, but at least THIS COULD BE THOUGHT AS ELECTRONIC SUPERIORITY.
*Does NOS assist tanking? Then alter the hulls so that they can fit serious tanks or can more effectively nano-tank without snakes and faction mods. That's NOT electronic superiority, but shouldn't Amarr Recons excell to sth for a change?
Jack of all trades, master to none - that's the sad truth about Amarr Recons.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 21:57:00 -
[955]
Pilgrim is not completely useless, it is very limited. You really have to pick your targets. (And wtf is up with the Pilgrim being the only recon that does not have a range bonus?!?)
The Curse has more "options"/uses due to its range bonus.
I agree with the above poster, the problem is not the Amarr recons, it's the modules they have bonuses for. They are simply not nearly as reliable as the modules other races have bonuses for. |
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.05.06 22:43:00 -
[956]
Originally by: Cerundir
Edited by: Cerundir on 05/05/2008 08:21:03
Originally by: Angelonico
[...] The pilgrim is garbage. [...]
Is that why you've never lost one? The only other logical explanation doesn't warrant any conclusion on behalf of the Pilgrim's viability on your part.
If you think I pvp with just this character, you're nuts.
Alright fine fine. Good points raised, particularly by the razor guy. The pilgrim is not totally useless (eg. garbage) however it is the worst of its ship class. The modules are indeed what kill the thing and it needs a bit of a tweaking to become viable again.
Yes, the falcon with max skills can shut down 4 cruiser size ships reliably. Convo me in game for my setup if you'd like.
The purpose of my choice of language to vent my frustration ("this ship is garbage") is to spur debate and get some attention given to the little guy. Sure it's a serviceable ship if you fit and micromanage it properly, but the same could be said of any of the "bad" ships in eve. You and I (speaking generally of course) both know the pilgrim needs a tweak or two.
I'd appreciate some dev comments on any of the suggestions so far, particularly the boost to it's range.
|
Brother Welcome
Amarr
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 11:09:00 -
[957]
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Originally by: Angelonico
Originally by: Alekseyev Karrde
--WTF doesn't Pilgrim have the range bonus instead of the amount bonus on Cap Drain modules?
These ships feel like they no longer mesh with the game system. A little designer time could make 'em much better with trivial work.
-vk
Why do ppl believe that the range bonus worths more than the drain amount bonus?
Can't you see that it would be impossible for a cruiser / recon to "damage" anything bigger (read with bigger capacitor to start with, and larger cargo bay for cap boosters) after NOS changes?
Range bonus instead of drain amount bonus would only be "better" should you try to nano the Pilgrim and that's not even remotely the right way to fix that ship. You would get some versatility versus other nano-cruisers or ceptors, by sacrificing the ability (possibility) to kill a stronger than yourself tanking ship. I really think that this trade off hurts way more than it helps the Pilgrim.
Actually, I agree with you and should say that to my taste I would *prefer* range bonus to drain bonus. The lack of range commits the Pilgrim to close in body-blow trading. I don't like being forced into that... as a Recon!
Some pilots talk about 'doing X if your opponent is cap boosting', but I find it very hard to tell if they are cap boosting. At least ECM you can see for sure whether you are locked or not. Couldn't we at least know if their cap is out?
I'm also finding my Pilgrim quite different from my Curse for CPU. Unless you have Recon 5 the cloak - the goddamned purpose of this ship - makes it very tough to fit a tank and solid mid-slot ewar. Or perhaps I should blame the sheer heaviness of neuts and nos as modules.
What bugs me is that it would be trivial to put these ships closer to other Recons.
C'mon CCP.
-vk
|
Phoenix492
Orion Expeditions
|
Posted - 2008.05.09 15:43:00 -
[958]
I'm currently training for a pilgrim, and all this is really worrrying! Come on CCP...any help?
WHAT IS WRITTEN ABOVE IS MY OWN OPINION, AND IS IN NO WAY THE VIEWS OF MY CORP / ALLIANCE. ANY PROBLEMS - SEE ME |
Xaen
Caldari
Caritas.
|
Posted - 2008.05.09 17:56:00 -
[959]
Originally by: Phoenix492
I'm currently training for a pilgrim, and all this is really worrrying! Come on CCP...any help?
Forget the pilgrim. It's garbage. The curse is awesome though.
-
Support fixing the UI|Suggest Jita fixes|Compact logs |
Xaen
Caldari
Caritas.
|
Posted - 2008.05.09 18:00:00 -
[960]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus
I've never flown and probably never will fly the Pilgrim in a fleet (unless I for some odd reason decide to nano it, in which case I might as well go with an Arbitrator). I find the Curse to be a much more reasonable choice for this purpose.
Here's the setup I've been using for the odd bit of solo PvP.
Quote:
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
Warp Scrambler II
Cap Recharger II
Medium Capacitor Battery II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
Trimark Armor Pump I
Trimark Armor Pump I
Hammerhead II x10
Vespa EC-600
It perma-runs with two neutralizers active, and for a solid 4 minutes with all three. It's no more than 45 000 effective HP (which is considerably less than 1600mm + trimark-tanked HACs), so your targets become limited accordingly. It takes ages to kill anyone, but the vast majority of that time is spent sneaking within web range. ^^
Targets? Active-tanked Ishtar. Any Zealot. Any Deimos. Any Eagle. Most active-tanked battlecruisers. Any nano ship that somehow lets you sneak up on them. There are many more ships that you won't be able to take on, but that seems to be the situation for most Force Recons.
/me lols at the failboat
That thing has great potential, if only you knew wtf you were doing.
-
Support fixing the UI|Suggest Jita fixes|Compact logs |
|
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.09 19:22:00 -
[961]
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 09/05/2008 19:24:01
Edited by: Caelum Dominus on 09/05/2008 19:23:29
Originally by: Xaen
/me lols at the failboat
That thing has great potential, if only you knew wtf you were doing.
Nice flamebait. Either way, the setup you quoted can take on a limited array of targets quite nicely.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.05.10 11:48:00 -
[962]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 10/05/2008 11:54:07
Just a heads up for those, who are somehow even "frustrated" for CCP not answering in this thread:
1. As long as this thread is alive with increasing insightful posts, it at least shows how pathetic CCPs attitude is towards the Pilgrim.
2. The lack of dev response in alternatively patching or this thread offers anyone insight into CCPs attitude towards balance and their playerbase (those players who specialize).
3. Neglecting to tune the Pilgrim to a viable ship prooves the current balancing team's attitude towards PvP. Basically a stealth assassin (the Pilgrim) is the top of the food chain solo. Going for raw firepower and some weird new game tactics instead (eg BOs jumping behind enemy lines - enemy lines which do not exist in this form) gives proof of the current balancing team's attitude which apparently aims for Carebearism.
4. A viable Pilgrim with hidden local would be the perfect anti-farmer/macro machine in EvE. Pilgrim pilots rejoice and farmers are out of business within like 2 days. Instead they put all the effort into support and new code to fight farmers.
So basically not acknowledging this issue gives proof of a poor attitude by CCP, which contradicts former statements regarding PvP in special. So in the end this thread is of no meaning to CCP due to the lack of players, but... the attitude shown has and will have a huge impact. Other companies learned it the hard way, CCP will learn it too (examples are: Origin/EA, AO, DAOC, Shadowbane,... - those who were there experienced it; all of those payed for this attitude in one or the other way).
__
- click here - |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.10 13:14:00 -
[963]
Nothing more can be said that hasnt been said before. It now just the waiting game. Its been over 6 months. I have gotten over it tbh. I have just learnt to not fly the thing or fly it like a gimp.
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.10 16:19:00 -
[964]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Nothing more can be said that hasnt been said before. It now just the waiting game. Its been over 6 months. I have gotten over it tbh. I have just learnt to not fly the thing or fly it like a gimp.
Perhaps CCP ppl have a secret load-out for these ships they consider that "obvious" that it would underestimate our intelligence to share
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game!
Introduce HEAT EMMITERÖ for the Pilgrim |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 11:58:00 -
[965]
Originally by: Diomidis
Originally by: Depp Knight
Nothing more can be said that hasnt been said before. It now just the waiting game. Its been over 6 months. I have gotten over it tbh. I have just learnt to not fly the thing or fly it like a gimp.
Perhaps CCP ppl have a secret load-out for these ships they consider that "obvious" that it would underestimate our intelligence to share
Sometimes I feel like this:
- someone from the balancing team maximized his skills for a test on live server
- this dev so went into a belt with his shiny CNR, knowing nothing can stop him in is Officer-only fitted CNR
- a Pilgrim pops in and beats the crap out of the CNR, which ofc can not load any precision Cruise missiles
- dev decides Pilgrim is overpowered and nerfs it into oblivion
Then again, that dev in question could also be a carebear, who does all he can to avoid cloaked killers.
Go figure...
__
- click here - |
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 12:07:00 -
[966]
Originally by: Hydrogen
stupid rant
Just post "bump" instead.
|
Kingwood
Amarr
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 14:45:00 -
[967]
Edited by: Kingwood on 13/05/2008 14:46:52
Pilgrim is fine, because it apparently does 4-5x times (!!) the damage other Force Recons do, according to this poster.
I pretty much gave up on arguing on these forums after I saw the posts people made in that thread. I'm just hoping CCP is doing something, which doesn't involve giving it a range bonus.
Edit: Fixed link.
|
Caelum Dominus
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 17:43:00 -
[968]
Originally by: Kingwood
Edited by: Kingwood on 13/05/2008 14:46:52
Pilgrim is fine, because it apparently does 4-5x times (!!) the damage other Force Recons do, according to this poster.
I pretty much gave up on arguing on these forums after I saw the posts people made in that thread. I'm just hoping CCP is doing something, which doesn't involve giving it a range bonus.
Edit: Fixed link.
Certainly a range bonus would be better than the monstrosity it is now, though? ^^
|
Kingwood
Amarr
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 18:16:00 -
[969]
Edited by: Kingwood on 13/05/2008 18:17:10
Would take away it's uniqueness though, imo. This is a one-of-a-kind ship, and I'd love it to stay that way. Who doesn't want a cloaking close-range ship? If bonuses get switched to range I'll start fitting Heavy Pulses.
|
Andreask14
Raptus Regaliter
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 22:42:00 -
[970]
You have to not compare the pilgrim to a HAC, you have to compare them to the other recons.
If you do this you will quickly find that...the pilgrim is also worst.
Rapier is the bane of nano ships and does average against other targets, at the very least it can always escape because of its webs. Comparable DPS and tank to the pilgrim.
Falcon is the best ECM boat in the game. Who doesnt like it ?
Arazu is like the rapier but with warp disruptors. Stays out of harms way. Comparable DPS to the pilgrim.
Of these only the pilgrim has to get close, close where it gets killed by Neuts/Webs. The only inferior ships to the pilgrim are turret boats with an active tank and little cap that dont cap boost (butt need cap to operate) and dont have a web.
So your targets are basically only ratting geddons.
Sig offline |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 06:28:00 -
[971]
Originally by: Andreask14
So your targets are basically only ratting geddons.
Do not underestimate a Geddon's drone bay and its tank as in the time buffer until his mates arrive...
__
- click here - |
Brother Welcome
Icarus' Wings
Brutally Clever Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 08:31:00 -
[972]
Originally by: Andreask14
You have to not compare the pilgrim to a HAC, you have to compare them to the other recons.
If you do this you will quickly find that...the pilgrim is also worst.
Rapier is the bane of nano ships and does average against other targets, at the very least it can always escape because of its webs. Comparable DPS and tank to the pilgrim.
Falcon is the best ECM boat in the game. Who doesnt like it ?
Arazu is like the rapier but with warp disruptors. Stays out of harms way. Comparable DPS to the pilgrim.
Of these only the pilgrim has to get close, close where it gets killed by Neuts/Webs. The only inferior ships to the pilgrim are turret boats with an active tank and little cap that dont cap boost (butt need cap to operate) and dont have a web.
So your targets are basically only ratting geddons.
Yes indeed. Amarr ships
Vulnerable to cap drain? Check.
Vulnerable to turret disruption? Check.
Vulnerable to ECM? Check.
Vunerable to sensor dampening? Check.
Amarr e-war
Good vs Drones? Nope.
Good vs Missiles? Nope.
Good vs Turrets? 50/50.
Good vs ships relying heavily on cap? Check.
Such genius.
BW
|
J'Mkarr Soban
Proxenetae Invicti
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 10:34:00 -
[973]
Just to let you all know, I've raised it as an issue in the Assembly Hall: here. Go show your support!
--
These are my personal views and in no way represent the views of Proxenetae Invicti, which maintains a neutral stance stemming from the strong ethics demanded of its work. |
Kingwood
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
Star Buccaneers
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 11:03:00 -
[974]
It's getting replied to by idiots again. I give up and am just hoping CCP is doing something at all.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.24 11:39:00 -
[975]
Originally by: Brother Welcome
Yes indeed. Amarr ships
Vulnerable to cap drain? Check.
Vulnerable to turret disruption? Check.
Vulnerable to ECM? Check.
Vunerable to sensor dampening? Check.
Amarr e-war
Good vs Drones? Nope.
Good vs Missiles? Nope.
Good vs Turrets? 50/50.
Good vs ships relying heavily on cap? Check.
Such genius.
BW
I don't think that the main problem in Amarr eWar types is target selection only, but the fact that both of them are couterable in very large degree.
I don't care that drones are "immune" to TDs and NOS / Neuts. No other ewar can counter them once they aggro anyways. In fact that could count as a Curse/Pilgim's strength (just like other drone boats - a killable dps source with ewar resistances).
But as mentioned before:
* There is no way to counter webs at "bonused ranges". Your ship comes to near stopped velocities pretty fast (yeah-yeah, inertia slows the process a tiny bit), you MWD cannot be instantly turned of so you get the full PENALTY when shot at and no benefits...
* There is no way to counter TPs.
* There is a way to counter ECM a bit (with the compromises required to make room for ECCM - very few do or can), yet once you get jammed, you lose lock = point, ewar capabilities, dps output, remote repping etc INSTANTLY. You do not complete one cicle etc.
* Damps can be countered in bigger ships, yet you can break lock still. Surely not the strongest ewar anymore, surely not on un-bonused and rigged ships for it anyways.
BUT...
* TDs are either range or transversal limited. A fast ship like a nano-curse can make the most out of both. A pilgrim cannot. Most targets are either fast enough to close distance and / or web you, or close one of your gang-mates...you cannot effectively disrupt dps like ppl suggest, unless the opponent doesn't know what to do.
* NOS/Neuts do not kill things easily, simply because their cicle time is long and you very rarely can time their action to comletely drain a target. Unlike ECM / Damps that instantly break lock and disrupt enemy dps and ewar to zero, the neuted / nosed enemy can time it's cap boosters etc to effectively counter NOS/Neuts pretty good. Also the looong cycles resistance mods get, makes it almost impossible to really weaken larger ships, which boost a large enough buffer to withstand a lost shield boost/armor repping cycle or two. Even if you zero-cap an enemy, and the timing is good enough to de-activate a rez module, a BCs / BSs natural cap regen rate is high enough so that it will be back on in less than 1-1.5 second, for another looong cycle.
And of-course MWD also does not deactivate once it starts it's cycle, so really fast ships can keep on traveling at high speeds even if they get "accidentally" Neuted to zero cap for an instance - they can still dis-engage and re-engage.
All of the above make the NOS/Neuts way more "chance based" than ECM - the usual Caldari excuse for ECM not being over-powered - at least vs. most targets.
---------------------------------------------
NOS/Neuts should really get reviewed, with their cycle duration / cap killing / cap consumed attributes re-balanced, down to like 5 secs - or less. That would make them more usable to effectively disrupt cap going into cap-friendly modules with long cycles, like resistance and ewar modules. It would also make them more effective on the Pilgrim / Curse with drain amount bonuses, and less effective in BSs etc...A BS could still cap-out smaller targets, but it would require more than a single cycle of a single Heavy Unstable neut...
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 01:45:00 -
[976]
Does anyone actually fly this ship for combat purposes anymore?
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 11:56:00 -
[977]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Does anyone actually fly this ship for combat purposes anymore?
From time to time I dust off one of my Pilgrims and search for some n00bs in Low-Sec... just to make them look worthwile
.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 15:19:00 -
[978]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Does anyone actually fly this ship for combat purposes anymore?
Well I even got one Corp mate, who flies those more often and who tells me that I got no clue about em. Yet again the kills do not pour in either so...
Pilgrim is flown for combat purposes but with unreasonable results - on the negative side that is.
__
- click here - |
Endless Subversion
Club Bear
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 15:55:00 -
[979]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Does anyone actually fly this ship for combat purposes anymore?
Kind of, they're quite good for solo mission ganking. Barring that and maybe anti-falcon duty they're total garbage.
Pilgrim needs help.
Self Destruct & LogOffs |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 16:13:00 -
[980]
yeah the Pilgrim has been stuck in my hangar as decoration for quite a while now.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
|
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 22:15:00 -
[981]
Mark me: it is better to give than to take. That said: CCP took alot of the Pilgrim ...
__
- click here - |
Feng Schui
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 08:07:00 -
[982]
/me looks around, and walks out.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Vito Parabellum
Fivrelde Corp
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 10:50:00 -
[983]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Does anyone actually fly this ship for combat purposes anymore?
Yes, I successfully use it to bump aligned ships in safes. Of course I rely on gangmates to come in and remote rep me before I blow up ;)
------
We live in an expanding universe. All of it is trying to get away from Chuck Norris.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 11:00:00 -
[984]
Originally by: Vito Parabellum
I rely on gangmates to come in and remote rep me before I blow up ;)
This.
__
- click here - |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 09:54:00 -
[985]
Edited by: Hydrogen on 06/06/2008 09:55:30
Quote:
Ships
Heron: capacity increased to 320m3 to match the other astrometrics frigates. Volume increased to 18,900m3, maximum targeting range decreased to 37,500m and gravimetric strength decreased to 10.
The Imicus has had its mass decreased to 1,350,000kg and volume decreased to 21500m3.
The Probe has had its ladar strength increased to 7.
The Anathema has had its model changed. It will now use the Magnate hull instead of the Crucifer hull
The Helios has had its model changed. It will now use the Imicus hull instead of the Maulus hull.
The Cheetah has had its model changed. It will now use the Probe hull instead of the Vigil Hull.
Caracal Navy Issue: Increased CPU output to 415tf, decreased power output to 690mw, added a launcher hard point, decreased shield recharge time to 1650s and tweaked the sensor system to make it in line with the other tier 2 faction cruisers
Apocalypse Navy Issue: The Apocalypse recent modifications have been mirrored to the Navy version. Changed the capacitor capacity bonus to a bonus to large energy turret optimal range bonus, increased capacitor capacity to 7500.0, increased CPU output to 505tf and increased power output to 20500mw
Stabber Fleet Issue: Velocity bonus changed to 10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking speed per level, moved a slot from high to low, added a turret hard point, increased max velocity, decreased the CPU output to 312tf, increased the drone bay and bandwidth to 40, increased power output to 950mw, increased armor HP and decreased shield HP
Just: Which part of "Pilgrim is broken" is so hard to understand?
Look at the other changes too: it was needed to change ship models make probe become a cheetah model and so on... It was important that guns return to their default position (think about the disturbance of all involved for turrets poninting in the wrong direction).
Now one could say: all those are different departments. Yes? Ok lets look at "our department". Omen Navy issue, Auguror,... erm... WTF? The most important ships which most ppl fly all the time and which will be fotm - Omen Navy and Auguror,... yes Sirrr that was important and will offer a major game impact.
All this was more important than having a look at Pilgrim?
Anyone understands that I just had some uncontrollable laughter-attack at... idiocy and stubborness?
__
- click here - |
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 10:09:00 -
[986]
hahahaha
what does that mean to play us out
___
Eve Players are not very smart.
Support Killmail Overhaul
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.06.06 12:06:00 -
[987]
Originally by: Erotic Irony
what does that mean to play us out
Awww you got it too and were first :)
I read the patch notes and couldnt believe it - it is so far below by CCP that I simply lack words...
__
- click here - |
Aydjile
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 05:23:00 -
[988]
Edited by: Aydjile on 07/06/2008 05:23:27
bump
as a customer, i would like some feedback for product i am paying for.
which is piligrim.
dev's could you care to comment? how i to use it, in it's corrent state.
Reality exist only in our imagination. |
Cailais
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 07:15:00 -
[989]
Nearly 8 months on from the OPs post. CCP comments....0
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Raniss
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 07:23:00 -
[990]
Originally by: Cailais
Nearly 8 months on from the OPs post. CCP comments....0
C.
CCP doesnt post in topics in S&M.
|
|
|
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 09:25:00 -
[991]
Originally by: Raniss
Originally by: Cailais
Nearly 8 months on from the OPs post. CCP comments....0
C.
CCP doesnt post in topics in S&M.
They didn't bother to post in any of the Pilgrim-Threads in Game Development as well.
Actually they only don't post in Pilgrim-Threads.
.
|
Diomidis
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 09:36:00 -
[992]
Originally by: Grytok
Originally by: Raniss
Originally by: Cailais
Nearly 8 months on from the OPs post. CCP comments....0
C.
CCP doesnt post in topics in S&M.
They didn't bother to post in any of the Pilgrim-Threads in Game Development as well.
Actually they only don't post in Pilgrim-Threads.
So the Pilgrim is not broken...
Either the covert-hauler option makes it useful "enough", or they have in mind a proper fitting/tactic that evades our imagination and these thread(s) - yet it's so obvious (even powerful) that they don't wonna share
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
A Ingus
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 15:55:00 -
[993]
Basically the only warp-cloaked recons worth anything are the Caldari and Minmatar. Which appears to be fine with the devs for some reason. I'm doing something I swore I would never do, train Caldari.
At least Amarr has the Curse, which is still usefull. The Lachesis and Arazu are only worth type 2 salvage. (Not meant as a derail) I agree the Pilgrim is broken, and also only worth type 2 salvage.
Possible motivations for the devs? Force players to cross-train with rotating lengthy nerfs? Still funny how the ECM nerf got fixed so quickly, while Amarr suffer(s-ed) for so long. Some comfort, appears Gallente is joining you.
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 01:58:00 -
[994]
Did the pilgrim get a boost in the new expansion at all? Any plans to?
|
Tyrrhena Maxus
Igneus Auctorita
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 08:52:00 -
[995]
tl;dr
|
Ceylana Zari
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 15:26:00 -
[996]
I have tried to post a constructive topic in the assembly hall. I would appreciate it if all the Pilgrim supporters would go there and post their support for getting the Pilgrim fixed. Please no stupid comments as I would like for this thread to be taken seriously.
CZ
Linkage
|
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 17:28:00 -
[997]
I am an Arazu pilot, and I complain incessantly about my ship. But as bad as my ship is, I gotta say you guys got screwed even more. A paper thin ship whose primary function (neut/nos) forces it to operate within web range? Yeah, that's useful. I feel for you guys.
Address the issues CCP!! Give us feedback.
Taxman V: Back in Black
|
Suitonia
interimo
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.14 18:06:00 -
[998]
100% Agree the Pilgrim, and Arazu/Lachesis needs to be reviewed by CCP.
---
|
Feng Schui
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 06:38:00 -
[999]
Over 1000 posts and still no acknowledgment from CCP.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 10:29:00 -
[1000]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Over 1000 posts and still no acknowledgment from CCP.
:( as well.
|
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 05:48:00 -
[1001]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Over 1000 posts and still no acknowledgment from CCP.
They really need to do something about the pilgrim.
|
Spermcell Giganticus
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 17:48:00 -
[1002]
Bump...Pilgrim NEEEEDDS a boost CCP
|
ian666
Rave Technologies Inc.
C0VEN
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 20:20:00 -
[1003]
maybe ccp need new staff, because old doesnt want to work
|
Blind Jhon
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 21:31:00 -
[1004]
if nos nerf has contribute broking the thempes....
... it clean of the pilgrim (and a bit the cure)
i suport this request
@CCP please guys, good job in new stuff... but now wake up, the old stuff starts smelling...
|
Xaen
Caritas.
|
Posted - 2008.06.20 21:50:00 -
[1005]
Curse is fine. (My favorite ship)
Pilgrim, Arazu, and Lach aren't worth buying.
Just check the market prices.
Compare to the Caldari/minmatar recon prices.
The market is incapable of lying, you can't get every eve player in the game to work together to make it lie any more than you can get them out of jita.
-
Support fixing the UI|Suggest Jita fixes|Compact logs |
gee ai
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 00:30:00 -
[1006]
I had plan to train for piglrim but after I've found this thread Im really not sure..
The main reason was to fly warp-cloaked solo pvp ship. Any other recon ship is suitable for this role?
|
Feng Schui
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 01:45:00 -
[1007]
All of them are capable of solo'ing, even the Pilgrim, however, I would say go with the Arazu or the Rapier.
I think the main problem with the Pilgrim is that while the other recons can engage higher tiered ships (battlecruisers, battleships, tackle carriers, etc..), the pilgrim is a "do or die" ship. All of the other recons can escape easily, except the Pilgrim.
This in itself wouldn't be so bad, if it had the capacitor & tank to support this type of fighting.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Jenni Falorgen
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 01:55:00 -
[1008]
stupid n00b question:
how does the drone capacity and bonuses of the non-amarr recons compare to the Pilgrim and Curse?
|
Feng Schui
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 02:01:00 -
[1009]
Caldari = non existent iirc
Gallente = 40 m3
Minmatar = 40 m3
TBH, I would use ECM drones on these ships, better for survivability.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Jenni Falorgen
|
Posted - 2008.06.21 02:22:00 -
[1010]
i read the first bunch of posts in this thread. the argument is very well thought out and clearly stated.
the problem is I didn't see much in the way talking about the these ships' drone capacity. the can hold 150m3, with bandwidth for 50m3.
there is a +10%/level bonus on dmg/hp/yield of all drones. at Cruiser 5 it's +50%
Drone Interfacing 5 +100% dmg/hp/yield
Combat Drone Ops 5 +25% dmg
Scout Drone 5 +25km range
Faction Drone Spec 5 +10% dmg
Drone Durability 5 +25% hp shield/armor/hull
EW Drone 5 +15km range
+ 2x Drone Link Augs (+20km range each)
base dmg on a Hammerhead 2 is 24hp, base range is 20km.
the Arbi and Recon cruisers are less than useless without at least 0.5mill in Drone SPs. the more drone specialized you are the more powerful these ships become.
|
|
|
Cailais
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.22 22:29:00 -
[1011]
Yet another pilgrim bites the dust without so much as making a dent in my opponent(s). Why do I bother?
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Tarron Sarek
Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 00:56:00 -
[1012]
Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
A paper thin ship whose primary function (neut/nos) forces it to operate within web range?
Well this could be fixed by giving the Pilgrim the Nos/Neut range bonus instead of the amount bonus.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
-Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam-
('nerf' means 'incompetence', esp. when you use it) |
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 02:14:00 -
[1013]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff
A paper thin ship whose primary function (neut/nos) forces it to operate within web range?
Well this could be fixed by giving the Pilgrim the Nos/Neut range bonus instead of the amount bonus.
No because neuts have sizes and the amount bonus is there to make neuts useful. Webs, TPs, scrams arent sized so they only need the range bonus. Neuts need 2 bonuses to be useful. This mean in short that pilgrim has been short of one bonus. If you change amount bonus to range bonus it will still suck badly.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Tarron Sarek
Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 02:35:00 -
[1014]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Webs, TPs, scrams arent sized so they only need the range bonus.
Webs and Scrams are not racial EW, just like Nos. TPs are (like ECM, RSDs and TDs). So this is a bit apples and oranges. Especially since TPs (/RSDs/TDs) actually need their strength bonus.
Quote:
Neuts need 2 bonuses to be useful.
I think you meant 'powerful'.
To be useful I'd say it would already be nice to apply them without the certainty of dying soon after.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
-Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam-
('nerf' means 'incompetence', esp. when you use it) |
Feng Schui
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.06.23 03:47:00 -
[1015]
why don't we just get rid of the nos and TD bonuses, and give it a cargo bonus and mining amount bonus.. seriously.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 02:26:00 -
[1016]
Originally by: Feng Schui
why don't we just get rid of the nos and TD bonuses, and give it a cargo bonus and mining amount bonus.. seriously.
LOL, imagine if that actually happened.
Bump, hello, fix the pilgrim.
|
Feng Schui
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 04:11:00 -
[1017]
My Pilgrim would be useful?
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 13:02:00 -
[1018]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
Webs and Scrams are not racial EW, just like Nos. TPs are (like ECM, RSDs and TDs). So this is a bit apples and oranges. Especially since TPs (/RSDs/TDs) actually need their strength bonus.
Recons are EW ships. Recons counter your own race with suitable bonuses. That is why minmatar recons get long webs+TDs to counter speedy ships for example. You can go anal all you like about the word but everything that is bonused on a recon is ELECTRONIC WARFARE in one way or another. Sure nos/neuts isnt technically ELECTRONIC warfare but that doesnt matter. You seem to be perfectly fine with falcon getting dual bonuses to EW, with you logic that would make the other recons suck because they only get one bonus to their EW?
So no, its not apples and oranges. The recons bonuses are balanced when you ADD up both bonuses together. Why the hell do you think people arent complaining about rapiers? Because long webs+tps are still good because webs are very good.
You just want to keep pilgrim nerfed because of a word technicality. Nos DOES need str AND range bonus to be useful. End of story.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Anubis Hatak
OUTLAWZ IMMORTAL
White Core
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 13:56:00 -
[1019]
Yea a range bonus of about 70-100% on the nos/neuts would be good, then it's not a covert-ops cloaking curse but it has a 20-24km (non faction) nos/neut range.
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 14:28:00 -
[1020]
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 20:48:00 -
[1021]
Bump for obvious fix.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Jalif
Deviance Inc
Nocturnal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 20:53:00 -
[1022]
Well, if you get the neut bonus like the curse, you should remove the drone damage bonus.
Reason?
Very simple, every single recon (the cloak variant) has a reduced damage output. Just look at the following:
Falcon has less missle strengt
Aruze has less highslots to fit for damage output.
Rapier has 3 highslots less then the huggin for the missile launchers.
I'm ok with the change for the pilgrim, to increase their range, but you should recieve a "nerf" in your damage output.
Cause if you don't, nobody will fly the curse anymore because the pilgrim has the ability to fit a covert-ops cloak which curse cant.
************ BOOST MINMATAR!!! ************ |
gee ai
|
Posted - 2008.06.25 22:28:00 -
[1023]
eee still dont understand one thing> if I need to go with Pilgrim in web range of my target, isnt the TD just useless? Im too close to use its range bonus and Im too slow(if the target is webbing me) to use its turret speed bonus, no? Am I wrong?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 02:16:00 -
[1024]
Originally by: Jalif
Cause if you don't, nobody will fly the curse anymore because the pilgrim has the ability to fit a covert-ops cloak which curse cant.
Wait because people fly alot of rooks, huginns and lachesis because they have more dps then their cloaking counterparts? Your argument is FAIL.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Cailais
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 02:22:00 -
[1025]
Originally by: gee ai
eee still dont understand one thing> if I need to go with Pilgrim in web range of my target, isnt the TD just useless? Im too close to use its range bonus and Im too slow(if the target is webbing me) to use its turret speed bonus, no? Am I wrong?
No you are broadly correct. The tracking speed script will off set slightly the webs effect and the tracking of large turrets but its application isnt anywhere nearly as effective compared to using the same modul outside of web range.
Providing a range bonus to nos/neuts would make the TD bonus more useful on the pilgrim and thats part of the reason why this ship is comparatively weak - it simply cant apply both bonuses (nos/td's) effectively at the same time.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Cailais
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 02:35:00 -
[1026]
Originally by: Jalif
Well, if you get the neut bonus like the curse, you should remove the drone damage bonus.
Reason?
Very simple, every single recon (the cloak variant) has a reduced damage output. Just look at the following:
Falcon has less missle strengt
Aruze has less highslots to fit for damage output.
Rapier has 3 highslots less then the huggin for the missile launchers.
I'm ok with the change for the pilgrim, to increase their range, but you should recieve a "nerf" in your damage output.
Cause if you don't, nobody will fly the curse anymore because the pilgrim has the ability to fit a covert-ops cloak which curse cant.
The Curse already has a higher dps in comparison to the pilgrim as it can equip more neuts / missile launchers (the neuts proportionally reducing the targets tank - which in effect is a increase in dps). The Curse is also faster, with a lower sig radius and has a better shield tank than the pilgrim making it more suited to the fast 'nano' cruiser role (and thats base let alone that the curse can achieve a higher shield tank than the pilgrim module wise).
So the argument that a range increased pilgrim would make a curse redundant, and therefore needs a dps nerf is not really sustainable.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Neferidian
Luminaire Atrocity
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 06:55:00 -
[1027]
so what if the pilgrims would be better then the curse, falcon totaly outclasses the rook :)
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 07:19:00 -
[1028]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
|
Samel Hysta
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 09:11:00 -
[1029]
Given that the curse is the combat recon.... I think switching its meds and lows over so give me 4 meds 6 lows drop the nos/neut range bonus and give it a 5% to resistances per level. Allowing the ship to be capable of tackling and holding targets. Then on the pilgrim switch the amount bonus for a range bonus thus allowing it to remain at a distance from targets and use its tracking disrupters more effectivly.
|
Jalif
Deviance Inc
Nocturnal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 12:47:00 -
[1030]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Jalif
Well, if you get the neut bonus like the curse, you should remove the drone damage bonus.
Reason?
Very simple, every single recon (the cloak variant) has a reduced damage output. Just look at the following:
Falcon has less missle strengt
Aruze has less highslots to fit for damage output.
Rapier has 3 highslots less then the huggin for the missile launchers.
I'm ok with the change for the pilgrim, to increase their range, but you should recieve a "nerf" in your damage output.
Cause if you don't, nobody will fly the curse anymore because the pilgrim has the ability to fit a covert-ops cloak which curse cant.
The Curse already has a higher dps in comparison to the pilgrim as it can equip more neuts / missile launchers (the neuts proportionally reducing the targets tank - which in effect is a increase in dps). The Curse is also faster, with a lower sig radius and has a better shield tank than the pilgrim making it more suited to the fast 'nano' cruiser role (and thats base let alone that the curse can achieve a higher shield tank than the pilgrim module wise).
So the argument that a range increased pilgrim would make a curse redundant, and therefore needs a dps nerf is not really sustainable.
C.
Alright, you convinced me, but if this change whould happen, what would be the DPS compared to the other races cloak recons? I think that that 50m3 brandwith with the 10% damage to drones bonus will outdamage any recon ship (except from the curse itself).
But I would like to see numbers first...
************ BOOST MINMATAR!!! ************ |
|
|
Twisted Pyramid
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 17:36:00 -
[1031]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
|
The ArchWarder
Warped Mining
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 18:45:00 -
[1032]
Originally by: Twisted Pyramid
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
Would totally destroy the ships ability to fight. Think about it. That bonus would have to replace an existing bonus, which would either be drone damage, drain amount or tracking disruption bonus. take any one of these bonuses away and the ship is useless.
Range isnt everything, and most of you are probably to lazy to fit your pilgrims for todays eve.
Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes, ty. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Cortes |
Lyria Skydancer
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.26 20:42:00 -
[1033]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 26/06/2008 20:42:24
Originally by: The ArchWarder
Range isnt everything, and most of you are probably to lazy to fit your pilgrims for todays eve.
Yes it is and the fits youre talking about are fail because you can kill those targets in a arbi or hac aswell.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Hydrogen
Art of War
Cruel Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.06.27 13:03:00 -
[1034]
There is no need to make everythign the same. I still advocate for the stealth assassin, which CCP apparently wants to eliminate.
Why do I advocate for it?
Because it is a unique playstyle. Unique playstyles add fun, depths and so much more to a game. Why eliminate them?
__
- click here - |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.06.27 17:09:00 -
[1035]
Let me quote myself:
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 00:30:00 -
[1036]
Originally by: Jalif
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Jalif
Well, if you get the neut bonus like the curse, you should remove the drone damage bonus.
Reason?
Very simple, every single recon (the cloak variant) has a reduced damage output. Just look at the following:
Falcon has less missle strengt
Aruze has less highslots to fit for damage output.
Rapier has 3 highslots less then the huggin for the missile launchers.
I'm ok with the change for the pilgrim, to increase their range, but you should recieve a "nerf" in your damage output.
Cause if you don't, nobody will fly the curse anymore because the pilgrim has the ability to fit a covert-ops cloak which curse cant.
The Curse already has a higher dps in comparison to the pilgrim as it can equip more neuts / missile launchers (the neuts proportionally reducing the targets tank - which in effect is a increase in dps). The Curse is also faster, with a lower sig radius and has a better shield tank than the pilgrim making it more suited to the fast 'nano' cruiser role (and thats base let alone that the curse can achieve a higher shield tank than the pilgrim module wise).
So the argument that a range increased pilgrim would make a curse redundant, and therefore needs a dps nerf is not really sustainable.
C.
Alright, you convinced me, but if this change whould happen, what would be the DPS compared to the other races cloak recons? I think that that 50m3 brandwith with the 10% damage to drones bonus will outdamage any recon ship (except from the curse itself).
But I would like to see numbers first...
A reasonable Arazu-loadout with 3x 250mm II and Faction AM + 4x MedDrones has 250 DPS at 25km, where most ships aren't even able to target you after you've applied your 3 Damps.
Sure, you can't weaken your targets tank, but if you catch a Ratter in the Belt with a triple-BS spawn, then it's 100% game over for your prey, while you're totally invincible.
.
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 08:48:00 -
[1037]
They are never fixing the pilgrim are they?
::sighs::
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 11:07:00 -
[1038]
Originally by: Grytok
Originally by: Jalif
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Jalif
Well, if you get the neut bonus like the curse, you should remove the drone damage bonus.
Reason?
Very simple, every single recon (the cloak variant) has a reduced damage output. Just look at the following:
Falcon has less missle strengt
Aruze has less highslots to fit for damage output.
Rapier has 3 highslots less then the huggin for the missile launchers.
I'm ok with the change for the pilgrim, to increase their range, but you should recieve a "nerf" in your damage output.
Cause if you don't, nobody will fly the curse anymore because the pilgrim has the ability to fit a covert-ops cloak which curse cant.
The Curse already has a higher dps in comparison to the pilgrim as it can equip more neuts / missile launchers (the neuts proportionally reducing the targets tank - which in effect is a increase in dps). The Curse is also faster, with a lower sig radius and has a better shield tank than the pilgrim making it more suited to the fast 'nano' cruiser role (and thats base let alone that the curse can achieve a higher shield tank than the pilgrim module wise).
So the argument that a range increased pilgrim would make a curse redundant, and therefore needs a dps nerf is not really sustainable.
C.
Alright, you convinced me, but if this change whould happen, what would be the DPS compared to the other races cloak recons? I think that that 50m3 brandwith with the 10% damage to drones bonus will outdamage any recon ship (except from the curse itself).
But I would like to see numbers first...
A reasonable Arazu-loadout with 3x 250mm II and Faction AM + 4x MedDrones has 250 DPS at 25km, where most ships aren't even able to target you after you've applied your 3 Damps.
Sure, you can't weaken your targets tank, but if you catch a Ratter in the Belt with a triple-BS spawn, then it's 100% game over for your prey, while you're totally invincible.
Agreed.
It's not all about the 'dps' though. In terms of combat the application of webs, scramble or nos are all extremely useful - the force recons can apply these special effects at range. This means they have a greater chance of survival and are more generically useful, either vs lone targets or within gang ops.
The Pilgrim however does not have this luxury. Its a close range ship, with the firepower and tank of a long range ship. And that has to placed into context, and the context is that of small cruiser combat being fast.
Even as an assassin ship there are few slow targets, and fewer lone targets for the pilgrim to latch onto. Its a ship thats been made redundant by advances in the game (nos nerf, ecm nerf, polycarbs, overheated webs etc).
Sure it used to be positively evil if one caught you alone - now I seriously consider if I actually want to try and attack that T1 Cruiser using a pilgrim.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
C0NRAD
Drunken Koalas Bears
Diabolic Paradox
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 11:33:00 -
[1039]
I would like to point out there is nothign wrong with the pilgrim in its current form, as a combat operationship it operates fine, which cause the dilema that the curse which is supposed to be our combat operation recon fails.
Now simply changing the pilgrim to a range bonus really dosne;t help this situation, no matter how much you buffed the curse, range bonus just inpowers the pilgrim further, especially versus things such as vagabonds.
How ever id liek to point out a few things, about our opossing races, Rapier > Huginn thansk to the extra low, and again the arazu is much prefered over the lachesis thank to the extra lows and cloak. Now all the combat recon ships got extra meds which is fine if i actually wanted to use said meds for a shield tank. But to be perfectly honest after fitting all my Ewar, points, web, im out of shield tanking slots.
In my opinnion the pilgrim is fine, what fails epically is the curse and that needs altering. Its not the comparrison in tank that needs altering its the comparrison in DPS over EWAR. The lowest DPS boats are the caldari which boast the highest ewar potential of all recons. the curse and pilgrim are at the other extreme they lack the Ewar self protection but have a highish DPS to cover for it. Now comparing with the Lachesis and Huginn both these boats have more DPS on paper due to other damage bonuses. But these bonuses arn;t really used a huge amount due to the fitting constraints in CPU and powergrid to really maximise these fits. But they are available options.
Perhaps a better fix would be to give the curse a Launcher rate of fire bonus over the tracking disruptor bonus. This would bring it more into line with the philopshy of the khanid ships. At the end of the day no recon is supposed to be a substitute for a HAC, there usefull assets for removing tactical advantages the enemy has, be that speed, Tank, DPS what ever.
|
Hastur DragonTooth
Amarr
coracao ardente
The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 15:25:00 -
[1040]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
|
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 17:02:00 -
[1041]
Originally by: C0NRAD
I would like to point out there is nothign wrong with the pilgrim in its current form, as a combat operationship it operates fine, which cause the dilema that the curse which is supposed to be our combat operation recon fails.
Now simply changing the pilgrim to a range bonus really dosne;t help this situation, no matter how much you buffed the curse, range bonus just inpowers the pilgrim further, especially versus things such as vagabonds.
How ever id liek to point out a few things, about our opossing races, Rapier > Huginn thansk to the extra low, and again the arazu is much prefered over the lachesis thank to the extra lows and cloak. Now all the combat recon ships got extra meds which is fine if i actually wanted to use said meds for a shield tank. But to be perfectly honest after fitting all my Ewar, points, web, im out of shield tanking slots.
In my opinnion the pilgrim is fine, what fails epically is the curse and that needs altering. Its not the comparrison in tank that needs altering its the comparrison in DPS over EWAR. The lowest DPS boats are the caldari which boast the highest ewar potential of all recons. the curse and pilgrim are at the other extreme they lack the Ewar self protection but have a highish DPS to cover for it. Now comparing with the Lachesis and Huginn both these boats have more DPS on paper due to other damage bonuses. But these bonuses arn;t really used a huge amount due to the fitting constraints in CPU and powergrid to really maximise these fits. But they are available options.
Perhaps a better fix would be to give the curse a Launcher rate of fire bonus over the tracking disruptor bonus. This would bring it more into line with the philopshy of the khanid ships. At the end of the day no recon is supposed to be a substitute for a HAC, there usefull assets for removing tactical advantages the enemy has, be that speed, Tank, DPS what ever.
The pilgrim is not fine. It needs range bonus just like ALL other recons. Adjust drone bays accordingly so that curse gets same dps as other combat recons like huginn and pilgrim gets same dps as rapier. Simple fix. The problem that ALL force recons somewhat void their combat recon counterparts is a differnt matter. That needs to be fixed for all races but fix pilgrim first so it is in line with the other races force recons. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 17:17:00 -
[1042]
Originally by: C0NRAD
I would like to point out there is nothign wrong with the pilgrim in its current form, as a combat operationship it operates fine, which cause the dilema that the curse which is supposed to be our combat operation recon fails.
Now simply changing the pilgrim to a range bonus really dosne;t help this situation, no matter how much you buffed the curse, range bonus just inpowers the pilgrim further, especially versus things such as vagabonds.
How ever id liek to point out a few things, about our opossing races, Rapier > Huginn thansk to the extra low, and again the arazu is much prefered over the lachesis thank to the extra lows and cloak. Now all the combat recon ships got extra meds which is fine if i actually wanted to use said meds for a shield tank. But to be perfectly honest after fitting all my Ewar, points, web, im out of shield tanking slots.
In my opinnion the pilgrim is fine, what fails epically is the curse and that needs altering. Its not the comparrison in tank that needs altering its the comparrison in DPS over EWAR. The lowest DPS boats are the caldari which boast the highest ewar potential of all recons. the curse and pilgrim are at the other extreme they lack the Ewar self protection but have a highish DPS to cover for it. Now comparing with the Lachesis and Huginn both these boats have more DPS on paper due to other damage bonuses. But these bonuses arn;t really used a huge amount due to the fitting constraints in CPU and powergrid to really maximise these fits. But they are available options.
Perhaps a better fix would be to give the curse a Launcher rate of fire bonus over the tracking disruptor bonus. This would bring it more into line with the philopshy of the khanid ships. At the end of the day no recon is supposed to be a substitute for a HAC, there usefull assets for removing tactical advantages the enemy has, be that speed, Tank, DPS what ever.
What are you talking about? The Curse is an excellent ship - sure its not on a par with a HAC like the sacri or vaga, but its pretty darn useful. The pilgrim on the other hand is flippin useless.
Have you got the ship names mixed up or something????
C.
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 17:49:00 -
[1043]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
The pilgrim is not fine. It needs range bonus just like ALL other recons. Adjust drone bays accordingly so that curse gets same dps as other combat recons like huginn and pilgrim gets same dps as rapier. Simple fix. The problem that ALL force recons somewhat void their combat recon counterparts is a differnt matter. That needs to be fixed for all races but fix pilgrim first so it is in line with the other races force recons.
The sad fact is that the Pilgim is NOT fine.
But it's also a fact that the Pilgrim is true to it's T1 Hull Bonuses, like other Recons are...
But, as mentioned before, unlike say ECM or Webbers, NOS/Neuts are size-based ewar modules. So vs. a bigger ship the Neut/Nos transfer amount bonus is WAY more important than the range bonus:
a BS with a Heavy Cap Booster "generates" more than 70-75 cap/second. A single, unbonused medium Neut can kill 15 Cap/sec with max skills, while the Pilgrim / Curse with the amount bonuses can double that to 30 Cap/Sec with maxed skills. It's not that difficult to understand that when a properly tanked pvp BS with cap booster can outlast a Pilgrim with 2-3x NOS/Neuts orbiting close to web range, even 3x unbonused Neuts (that would kill your cap just as fast as they do now) would do crap against it, as you would neutralize 50-75% the Cap you did before.
A range would help you scare or kill a few ceptors or a Vaga or sth, and would make a nano-Pilgrim a bit more "viable" against small targets. But your DPS would still suck big, and your cap killing potential would be ridiculous. A nano-cane would do it better
The Pilgrim is broken via the Medium Nos/Neut modules, not it's hull bonuses.
Perhaps adding special bonuses for it to use Heavy Neuts/NOSs without an amount bonus, but with less cap usage bonuses (and fitting requirements of course) would make more sense: 24km range, but with enough cap killing potential to really threaten BSs/BCs.
People suggesting range over amount simply do not understand how NOS/Neuts work...
And adding 3x ewar related bonuses is in-consistent to other cloaking recons... |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 18:06:00 -
[1044]
Originally by: Diomidis
The Pilgrim is broken via the Medium Nos/Neut modules, not it's hull bonuses.
Perhaps adding special bonuses for it to use Heavy Neuts/NOSs without an amount bonus, but with less cap usage bonuses (and fitting requirements of course) would make more sense: 24km range, but with enough cap killing potential to really threaten BSs/BCs.
People suggesting range over amount simply do not understand how NOS/Neuts work...
And adding 3x ewar related bonuses is in-consistent to other cloaking recons...
Yes exactly. The problem is that neuts/nos are sized unlike other ew. To give them "recon-power" they need both a range AND a strength bonus. The problem is that both these ships use up 2 bonuses for it and one of the ships, pilgrim, doesnt even get one of the bonuses it should get; range. Effectively curse and pilgrim have one bonus less. The strength and range bonus for both these ships needs to be wrapped up into ONE single bonus. This gives pilgrim the range bonus it needs and the curse gets a missile bonus or something.
Yeah the curse would get a boost by this and one could argue its better then other combat recons. Solution: Boost damage on all other combat recon with higher dmg bonuses.
Pilgrim fixed and all combat recons fixed.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.28 20:50:00 -
[1045]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Yes exactly. The problem is that neuts/nos are sized unlike other ew. To give them "recon-power" they need both a range AND a strength bonus. The problem is that both these ships use up 2 bonuses for it and one of the ships, pilgrim, doesnt even get one of the bonuses it should get; range. Effectively curse and pilgrim have one bonus less. The strength and range bonus for both these ships needs to be wrapped up into ONE single bonus. This gives pilgrim the range bonus it needs and the curse gets a missile bonus or something.
Yeah the curse would get a boost by this and one could argue its better then other combat recons. Solution: Boost damage on all other combat recon with higher dmg bonuses.
Pilgrim fixed and all combat recons fixed.
I don't think a "general Recon Overhaul" is required. Just shift Pilgrim and Curse's bonuses towards Heavy Neuts and change "transfer amount" to "cap activation reduction for energy vampire and Energy Vampire and Energy Neutralizer" or something.
The Curse's Range bonus should be lowered so that max range with a Heavy Neut/NOS module won't exceed 40km or so. The 24km range is more than enough for the Pilgrim.
The capacitor killing potential with 2-3 modules would be just the same with current bonuses, tho the range would be greater. NOS won't be the i-win button, and neuts will still require micro-management, unlike or way more than ALL other ewar.
The Efficiency bonus would keep the Amarr Recons as cap efficient as they are now with medium NOS/Neut modules.
Mass addition should not be a problem, as both medium and heavy NOS/Neuts are supposed to weight the same = neither curse or pilgrim should act like slow turning bricks in space. Handling is un-altered.
In overall:
*the Piglrim gets a 24km range, way lower than all other racial ewar, and in range of other ships fitting the same module => a BC won't be easy to counter-neut you, tho a BS will.
*NOS/Neut Range remains the same for the Curse
*Cap Killin capabilities remain the same for both
*Cap efficiency remains the same for both
*DPS remain the same for both, not that weak, not too strong.
*The target and weapon platform limitations remain for both Amarrian ships, making them way more "picky" than their counterparts.
*The added range surely will make the Pilgrim able to NOS/Neut more than a single target during a fight, also helping it lose the webber many consider as standard fit for a second TD, restoring its "electronics superiority platform" role. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 02:03:00 -
[1046]
Edited by: Cailais on 29/06/2008 02:04:44
Edited by: Cailais on 29/06/2008 02:03:41
An alternative to the nos/neut range option is to restore the pilgrim to what it excelled at pre nos nerf: capacitor denial.
Rather than increase it's nos / neut range simply provide it with a bonus that allows it to run neutralizers essentially for 'free' - or close to it.
Currently the Pilgrim (with x 3 neuts) will drain 1080 cap at a cost of 540 cap of a base capacitor of 1250. It doesnt take a genius to work out the pilgrim will cap itself out in just 3 cycles.
So our new bonus should be...
A 20% reduction in the cost of energy neutralizers per level.
WHAT?!!11!
Ok - so it can neutralise 540 cap per cycle in that case for 0 cap expended, but under the old nos rules it could drain 216 per cycle with 3 nos - (a net total of 432 cap each way). 216 cap is enough cap to perma run a MAR II (160 cap) - the equivalent of soaking up 26.6 dps, and a webifier and a scrambler.
With decent cap skills the 'old pilgrim' could essentially maintain a +52dps advantage (the pilgrim could rep - its target couldnt assuming both ships use a MAR II) and could hold a web & scram combo for enough time to cripple its target.
The current pilgrim just cant do that - if it uses nos, or a nos neut combo it simply caps out trying to run the MAR +web +scram unless it cap injects which (as others have pointed out) it will always loose the battle of. If it uses 3 nos at some point it will have equivalent % cap to its target, will stop nossing and thus loose the dps advantage. If it uses a neutraliser to drop its cap it will eventually cap out and will only recover 144 cap from the nos: not enough to keep the MAR +web + scram running.
"wait a mo cailais - I can do the same thing in my Curse - whats the difference?"
The Curse doesnt need an active tank because it can speed tank at range, nor does it need to run a web: all it needs is its MWD running and a warp disruptor. Plus, as it has more mid slots it can fit a cap injector to fill the occasional gap in its capacitor - where as the pilgrim, perma running the lot has to perma run its injector and suffer the reload time.
The pilgrim however MUST run its web and scram 100% of the time because if it doesnt the target will move out of web, and hence neut range and consequently recover the dps advantage.
With 0 cost neutralisers the Pilgrim can run its MAR II, Web and Scram for an extended period vs a capped out target.
Essentialy its the old pilgrim. Notice how the 'old' Pilgrim had a net cap exchange of 432 cap? 216 cap off its target added to the pilgrim? And with a 20% reduction in cap use it would neutralise 540 cap - remarkabley close to 432.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Choans
RSP Enterprises
HUZZAH FEDERATION
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 07:53:00 -
[1047]
longthread this... better keep it alive so we might see this change to amarr recons, atleast the pilgrim that i dont rly like to fly, it dosent fit my playstyle. so i would love to se a change on it.
may it be nos/neut change in range or cap amount... but make it work like the other races cloaky recons is needed imo. i to often take a curse with a cloak instead of a pilgrim when roaming with cloaky recon gangs.
RSP Enterprises
|
Chee
Minmatar
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 15:42:00 -
[1048]
just make an exception for the curse and pilgrim on the nos-limit. Only those two ships can NOS someone below their own %. uhh and sentinel then. that would fix em for me
|
Hastur DragonTooth
Amarr
coracao ardente
The Requiem
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 16:44:00 -
[1049]
Originally by: Chee
just make an exception for the curse and pilgrim on the nos-limit. Only those two ships can NOS someone below their own %. uhh and sentinel then. that would fix em for me
Don't forget the Bhaalgorn.
While that would be the optimal fix as the ships are designed to nos/neut while the domi and other ships were not, I doubt CCP wants to maintain two separate code forks just for a handful of ships.
CCP knows the destroyed the Amarr recons with the nos nurf. Over 1000 posts in this thread and not a peep from them. They just don't care. CCP are Amarr h8ers |
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.06.29 17:29:00 -
[1050]
Edited by: Madla Mafia on 29/06/2008 17:29:53
Originally by: C0NRAD
I would like to point out there is nothign wrong with the pilgrim in its current form, as a combat operationship it operates fine, which cause the dilema that the curse which is supposed to be our combat operation recon fails.
Now simply changing the pilgrim to a range bonus really dosne;t help this situation, no matter how much you buffed the curse, range bonus just inpowers the pilgrim further, especially versus things such as vagabonds.
How ever id liek to point out a few things, about our opossing races, Rapier > Huginn thansk to the extra low, and again the arazu is much prefered over the lachesis thank to the extra lows and cloak. Now all the combat recon ships got extra meds which is fine if i actually wanted to use said meds for a shield tank. But to be perfectly honest after fitting all my Ewar, points, web, im out of shield tanking slots.
In my opinnion the pilgrim is fine, what fails epically is the curse and that needs altering. Its not the comparrison in tank that needs altering its the comparrison in DPS over EWAR. The lowest DPS boats are the caldari which boast the highest ewar potential of all recons. the curse and pilgrim are at the other extreme they lack the Ewar self protection but have a highish DPS to cover for it. Now comparing with the Lachesis and Huginn both these boats have more DPS on paper due to other damage bonuses. But these bonuses arn;t really used a huge amount due to the fitting constraints in CPU and powergrid to really maximise these fits. But they are available options.
Perhaps a better fix would be to give the curse a Launcher rate of fire bonus over the tracking disruptor bonus. This would bring it more into line with the philopshy of the khanid ships. At the end of the day no recon is supposed to be a substitute for a HAC, there usefull assets for removing tactical advantages the enemy has, be that speed, Tank, DPS what ever.
B U L L S H I T.
Let me quote myself again:
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
|
|
|
Ophelia T'Kun
|
Posted - 2008.07.01 20:42:00 -
[1051]
Page 4? No way!
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 15:33:00 -
[1052]
And still no response from GM's. Not good.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Jallem Sims
Minmatar
Quantum Warriors
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 16:06:00 -
[1053]
er.... amarr are doing well enough, i see nothing but zealots/apocs/gurdians and lots of other random amarr hulls. Tbh, hte is nothing wrong with amarr recons. They do their job.. curse is still evil if you fly it. and the point for the pilgrim is to get in there cloaked and do its damage. Cap warfare is very effective!! very very effective if used against the right ship. so is a highly damgerous ship. Every race has its dud ships, eos anyone.... the myrmidon!! Well, most of caldari ships are pretty crummy too. and you have the epically fail scimitar/claymore and most of the t1 ships tbh for minmatar.
Leave the amarr ships alone you big whiners! |
Chinkies IV
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 16:12:00 -
[1054]
Originally by: Jallem Sims
er.... amarr are doing well enough, i see nothing but zealots/apocs/gurdians and lots of other random amarr hulls. Tbh, hte is nothing wrong with amarr recons. They do their job.. curse is still evil if you fly it. and the point for the pilgrim is to get in there cloaked and do its damage. Cap warfare is very effective!! very very effective if used against the right ship. so is a highly damgerous ship. Every race has its dud ships, eos anyone.... the myrmidon!! Well, most of caldari ships are pretty crummy too. and you have the epically fail scimitar/claymore and most of the t1 ships tbh for minmatar.
Leave the amarr ships alone you big whiners!
I can't tell for sure whether this is sarcasm. :/
|
Ambrosious Martin
Son of Man
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 19:03:00 -
[1055]
Originally by: Jallem Sims
er.... amarr are doing well enough, i see nothing but zealots/apocs/gurdians and lots of other random amarr hulls. Tbh, hte is nothing wrong with amarr recons. They do their job.. curse is still evil if you fly it. and the point for the pilgrim is to get in there cloaked and do its damage. Cap warfare is very effective!! very very effective if used against the right ship. so is a highly damgerous ship. Every race has its dud ships, eos anyone.... the myrmidon!! Well, most of caldari ships are pretty crummy too. and you have the epically fail scimitar/claymore and most of the t1 ships tbh for minmatar.
Leave the amarr ships alone you big whiners!
agreed.. on all amarr related issues...minni rock tho.. RFS anyone... Ruppy, cane?
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.07.02 22:15:00 -
[1056]
Originally by: Jallem Sims
er.... amarr are doing well enough, i see nothing but zealots/apocs/gurdians and lots of other random amarr hulls. Tbh, hte is nothing wrong with amarr recons. They do their job.. curse is still evil if you fly it. and the point for the pilgrim is to get in there cloaked and do its damage. Cap warfare is very effective!! very very effective if used against the right ship. so is a highly damgerous ship. Every race has its dud ships, eos anyone.... the myrmidon!! Well, most of caldari ships are pretty crummy too. and you have the epically fail scimitar/claymore and most of the t1 ships tbh for minmatar.
Leave the amarr ships alone you big whiners!
Ha ha ha, have you ever even flown any Amarr ship? Ifyou have read at least a few pages of this insanely long thread you would know a little of what we're talking about. Try to fly one, then talk.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 08:39:00 -
[1057]
Originally by: Jallem Sims
er.... amarr are doing well enough, i see nothing but zealots/apocs/gurdians and lots of other random amarr hulls. Tbh, hte is nothing wrong with amarr recons. They do their job.. curse is still evil if you fly it. and the point for the pilgrim is to get in there cloaked and do its damage. Cap warfare is very effective!! very very effective if used against the right ship. so is a highly damgerous ship. Every race has its dud ships, eos anyone.... the myrmidon!! Well, most of caldari ships are pretty crummy too. and you have the epically fail scimitar/claymore and most of the t1 ships tbh for minmatar.
Leave the amarr ships alone you big whiners!
this post has nothing to do with other Amarr ships - so dont try and derail it. True the Curse is still a comparitively effective ship however the pilgrim is about effective as a wet paper towel. As you point out the pilgrim has to cloak and get close to do damage - a factor which makes its TDs effectively useless, places it well within web/scram range for a ship which does comparitively little damage and cannot sustain a tank vs the majority of its targets.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
tropic89
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 09:53:00 -
[1058]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Edited by: Madla Mafia on 29/06/2008 17:29:53
Originally by: C0NRAD
I would like to point out there is nothign wrong with the pilgrim in its current form, as a combat operationship it operates fine, which cause the dilema that the curse which is supposed to be our combat operation recon fails.
Now simply changing the pilgrim to a range bonus really dosne;t help this situation, no matter how much you buffed the curse, range bonus just inpowers the pilgrim further, especially versus things such as vagabonds.
How ever id liek to point out a few things, about our opossing races, Rapier > Huginn thansk to the extra low, and again the arazu is much prefered over the lachesis thank to the extra lows and cloak. Now all the combat recon ships got extra meds which is fine if i actually wanted to use said meds for a shield tank. But to be perfectly honest after fitting all my Ewar, points, web, im out of shield tanking slots.
In my opinnion the pilgrim is fine, what fails epically is the curse and that needs altering. Its not the comparrison in tank that needs altering its the comparrison in DPS over EWAR. The lowest DPS boats are the caldari which boast the highest ewar potential of all recons. the curse and pilgrim are at the other extreme they lack the Ewar self protection but have a highish DPS to cover for it. Now comparing with the Lachesis and Huginn both these boats have more DPS on paper due to other damage bonuses. But these bonuses arn;t really used a huge amount due to the fitting constraints in CPU and powergrid to really maximise these fits. But they are available options.
Perhaps a better fix would be to give the curse a Launcher rate of fire bonus over the tracking disruptor bonus. This would bring it more into line with the philopshy of the khanid ships. At the end of the day no recon is supposed to be a substitute for a HAC, there usefull assets for removing tactical advantages the enemy has, be that speed, Tank, DPS what ever.
B U L L S H I T.
Let me quote myself again:
Originally by: Madla Mafia
If the pilgrim got this range bonus, LIKE ALL THE OTHER FORCE RECONS HAVE, then the problem would be solved.
Let me quote you're idiot quote, and retort: you're an idiot.
|
Onionico
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 11:07:00 -
[1059]
Perhaps i missed it in all the pages... but can someone please tell me why the pilgrim doesn't have the same range bonus of all the other ships from the various races of its class? It certainly wouldn't make it overpowered.
The devs have STILL not acknowledge the pilgrim being worthless is a problem. What gives?
Falcon is awesome.
Rapier is awesome.
Gallente Recons not so much, by they're still are flyable.
The Pilgrim is rubbish. Utter and complete rubbish.
(unless you want to covertly haul of course.)
I'll repeat myself for easy quoting. Someone please respond to this: Perhaps i missed it in all the pages... but can someone please tell me why the pilgrim doesn't have the same range bonus of all the other ships from the various races of its class? It certainly wouldn't make it overpowered.
|
Hydrogen
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 12:15:00 -
[1060]
Originally by: Onionico
Perhaps i missed it in all the pages... but can someone please tell me why the pilgrim doesn't have the same range bonus of all the other ships from the various races of its class? It certainly wouldn't make it overpowered.
The devs have STILL not acknowledge the pilgrim being worthless is a problem. What gives?
Falcon is awesome.
Rapier is awesome.
Gallente Recons not so much, by they're still are flyable.
The Pilgrim is rubbish. Utter and complete rubbish.
(unless you want to covertly haul of course.)
I'll repeat myself for easy quoting. Someone please respond to this: Perhaps i missed it in all the pages... but can someone please tell me why the pilgrim doesn't have the same range bonus of all the other ships from the various races of its class? It certainly wouldn't make it overpowered.
Because... well, because... actually because of... well screw that. There is no reason for keeping the Pilgrim in its current state, neither is there a reason why no dev responds to a valid request. There is even no reason for a dev to not respond if we made a mistake.
Looking at the pattern it appears as if CCP balancing has a general problem with cloaked ships being effective in killing something:
1. Cloak below cov ops cloak: target delay + scan res penalty
2. BOs
3. Pilgrim
It is for sure a general concept and there *might* be sane reasoning behind it, but... why CCP, why dont tell us in this thread?
__
- click here - |
|
|
Jallem Sims
Minmatar
Quantum Warriors
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 14:15:00 -
[1061]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Originally by: Jallem Sims
** epically good statement **
Leave the amarr ships alone you big whiners!
Ha ha ha, have you ever even flown any Amarr ship? Ifyou have read at least a few pages of this insanely long thread you would know a little of what we're talking about. Try to fly one, then talk.
I often dream about the curse... but have more or my own racial skills to train. But i spend most my gangs surrounded by dam amarr apocs and zealots! YOur right though... the pilgrim sucks, like the gal recons too... so the whole arguement on any amarr ships getting boosted fails. they are good, just you need them to be better and are going to spend time using OLD arguments to try to keep pushing OLD lines.
|
jam6549
Amarr
Via Crucis
|
Posted - 2008.07.03 15:29:00 -
[1062]
give the pilgrim a range bonus for TDs instead of drone damage or something so it can be an anti-sniper ship...always wanted to **** up snipers with TDs
|
Anubis Hatak
OUTLAWZ IMMORTAL
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 11:25:00 -
[1063]
Originally by: jam6549
give the pilgrim a range bonus for TDs instead of drone damage or something so it can be an anti-sniper ship...always wanted to **** up snipers with TDs
No.
|
Xofii
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 19:38:00 -
[1064]
Originally by: Anubis Hatak
No.
Why would longrange TD's be bad? Not saying anything about the entire rewrite of the pilgrim, but seems inline with longrange ewar?
//Xo
|
Misanth
The Forsakened Companions
Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 20:26:00 -
[1065]
Originally by: Cailais
this post has nothing to do with other Amarr ships - so dont try and derail it. True the Curse is still a comparitively effective ship however the pilgrim is about effective as a wet paper towel. As you point out the pilgrim has to cloak and get close to do damage - a factor which makes its TDs effectively useless, places it well within web/scram range for a ship which does comparitively little damage and cannot sustain a tank vs the majority of its targets.
C.
Pretty much that.
Pilgrims arn't as bad as people say ("absolute rubbish" is a major exaggeration). Tho what you and others mention is exactly the issue with it; it has to go close enough to tank things. And it hasn't got a tank. The day the Pilgrim get a HAC-tank or get a decent way to nano I'll be fine with having the short range energy drains, but atm it's gimping the ship by default.
Curse do fine atm, mostly thanks to speedtanking and buffer shieldtank, but if there's ever a change to nano the Curse will be vulnerable again. ewar + nos rage + faction disrupt makes it good by default by the same reasons Pilgrim are not so good by default (as it have to tank)..
I read about a third of this thread, cba to read every single post, but there's 2 simple things that needs to be done to Amarr recons:
1) Pilgrim simply need the range bonus to nos/neut.
2) Pilgrim, Curse, AND the Arbitrator need a buff to their capacitor.
Illustration of example 2: I went on a roam in my Pilgrim, with a Rapier friend (I got max cap skills btw). In one system we had a 280+ AU jump. He capped out near the end. I had to do SIX jumps. The Pilgrim (and the Curse, and the Arbitrator) have huge issues when it comes to mobility.. any fast roaming gang that don't bother to align, just straight jump.. and you cap out every now and then, slowing down the whole team. WITH MAX CAP SKILLS! No other ship have this issue. No other hull.
|
Anubis Hatak
OUTLAWZ IMMORTAL
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 09:58:00 -
[1066]
Originally by: Xofii
Originally by: Anubis Hatak
No.
Why would longrange TD's be bad? Not saying anything about the entire rewrite of the pilgrim, but seems inline with longrange ewar?
//Xo
Because losing the drone damage to a bonus that only affects turret based ships is just crap. It needs a boost to the nos/neuts not the tracking disruptors...
|
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 10:40:00 -
[1067]
Originally by: Misanth
I read about a third of this thread, cba to read every single post, but there's 2 simple things that needs to be done to Amarr recons:
1) Pilgrim simply need the range bonus to nos/neut.
2) Pilgrim, Curse, AND the Arbitrator need a buff to their capacitor.
Illustration of example 2: I went on a roam in my Pilgrim, with a Rapier friend (I got max cap skills btw). In one system we had a 280+ AU jump. He capped out near the end. I had to do SIX jumps. The Pilgrim (and the Curse, and the Arbitrator) have huge issues when it comes to mobility.. any fast roaming gang that don't bother to align, just straight jump.. and you cap out every now and then, slowing down the whole team. WITH MAX CAP SKILLS! No other ship have this issue. No other hull.
I'd agree with this, though I'm a little confused about how it works. The Pilgrim has significantly more cap than a Rapier, and even with better cap skills on the Pilgrim pilot, the Rapier is able to warp significantly further. At the end of a medium warp, the Pilgrim is struggling cap-wise...on a ship that is very cap intensive to run since the nos nerf. I used to fly the Pilgrim quite a bit, but am sorry to say that its barely been touched this whole year :(
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 11:36:00 -
[1068]
The Rapier is much lighter so it travels further with less cap to initiate the warp...
The Pilgrim on the contrary is heavier, and tho it's cap is bigger than on other Recons, it's a bit gimped when it comes to large warps...this also gimps it's fighting capabilities, as your cap could be below 50% or even 30% when you enter the fight's grid...
Just don't over-exaggerate things: the Falcon is another Recon with sufficient cap problems itself - it caps out during long warps and it's slowing the gang, sometimes in critical situations, as unlike the Pilgrim, a single Falcon is a very precious asset for every small gang.
I'll keep on repeating:
*** Do NOT ask for range over amount for the NOS/Neuts. Those will be useless against larger than cruiser targets. And it "does" Cruisers already ffs...
Either make it HUGELY effective up close = neut BSs easily etc, or make it use Heavy Neuts = out to 24km with current 12km efficiency.
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Malcanis
We are Legend
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 11:44:00 -
[1069]
Originally by: Misanth
Originally by: Cailais
this post has nothing to do with other Amarr ships - so dont try and derail it. True the Curse is still a comparitively effective ship however the pilgrim is about effective as a wet paper towel. As you point out the pilgrim has to cloak and get close to do damage - a factor which makes its TDs effectively useless, places it well within web/scram range for a ship which does comparitively little damage and cannot sustain a tank vs the majority of its targets.
C.
Pretty much that.
Pilgrims arn't as bad as people say ("absolute rubbish" is a major exaggeration). Tho what you and others mention is exactly the issue with it; it has to go close enough to tank things. And it hasn't got a tank. The day the Pilgrim get a HAC-tank or get a decent way to nano I'll be fine with having the short range energy drains, but atm it's gimping the ship by default.
Curse do fine atm, mostly thanks to speedtanking and buffer shieldtank, but if there's ever a change to nano the Curse will be vulnerable again. ewar + nos rage + faction disrupt makes it good by default by the same reasons Pilgrim are not so good by default (as it have to tank)..
I read about a third of this thread, cba to read every single post, but there's 2 simple things that needs to be done to Amarr recons:
1) Pilgrim simply need the range bonus to nos/neut.
2) Pilgrim, Curse, AND the Arbitrator need a buff to their capacitor.
Illustration of example 2: I went on a roam in my Pilgrim, with a Rapier friend (I got max cap skills btw). In one system we had a 280+ AU jump. He capped out near the end. I had to do SIX jumps. The Pilgrim (and the Curse, and the Arbitrator) have huge issues when it comes to mobility.. any fast roaming gang that don't bother to align, just straight jump.. and you cap out every now and then, slowing down the whole team. WITH MAX CAP SKILLS! No other ship have this issue. No other hull.
Um, yes they do. Falcon with MWD springs immediately to mind.
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
Xofii
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 16:13:00 -
[1070]
Originally by: Anubis Hatak
Because losing the drone damage to a bonus that only affects turret based ships is just crap. It needs a boost to the nos/neuts not the tracking disruptors...
i concurr that range bonused instead of drone dmg is not enough, I simply asked if the idea of long range TD's are faulty, which imo it is not on the pilgrim. Either make it a "stealth assassin" ala hydrogens wishes or make it into a long-range ewar boat like the rest in its class.
//xo
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 06:58:00 -
[1071]
Good to see this thread still going. Ive been inactive lately, Pilgrim still gimped? Typical.
*clap clap* ccp, good work. :(
|
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 07:06:00 -
[1072]
Dang....
I finally started fitting my pilgrim today. Seems I need Recon 4 and a 3% CPU implant to get a good fit. The Rapier sure is a lot easier to equip for its role
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 07:49:00 -
[1073]
Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
Dang....
I finally started fitting my pilgrim today. Seems I need Recon 4 and a 3% CPU implant to get a good fit. The Rapier sure is a lot easier to equip for its role
read my guide :\ you need recon 5 in order to fit it without using a co-processor
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 10:23:00 -
[1074]
Im just going to adopt my own private boycott (sorry pilgrim producers) and not buy another Pilgrim until something is done to fix its blatant imbalances.
Its so sub-standard in comparision to the Curse it would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Caelum Dominus
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 14:20:00 -
[1075]
Bump for justice - Pilgrim needs to be looked into.
|
Meridius Dex
Amarr
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 14:37:00 -
[1076]
Bump for a damn explanation from anyone who actually produces this game why the range bonus has not been implemented the same as other racial ships in this class.
--
Meridius Dex
--
Amarr = EVE on Hard setting |
Lysander Kaldenn
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 00:06:00 -
[1077]
Edited by: Lysander Kaldenn on 07/07/2008 00:06:44
I can say this honestly as a long time amarr recon pilot.... Stop crying... The curse is probably the best recon in game with a full rack of nuets and the pilgrim (while i would love to see a range bonus) is fine for solo hunting if you fit a booster and pick targets wisely. Ask yourself an honest question. If you were going solo pirating would you be caught dead in an arazu or a rapier, or for god's sake a falcon? Maybe the rapier, anything else is maddness.
The real problem is that the ships were over-powered before and most people miss that power. Still a nuet curse will freaking solo own almost anything BC sized and smaller...sometimes even BS. Can any other recon do that? Your only problem might be passive drakes and HICs, but shouldn't every ship have a weakness?
Honestly if you've lost a BS to a solo rapier, arazu or falcon you should probably be checking your fit, you should be able to tank the jesus out of anyone of them.
They should lock this thread, its pointless.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 00:17:00 -
[1078]
Edited by: Feng Schui on 07/07/2008 00:18:17
I am pretty sure that we all have come to the conclusion that yes, the curse IS a fine ship to fly.
I would like to call you out on your assumptions on the pilgrim. Unless, of course, you only enjoy (and target) newbies? (As you can see in my video, yes, newbies can be quite the fireworks display).
I would rather solo in a Falcon than a Pilgrim tbfh. At least I have the assurance that if I need to escape, I can (same can be said with the other recons, including curse).
edit: you say you're a long term amarr recon pilot, well, ever fly the pilgrim? Or just the curse?
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Diomidis
Amarr
Mythos Corp
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 11:36:00 -
[1079]
Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn
Still a nuet curse will freaking solo own almost anything BC sized and smaller...sometimes even BS. Can any other recon do that? Your only problem might be passive drakes and HICs, but shouldn't every ship have a weakness?
Honestly if you've lost a BS to a solo rapier, arazu or falcon you should probably be checking your fit, you should be able to tank the jesus out of anyone of them.
They should lock this thread, its pointless.
Your comments are pointless, cause you are the one comparing apples with oranges.
A Huginn can solo smaller than BC ships - does that proves something?
In larger gangs with BSs present, rook and huginn > curse IMHO, tho not as capable to solo stuff, and long range scram - even damps - have their uses too.
The thing is that both Curse/Pilgrim and Arazu/Lachesis need to focus multiple Neut/Damp modules to really mess up a single target, while Minmatar and Caldari can cripple at least 2x targets.
The only cases dual-webbers on a single target are needed is vs. gate re-approaching heavy ships and very fast small ships, in which cases all other recons woul do few things to threat em - perhaps Gallente ones could tackle nanos further out, but without other ships to web etc killing them is not probable.
You are messing combat recons with forcing recons otherwise, and Pilgrim is by far the worst force recon there is. It's ability to solo hand-picked targets means nothing...a stealth bomber or a ceptor can solo targets too, does that prove something?
Join the Biggest Greek Corp!
www.Mythos-eve.com - Join Mythos Channel in game! |
Caelum Dominus
Invicta.
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 20:29:00 -
[1080]
SO YOU THOUGHT WE'D LET THIS THREAD DIE, HUH?
|
|
|
Hastur DragonTooth
Amarr
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 19:43:00 -
[1081]
Armed with pitchforks and torches, a hoard of True Amarr
believers start their long march across the Atlantic to CCP
headquarters, demading that justice be had for the pilgrim.
|
LetsDoThis
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 19:59:00 -
[1082]
I like the pilgrim its my exploration ship omg please don't nerf it!
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 02:00:00 -
[1083]
We fix can please pilgrim?
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Liang Nuren
Perkone
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 03:02:00 -
[1084]
Originally by: Diomidis
In larger gangs with BSs present, rook and huginn > curse IMHO, tho not as capable to solo stuff, and long range scram - even damps - have their uses too.
Having their uses is not playing support for Falcons.
Quote:
The thing is that both Curse/Pilgrim and Arazu/Lachesis need to focus multiple Neut/Damp modules to really mess up a single target, while Minmatar and Caldari can cripple at least 2x targets.
Well said.
BTW, boost the Pilgrim. :)
-Liang
--
The Universe has a really good firewall. Why else do you think nobody has hacked the Universe yet? |
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 07:41:00 -
[1085]
Originally by: Erotic Irony
The task: bring the Pilgrim performance in line with other recons.
The limitation: The logic of its bonuses must be consistent with the other recons, you can't trade drone damage for neut range for example.
The premise:The energy neutralize amount bonus should be a multi-attribute skill much like drone interfacing. Should be neut amount & range rather splitting the two and trying to make the pilgrim competitive without shedding its EWAR, role bonus or cap war premise. This would give both the sentinel and the pilgrim a new lease on life, especially given how weak non battleship neuts are. Curse could have a capacitor amount or cap recharge bonus to replace the "lost" bonus as a result.
___
Eve Players are not very smart.
Support Killmail Overhaul
|
Sejet
|
Posted - 2008.07.11 08:43:00 -
[1086]
Originally by: Erotic Irony
Originally by: Erotic Irony
The task: bring the Pilgrim performance in line with other recons.
The limitation: The logic of its bonuses must be consistent with the other recons, you can't trade drone damage for neut range for example.
The premise:The energy neutralize amount bonus should be a multi-attribute skill much like drone interfacing. Should be neut amount & range rather splitting the two and trying to make the pilgrim competitive without shedding its EWAR, role bonus or cap war premise. This would give both the sentinel and the pilgrim a new lease on life, especially given how weak non battleship neuts are. Curse could have a capacitor amount or cap recharge bonus to replace the "lost" bonus as a result.
I agree for the most part, changing the Neut/Nos bonus to a two part bonus will let the Pilgrim (And Sentinel) be a lot more competative.
But, and it's a rather big one, the Curse is by no means in need of an extra ship bonus, if the result of all of this is to merge the amount and range bonus the addet bonus to the curse needs to be near useless. somthing like HAM RoF.
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.07.17 06:34:00 -
[1087]
Ya know, when there was a potential carrier nerf, the forums had a whole 10 page thread, and dev's commented like whoa.
38? 39 pages, and not a ****ing word from ccp.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Stabby McStabbins
|
Posted - 2008.07.17 13:08:00 -
[1088]
CCP belongs to the Caldari.... no reply imminent.
|
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.07.20 22:41:00 -
[1089]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Ya know, when there was a potential carrier nerf, the forums had a whole 10 page thread, and dev's commented like whoa.
38? 39 pages, and not a ****ing word from ccp.
Thats because the carrier nerf prompted an Alliance wail of despair - predominantly from Triumvirate but others followed suit. The pilgrim is a 'solo' ship and we all know what CCP feels about solo players.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Liranan
M'8'S
Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 06:11:00 -
[1090]
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Feng Schui
Ya know, when there was a potential carrier nerf, the forums had a whole 10 page thread, and dev's commented like whoa.
38? 39 pages, and not a ****ing word from ccp.
Thats because the carrier nerf prompted an Alliance wail of despair - predominantly from Triumvirate but others followed suit. The pilgrim is a 'solo' ship and we all know what CCP feels about solo players.
C.
Carrier nerf would have posed a major problem for all alliances. It was not acceptable by anyone, especially cap heavy reliant alliances such as RA, BoB, MC, AAA, MM, RZR and many others. While MC may no longer exist it would have been a problem for them too. So as you can see the carrier nerf would have affected many people.
Recon noobishness only affects recon noobs. I know people who are solo gods in recons so the whine here is pointless. Hydrogen can't fly recons so complains. Recons were never meant to be flown alone so if you get wasted flying one solo take it to the forums and make 40 page threads about it because maybe somoene might care.
Hydrogen I didn't even read that wall of text of yours. It was horrible and it was drama by a drama queen. Please stop posting this nonsense, it's the same nerf titans, nerf carriers, dreads, battleships, battlecruisers, cruisers, frigates and then the most ridiculous are the pirares who miss out on a pod and then come to these forums and make threads about how pods need to get nerfed.
You want to fly an Amarr recon? Fit cap boosters. Don't want to fit cap boosters? Don't fly Amarr. Want to fly Amarr and whine incessantly about nothing? Give me your stuff and bye.
These noobie whine threads are ridiculous and I don't care whether you've been playing EVE from the day you were born or from the beginning of time. I'm not new to EVE either and all I see are whine threads. At least Goons learned that Titans aren't invincible and neither are Carriers or Dreads.
End of discussion.
Farjung is my God |
|
|
Liranan
M'8'S
Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 06:13:00 -
[1091]
Originally by: Hastur DragonTooth
Armed with pitchforks and torches, a hoard of True Amarr
believers start their long march across the Atlantic to CCP
headquarters, demading that justice be had for the pilgrim.
Don't give CVA any idea's!!
Farjung is my God |
Boz Well
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 06:17:00 -
[1092]
So because fewer people fly amarr recon than fly carriers this topic is offlimits for discussion? On a forum created for discussing ships and their fits? Please.
If you had a point anywhere in your post, it might have been worth reading, but as is I consider it a waste of my time. You 'know people' who use the ship so of course it's fine. That's about as credible as you saying you saw a pilgrim win a fight in a video once, and so it's obviously fine. Or hell, maybe the 'friend' of yours is just some guy who made a video. Who knows. Point being, if you aren't flying it, if you aren't fitting it, if you aren't offering up any more argument than you know someone who flies it, then you aren't contributing anything except flames.
For someone complaining about lots of whines and dribble on the forums, you certainly let a lot of it spew out of your own mouth.
|
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
White Core
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 06:19:00 -
[1093]
I recently bought a new pilgrim.. ive maxed out the disrubter skilz so im going to get it a different shot..
The problem is i think with the optimal range so far away while the pilgrim fights up close range.. its just not logical..
www.garia.net |
BiggestT
Caldari
Fun Inc
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 06:50:00 -
[1094]
Originally by: Stabby McStabbins
CCP belongs to the Caldari.... no reply imminent.
yes thats why our ships are jove-like in comparison to others:
fear the mighty nighthawk
run from the swift drake
hide from the evil rook..
oh wait those ships are mediocre at best
fail post
poudly annoying fc's since 2007 |
Liranan
M'8'S
Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 07:28:00 -
[1095]
Originally by: Boz Well
So because fewer people fly amarr recon than fly carriers this topic is offlimits for discussion? On a forum created for discussing ships and their fits? Please.
If you had a point anywhere in your post, it might have been worth reading, but as is I consider it a waste of my time. You 'know people' who use the ship so of course it's fine. That's about as credible as you saying you saw a pilgrim win a fight in a video once, and so it's obviously fine. Or hell, maybe the 'friend' of yours is just some guy who made a video. Who knows. Point being, if you aren't flying it, if you aren't fitting it, if you aren't offering up any more argument than you know someone who flies it, then you aren't contributing anything except flames.
For someone complaining about lots of whines and dribble on the forums, you certainly let a lot of it spew out of your own mouth.
You either lack the sp, the skill, the team or a combination of the three. My friend isn't dumb enough to make a film and give his secrets away but I have seen him in action and he is amazing, how many people do you know who dual account recons?. If you so desire to find out we can arrange a low sec system for you to experience the neut power of Amarr recons.
Don't level that recon skill to 5 it's a total waste of time! Level forum whining instead, your forum warrioring is weak.
Farjung is my God |
Liranan
M'8'S
Frontal Impact
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 07:31:00 -
[1096]
Edited by: Liranan on 21/07/2008 07:34:10
Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn
Edited by: Lysander Kaldenn on 07/07/2008 00:06:44
I can say this honestly as a long time amarr recon pilot.... Stop crying... The curse is probably the best recon in game with a full rack of nuets and the pilgrim (while i would love to see a range bonus) is fine for solo hunting if you fit a booster and pick targets wisely. Ask yourself an honest question. If you were going solo pirating would you be caught dead in an arazu or a rapier, or for god's sake a falcon? Maybe the rapier, anything else is maddness.
The real problem is that the ships were over-powered before and most people miss that power. Still a nuet curse will freaking solo own almost anything BC sized and smaller...sometimes even BS. Can any other recon do that? Your only problem might be passive drakes and HICs, but shouldn't every ship have a weakness?
Honestly if you've lost a BS to a solo rapier, arazu or falcon you should probably be checking your fit, you should be able to tank the jesus out of anyone of them.
They should lock this thread, its pointless.
I didn't think quoting was necessary but it is. All recon noobs with 0 experience should read that a few times.
Can I have your stuff before you self destruct and leave the game because you lost a ship with skills at lvl 1?
P.S. I myself have lost quite a few BC's and HAC's to Amarr recons.
Farjung is my God |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.07.21 19:43:00 -
[1097]
Originally by: Liranan
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Feng Schui
Ya know, when there was a potential carrier nerf, the forums had a whole 10 page thread, and dev's commented like whoa.
38? 39 pages, and not a ****ing word from ccp.
Thats because the carrier nerf prompted an Alliance wail of despair - predominantly from Triumvirate but others followed suit. The pilgrim is a 'solo' ship and we all know what CCP feels about solo players.
C.
Carrier nerf would have posed a major problem for all alliances. It was not acceptable by anyone, especially cap heavy reliant alliances such as RA, BoB, MC, AAA, MM, RZR and many others. While MC may no longer exist it would have been a problem for them too. So as you can see the carrier nerf would have affected many people.
Well DUHH! Isnt that my point?!!? The carrier nerf effected a large number of ALLIANCES led, predominantly by....carrier pilots...who promptly whipped up their underlings into a forum frenzy in order to get CCP to stop what were arguably needed changes.
Pilgrim Pilots are a miniscule % of the EVE player base - and so get ignored.
As for the rest of your trolling, Id agree the Amarr Combat Recon (Curse) is an excellent ship and I fly it almost exclusively. The Pilgrim is not. In fact I wouldnt mind if was 'not as good but not far off' but its nowhere near as capable: which is bonkers considering the skill requirements are broadly the same & using the same hull.
That's the argument here - not whether your mates cousins best mates brother thinks Amarr recons are 'teh pwn', which frankly is the poorest argument Ive read on this forum.
C.
VITOC - Amarr Corp for Faction Warfare! |
Ballamahamabad Madas
|
Posted - 2008.07.22 14:10:00 -
[1098]
Originally by: Liranan
Originally by: Boz Well
So because fewer people fly amarr recon than fly carriers this topic is offlimits for discussion? On a forum created for discussing ships and their fits? Please.
If you had a point anywhere in your post, it might have been worth reading, but as is I consider it a waste of my time. You 'know people' who use the ship so of course it's fine. That's about as credible as you saying you saw a pilgrim win a fight in a video once, and so it's obviously fine. Or hell, maybe the 'friend' of yours is just some guy who made a video. Who knows. Point being, if you aren't flying it, if you aren't fitting it, if you aren't offering up any more argument than you know someone who flies it, then you aren't contributing anything except flames.
For someone complaining about lots of whines and dribble on the forums, you certainly let a lot of it spew out of your own mouth.
You either lack the sp, the skill, the team or a combination of the three. My friend isn't dumb enough to make a film and give his secrets away but I have seen him in action and he is amazing, how many people do you know who dual account recons?. If you so desire to find out we can arrange a low sec system for you to experience the neut power of Amarr recons.
Don't level that recon skill to 5 it's a total waste of time! Level forum whining instead, your forum warrioring is weak.
So you're saying that since your "friend" dual boxes with a curse and falcon, that the pilgrim is perfectly fine?
|
Endless Subversion
The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.07.22 14:27:00 -
[1099]
Quote:
So you're saying that since your "friend" dual boxes with a curse and falcon, that the pilgrim is perfectly fine?
No, no, he's not JUST saying that, he's also implying his friend has some secret, never before seen uber setup and totally novel tactics that allow him to totally pwn everything in his amarr recons of doom (plus his other unspecified recon that he dual boxes).
Lol. Great addition to this thread. I'd like to read more by this champion!
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 00:21:00 -
[1100]
So anyway, what's gonna happen with this ship then? Will it ever get fixed? Seems like CCP like to nerf thing beyond usefulness. Pilgrim - Dead. Nanos - Dead. Hello Caldari Online!
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
|
|
White Ronin
Gallente
Screenout
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 01:30:00 -
[1101]
Originally by: Cailais
The pilgrim is a 'solo' ship and we all know what CCP feels about solo players.
C.
The one true truth.
From CCP to the CSM, those who do not play the game as they want you get missions and a steaming hot cup of "shut the hell up".
Enjoy.
P.S. - Drink that slow cause it's hot.
---------------------------------------------
"There have always been ghosts in the machine . . . random segments of code that have grouped together to form unexpected protocols. " |
Frankinator
Ascent of Ages
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 02:06:00 -
[1102]
Um, you obviously havent flown the Pilgrim on the test server lately. If anything its better now with the nano nerf.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 07:32:00 -
[1103]
Originally by: Frankinator
Um, you obviously havent flown the Pilgrim on the test server lately. If anything its better now with the nano nerf.
Better or not on sisi; Pilgrim still sucks. Sorry, but they need to give it RANGE just like other recons. End of story.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
whysoserious
|
Posted - 2008.07.30 09:25:00 -
[1104]
Any news on this ship?
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 15:07:00 -
[1105]
Doesn't look like it. Pretty sure CCP has given up on this ship.
Pilgrim = Bottom of the food chain.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Cailais
Amarr
VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 15:40:00 -
[1106]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Doesn't look like it. Pretty sure CCP has given up on this ship.
Pilgrim = Bottom of the food chain.
Incorrect. If the nano-nerf patch goes through more or less as it is, then the pilgrim will be vastly improved. So much so that after just an hour on SISI I logged onto TQ and bought one.
C.
Originally by: Tarminic
Your continued whining is somewhat diminished by your continued willingness to give your money to CCP.
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 16:41:00 -
[1107]
That's as may be, but the Pilgrim still faces rather sharp limitations, due to limits in bandwidth and the lack of use as a scout ship. And not only it; most other Force Recons feel sharp limitations. Certainly with the up and coming speed patch.
My suggestion is to give all Recon ships one more slot. In the Pilgrim's case this would be another high slot. In addition, one could either up the Pilgrim's cap by 15%, or place its speed on par on par with the Curse's, or increase its bandwidth by 10-25 Mbit/s, or increase any other stat(s) just minutely until it balances out.
As it is, without drastic fits or skills at their absolute peak, the Pilgrim is not very good at anything else than taking out unfortunate and less-skilled solo miners and ratters. And not everyone wants to be such a ***** as to use their ship for this only. They are also rather meaningless in fleet, and with their limited range this is understandable and intentional, but when this stretches out to not even providing a fleet function by opening the way for other ships...
Well, hopefully, and probably, Black Ops will be able to ignore cynojammers when they jump in the future, and so we'll see at least a small change on that last point.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 17:18:00 -
[1108]
Give range to pilgrim like all other force recons. NOW!
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Ashaz
Mindstar Technology
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 18:14:00 -
[1109]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Give range to pilgrim like all other force recons. NOW!
yea what he/she said.
How hard can it be to realize that this is the main issue with this ship?
|
VJ Maverick
Caldari
Splinter Cell Alfa
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 20:01:00 -
[1110]
Originally by: Ashaz
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Give range to pilgrim like all other force recons. NOW!
yea what he/she said.
How hard can it be to realize that this is the main issue with this ship?
I disagree. I prefer the drone bonus over a range bonus on this ship any day, especially with the upcoming changes. A close range, AB fitted pilgrim will be downright scary after the next patch.
Telling your girlfriend that you play EvE is like telling her about your herpes. Timing is everything. |
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 20:20:00 -
[1111]
Originally by: VJ Maverick
Originally by: Ashaz
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Give range to pilgrim like all other force recons. NOW!
yea what he/she said.
How hard can it be to realize that this is the main issue with this ship?
I disagree. I prefer the drone bonus over a range bonus on this ship any day, especially with the upcoming changes. A close range, AB fitted pilgrim will be downright scary after the next patch.
it already has a drone bonus and it needs a drone dmg bonus because it doesnt have its highs free to put weapons in like other recons.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 20:52:00 -
[1112]
Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 04/08/2008 20:53:58
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
it already has a drone bonus and it needs a drone dmg bonus because it doesnt have its highs free to put weapons in like other recons.
Better then to add a highslot, and next let Recons work better as utility ships.
The Pilgrim is meant to operate within 10 km. That's why it has a cloak. And it quite purposefully has higher DPS than other Recons. The real problems that it faces is slipping away from HACs coming at it from out of its range so that it can't jam or cloak, the lack of an effective ECM, and a very pointed weakness against missiles. And these things should be solved through other measures.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 21:06:00 -
[1113]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 04/08/2008 21:05:55
Originally by: Aleus Stygian
Edited by: Aleus Stygian on 04/08/2008 20:53:58
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
it already has a drone bonus and it needs a drone dmg bonus because it doesnt have its highs free to put weapons in like other recons.
Better then to add a highslot, and next let Recons work better as utility ships.
The Pilgrim is meant to operate within 10 km. That's why it has a cloak. And it quite purposefully has higher DPS than other Recons. The real problems that it faces is slipping away from HACs coming at it from out of its range so that it can't jam or cloak, the lack of an effective ECM, and a very pointed weakness against missiles. And these things should be solved through other measures.
Higher dps then other recons? You have any idea how much dps a huginn has? After the nerf pilgrim and curse dont have anything near "good" dps.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 21:25:00 -
[1114]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Higher dps then other recons? You have any idea how much dps a huginn has? After the nerf pilgrim and curse dont have anything near "good" dps.
Why don't you tell me? Preferably assuming highest skills possible for both ships.
Anyway, the greater problem is missiles being able to **** everything over, including drones.
|
VJ Maverick
Caldari
Splinter Cell Alfa
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 21:43:00 -
[1115]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: VJ Maverick
Originally by: Ashaz
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Give range to pilgrim like all other force recons. NOW!
yea what he/she said.
How hard can it be to realize that this is the main issue with this ship?
I disagree. I prefer the drone bonus over a range bonus on this ship any day, especially with the upcoming changes. A close range, AB fitted pilgrim will be downright scary after the next patch.
it already has a drone bonus and it needs a drone dmg bonus because it doesnt have its highs free to put weapons in like other recons.
That's my point. I like the drone dmg bonus. But some would like to have it replaced with nos/neut range bonus. I prefer the bonuses as they are right now, albeit I never fit tracking disruptors, opting instead for an ECM burst+sensor damps with resolution scripts.
Telling your girlfriend that you play EvE is like telling her about your herpes. Timing is everything. |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 23:53:00 -
[1116]
Edited by: Grytok on 04/08/2008 23:53:34
I still use my Pilgrim now and then in LowSec only to gank some n00bs, as it's no real help for any gang.
And even in LowSec you need to be very picky about your targets, like T1-cruisers or Mining Barges.
In 0.0 I'd allways choose an Arazu over a Pilgrim for soloing ratting Ravens or the like, because you can disengage if something goes awfully wrong.
.
|
Ambrosious Martin
Son of Man
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 00:31:00 -
[1117]
Originally by: Aleus Stygian
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Higher dps then other recons? You have any idea how much dps a huginn has? After the nerf pilgrim and curse dont have anything near "good" dps.
Why don't you tell me? Preferably assuming highest skills possible for both ships.
Anyway, the greater problem is missiles being able to **** everything over, including drones.
Its pitiful, becuase the only way to use all 6 highs for split weapons is to use AC's which unfortunatelly leave you well inside heavy nuet range. the huggin is a great ship for soloing another ship of near same class, but bigger ships LOL its a cool explosion waiting to happen.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 11:42:00 -
[1118]
Originally by: Aleus Stygian
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Higher dps then other recons? You have any idea how much dps a huginn has? After the nerf pilgrim and curse dont have anything near "good" dps.
Why don't you tell me? Preferably assuming highest skills possible for both ships.
Anyway, the greater problem is missiles being able to **** everything over, including drones.
Well you got my point. Wich is: Dps advantage of amarr recons is an old myth.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] I'm a soldier, so remember the name |
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 15:44:00 -
[1119]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Well you got my point. Wich is: Dps advantage of amarr recons is an old myth.
330 with the ability to still tank and NOS doesn't seem so horrible to me. Not when it's from drones.
But, alrightythen. Let's give them a boost instead, shall we? I mean, the Pilgrim's already lost about 200 hp for no reason, and all Recon ships need another slot or two, including the Minmatar, to make them worth enough for one to spend their time on them.
|
Fireball Jones
|
Posted - 2008.08.05 15:55:00 -
[1120]
Originally by: Aleus Stygian
330 with the ability to still tank and NOS doesn't seem so horrible to me. Not when it's from drones.
But, alrightythen. Let's give them a boost instead, shall we? I mean, the Pilgrim's already lost about 200 hp for no reason, and all Recon ships need another slot or two, including the Minmatar, to make them worth enough for one to spend their time on them.
Where are you getting 330? I'm getting 238 DPS with max skills and 5 Hammerhead IIs.
|
|
|
Madla Mafia
The Dead Man's Hand
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 15:13:00 -
[1121]
lol
Pilgrim
- low dps
- no range
- ship hangar decoration
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Grytok
moon7empler
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2008.08.06 15:42:00 -
[1122]
Edited by: Grytok on 06/08/2008 15:43:25
Originally by: Aleus Stygian
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Well you got my point. Wich is: Dps advantage of amarr recons is an old myth.
330 with the ability to still tank and NOS doesn't seem so horrible to me. Not when it's from drones.
But, alrightythen. Let's give them a boost instead, shall we? I mean, the Pilgrim's already lost about 200 hp for no reason, and all Recon ships need another slot or two, including the Minmatar, to make them worth enough for one to spend their time on them.
The times when a Pilgrim could field 2x Ogre II, 2x Hammerhead II, 1 Hobgoblin II are long over m8.
Seems you didn't get the memo 8 month ago.
You're limited to 50 MBit bandwith now and 5x hammerhead II do max 240 DPS.
EDIT: 75 MBit as it was would definately help... CCP?
.
|
Akuma Nei
Trans Eve Organization
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 18:10:00 -
[1123]
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet, but i'm quite apprehensive about how viable the is curse going to be after the nano nerf. Thoughts? |
Madla Mafia
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 18:34:00 -
[1124]
After the new patch, both Amarr recons might become hangar decoration. Onto...a new class of ships that isn't worthless?
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.21 19:56:00 -
[1125]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
After the new patch, both Amarr recons might become hangar decoration. Onto...a new class of ships that isn't worthless?
Amarr recons are failboats compared to amarr hacs. Who in their right mind flies them.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Nomad Storm
Ad Astra Vexillum
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 01:08:00 -
[1126]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
After the new patch, both Amarr recons might become hangar decoration. Onto...a new class of ships that isn't worthless?
I dont know what your smoking. Only the curse is going to be hurt unless someone told you that nanopilgrims were a good idea.
|
d3vo
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 01:13:00 -
[1127]
I think the Amarr recons are fine.
__________
\(^.^)/ |
Onionico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 02:57:00 -
[1128]
Originally by: d3vo
I think the Amarr recons are fine.
Compare the pilgrim to every other recon of its class and tell me that and yes, I fly all 4.
|
d3vo
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 22:25:00 -
[1129]
Originally by: Onionico
Originally by: d3vo
I think the Amarr recons are fine.
Compare the pilgrim to every other recon of its class and tell me that and yes, I fly all 4.
Would you like a bonus to range with the neuts? It would the be a curse with neuts and a cov cloak.
We would increase the effectiveness of the TD's but idk TD's hurt a lot imo if used in the right situations.
__________
\(^.^)/ |
Lili Lu
Victory Not Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.08.23 03:47:00 -
[1130]
Originally by: d3vo
Originally by: Onionico
Originally by: d3vo
I think the Amarr recons are fine.
Compare the pilgrim to every other recon of its class and tell me that and yes, I fly all 4.
Would you like a bonus to range with the neuts? It would the be a curse with neuts and a cov cloak.
We would increase the effectiveness of the TD's but idk TD's hurt a lot imo if used in the right situations.
Maybe if you would read at least some of the 37 pages preceding this one you would not write out your short preconceived notions, and instead might sound more learned as you address (and try to counter) some of the stated complaints and offered solutions for the pilgrim.
but hey, thanks for the free bumping at least with your useless counterposting
|
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 18:14:00 -
[1131]
Pilgrim needs to get its range like all other recons.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 18:20:00 -
[1132]
Will the pilgrim really suffer that much post-patch, assuming CCP's wonderful changes go through as planned? It still won't be much for gang work, I'll definitely give you that, but for ganking it seems like it'd do decently well
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.08.28 18:25:00 -
[1133]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 28/08/2008 18:25:58
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 28/08/2008 18:25:33
Originally by: Boz Well
Will the pilgrim really suffer that much post-patch, assuming CCP's wonderful changes go through as planned? It still won't be much for gang work, I'll definitely give you that, but for ganking it seems like it'd do decently well
You either need to give the pilgrim range or means to run tank AND neuts. If range cant be its tank then you need to give it means to tank at the range it operates at. Pick one.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
whysoserious
|
Posted - 2008.08.30 03:52:00 -
[1134]
ThatĘs right. Pilgrim has no tank because of the style it has to fight, it has no cap because of neuts, it has no gank because it doesnĘt have the dps, it has no range because its neut bonus doesnĘt allow it, its td's bonus is pointless because it fights at a close range. So it just broken, and still is broken, and still no word of it being fixed?
|
Madla Mafia
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.08.30 20:53:00 -
[1135]
Still no word... The only thing that was going to "maybe" boost it a little was the nano-nerf which has been put on hold for now. See patch notes.
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.01 21:34:00 -
[1136]
meh, still no fix? |
Rudy Metallo
The Bastards
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 00:05:00 -
[1137]
Stop *****ing because the curse and pilgrim arent solopwnmobiles any more. They're still an invaluble asset to any gang, which was their intended role as Cov Ops and the role in which all Cov Ops flourish.
Does the Rapier have more DPS than the Pilgrim? Yes. Would I rather have a pilgrim in a gang with me. You bet your ****ing balls I would. What would I rather have, a stationary target that can rep itself til friends arrive, or a slightly more mobile target that mostly just flails hopelessly while our guns rip it to shreds?
The Amarr recons are not hanger decorations, they are in their intended role. Quit yer *****ing. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Trinity Nova Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 03:43:00 -
[1138]
The role isnt the problem the problem is their inability to do it with any decent amount of effectiveness. |
Einar Lightfingers
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Associates
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 04:02:00 -
[1139]
Originally by: Rudy Metallo
Stop *****ing because the curse and pilgrim arent solopwnmobiles any more. They're still an invaluble asset to any gang, which was their intended role as Cov Ops and the role in which all Cov Ops flourish.
Does the Rapier have more DPS than the Pilgrim? Yes. Would I rather have a pilgrim in a gang with me. You bet your ****ing balls I would. What would I rather have, a stationary target that can rep itself til friends arrive, or a slightly more mobile target that mostly just flails hopelessly while our guns rip it to shreds?
The Amarr recons are not hanger decorations, they are in their intended role. Quit yer *****ing.
I feel the need to correct something here... you wouldn't rather have a Pilgrim.. you'd rather have a Curse at this stage of the game.
Why?
Because that Pilgrim would die if the target knew wtf they were doing. Because that Pilgrim can't sustain a decent tank while it makes the target "just flail hopelessly"... Because, as it's been stated over, and over, and over again, TD's, while extremely useful, really don't help at the ranges Pilgrim's have to operate. Because the Curse does the job, and does it better, right now. Range is the key. Arazu gets that range... Rapier gets that range... we all know the Falcon LIVES at range... but the Pilgrim does not. The Pilgrim offers nothing to a gang that the Curse can't currently do better. Why? Because the Curse operates at range and can fit a perma-running setup that all but kills a BS's cap in a matter of seconds.
For the sake of sanity, we aren't *****ing because they aren't solopwnmobiles anymore. We're *****ing because the Amarr recons have all but lost their value to the damn game. The Curse still survives, but if that nano-nerf goes through, it effectively dies too. Notice, the talk isn't about flying solo... it's about usefulness to the gang. Which is CCP's whole point... encouraging gang warfare... The way the Pilgrim is, doesn't encourage anyone flying it in a gang.
So, next time, read the thread, see WHY we are complaining, and actually think about it. I was as upset as the next guy when they nerfed NOS... but I adapted and still do well, if not better. Even before that nerf, Pilgrim's weren't gang-boats.
Think about it. |
Boz Well
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 06:50:00 -
[1140]
Quote:
Stop bumping this thread. Let it die.
|
|
|
Ashaz
Mindstar Technology
The Kano Organisation
|
Posted - 2008.09.02 21:28:00 -
[1141]
I used to love my recons.
They were the first T2 ships I learned to fly. I even switched from gallente to amarr just cause I liked the curse so much.
Used to never fly anything but my black beauty.
Now, I have sold my curse.
My beloved Genevieve is no more. Nor do i expect her ever to fly again.
Now I just fly battleships like evryone else. horay for variety? |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.03 19:44:00 -
[1142]
Originally by: Rudy Metallo
Stop *****ing because the curse and pilgrim arent solopwnmobiles any more. They're still an invaluble asset to any gang, which was their intended role as Cov Ops and the role in which all Cov Ops flourish.
Does the Rapier have more DPS than the Pilgrim? Yes. Would I rather have a pilgrim in a gang with me. You bet your ****ing balls I would. What would I rather have, a stationary target that can rep itself til friends arrive, or a slightly more mobile target that mostly just flails hopelessly while our guns rip it to shreds?
The Amarr recons are not hanger decorations, they are in their intended role. Quit yer *****ing.
Sorry but you have no clue about recons. Go fail somewhere else.
Oh and why dont you come by our space with a gang of 5 cruisers + 1 pilgrim and ill come meet you in 5 cruisers + 1 any recon and mess you up?
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Madla Mafia
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.09.04 20:45:00 -
[1143]
Yeah, until the Pilgrim gets range (or some other boost I can't think of now) then:
Pilgrim = Hangar Decoration
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Commander Krispy
|
Posted - 2008.09.05 14:52:00 -
[1144]
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Yeah, until the Pilgrim gets range (or some other boost I can't think of now) then:
Pilgrim = Hangar Decoration
LOL you're crazy to say that ! Pilgrim not bad if you know how to play it !
I fly curse and pilgrim, and for me pilgrim is a good close combat ship, and good for assassin job that's all !
Not the same role than curse ...
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.05 15:33:00 -
[1145]
Originally by: Commander Krispy
Originally by: Madla Mafia
Yeah, until the Pilgrim gets range (or some other boost I can't think of now) then:
Pilgrim = Hangar Decoration
LOL you're crazy to say that ! Pilgrim not bad if you know how to play it !
I fly curse and pilgrim, and for me pilgrim is a good close combat ship, and good for assassin job that's all !
Not the same role than curse ...
Wth are you on about? I can rip your pilgrim in half with my sac any day and my sac can solo anything you can and more.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
Commander Krispy
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 11:09:00 -
[1146]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Wth are you on about? I can rip your pilgrim in half with my sac any day and my sac can solo anything you can and more.
In 1vs1 you're sac can kill me yes, but you have to find me first ;)
Pilgrim choose his target ... not the target who choose pilgrim :p
|
Euriti
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 11:41:00 -
[1147]
Giving the pilgrim the range bonus would solve a hell of alot
|
Angelina Arwen
|
Posted - 2008.09.06 23:56:00 -
[1148]
Originally by: Commander Krispy
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Wth are you on about? I can rip your pilgrim in half with my sac any day and my sac can solo anything you can and more.
In 1vs1 you're sac can kill me yes, but you have to find me first ;)
Pilgrim choose his target ... not the target who choose pilgrim :p
And apart from t1 cruisers, what targets are you choosing again?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Eve Defence Force
|
Posted - 2008.09.09 17:54:00 -
[1149]
Originally by: Angelina Arwen
Originally by: Commander Krispy
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Wth are you on about? I can rip your pilgrim in half with my sac any day and my sac can solo anything you can and more.
In 1vs1 you're sac can kill me yes, but you have to find me first ;)
Pilgrim choose his target ... not the target who choose pilgrim :p
And apart from t1 cruisers, what targets are you choosing again?
Made up ones, like all the others that claim pilgrim is fine.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] Support Barrage |
whysoserious
|
Posted - 2008.09.22 01:14:00 -
[1150]
40 pages yet?
Seriously, the poor little pilgrim is still gimped. Has anyone come up with a decent setup that can make the ship useful in some situations?
|
|
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.09.22 04:27:00 -
[1151]
in some circumstances, sure; but pretty much any ship in the game can do the same job at either a lower cost, or outperform, the pilgrim.
except, of course, it reigns supreme as a covert-cloaking hauler.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.09.25 10:40:00 -
[1152]
Originally by: Euriti
Giving the pilgrim the range bonus would solve a hell of alot
Damn straight. It needs to be done.
|
sdthujfg
|
Posted - 2008.09.25 13:21:00 -
[1153]
Where is the love? We have been waiting for a pilgrim fix for years now.
|
Xanos Blackpaw
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2008.09.25 13:59:00 -
[1154]
the curse is fine. the pilgrim on the other hand need a boost. either give it a range bonus in adittion to what it got now or give it bonus to how deap into cap it can suck while still having cap left...like at recon 5 nos modules on the pilgrim work as nos did before the change...
Playing minmatar is "like going down a flight of stairs in a office chair firing an Uzi". |
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.09.25 14:44:00 -
[1155]
Originally by: Xanos Blackpaw
the curse is fine. the pilgrim on the other hand need a boost. either give it a range bonus in adittion to what it got now or give it bonus to how deap into cap it can suck while still having cap left...like at recon 5 nos modules on the pilgrim work as nos did before the change...
You come and fight me in your curse after nano nerf hits tranq and I'll laugh at you while I squish that 100mill ship within seconds with pretty much anything bigger then a t1 cruiser.
|
Angelic Eviaran
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 09:26:00 -
[1156]
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Xanos Blackpaw
the curse is fine. the pilgrim on the other hand need a boost. either give it a range bonus in adittion to what it got now or give it bonus to how deap into cap it can suck while still having cap left...like at recon 5 nos modules on the pilgrim work as nos did before the change...
You come and fight me in your curse after nano nerf hits tranq and I'll laugh at you while I squish that 100mill ship within seconds with pretty much anything bigger then a t1 cruiser.
This.
|
Skaaj
Universal Star
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 13:37:00 -
[1157]
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Xanos Blackpaw
the curse is fine. the pilgrim on the other hand need a boost. either give it a range bonus in adittion to what it got now or give it bonus to how deap into cap it can suck while still having cap left...like at recon 5 nos modules on the pilgrim work as nos did before the change...
You come and fight me in your curse after nano nerf hits tranq and I'll laugh at you while I squish that 100mill ship within seconds with pretty much anything bigger then a t1 cruiser.
This.
Lol... mean to use your alt to do that?
|
Madla Mafia
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 14:42:00 -
[1158]
I killed a ratting Caracal yesterday in my Pilgrim! Yay, the Pilgrim is a pwnmobile!
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 16:32:00 -
[1159]
Anyone else wish you could fit nos/neuts, a mwd, and a repper w/o the need for a powergrid rig?
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
whysoserious
|
Posted - 2008.09.28 10:55:00 -
[1160]
Well you see the pilgrim weapon upgrades have no effect on nos, which hurts it a little bit, still I am not complaining so much about the powergrid. Yet I am cheesed off with the fact that ccp gave the pilgrim a 100pg increase so it could fit a 150pg mod so it can use neuts. Go figure.
I would rather have cap stability than more pg.
|
|
|
Angelonico
Series of Tubes
|
Posted - 2008.09.29 03:56:00 -
[1161]
Please ccp, make the pilgrim useful for something other than hauling.
Pretty please?
|
whysoserious
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 03:41:00 -
[1162]
Damn, still no news?
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.10.12 11:58:00 -
[1163]
Yea.. ccp is going to nerf medium drones.
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Zao Jin
|
Posted - 2008.10.14 09:29:00 -
[1164]
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Angelic Eviaran
Originally by: Xanos Blackpaw
the curse is fine. the pilgrim on the other hand need a boost. either give it a range bonus in adittion to what it got now or give it bonus to how deap into cap it can suck while still having cap left...like at recon 5 nos modules on the pilgrim work as nos did before the change...
You come and fight me in your curse after nano nerf hits tranq and I'll laugh at you while I squish that 100mill ship within seconds with pretty much anything bigger then a t1 cruiser.
This.
lol! Epic Fail.
|
SirDanceAlot
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 06:09:00 -
[1165]
Originally by: Feng Schui
Yea.. ccp is going to nerf medium drones.
I wish ccp would look at pilgrim and curse and for that matter all recons and do a whole rebalance.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:35:00 -
[1166]
fix pilgrim.
-----------------------------------------
[Video] The Cruise |
Madla Mafia
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 16:55:00 -
[1167]
Edited by: Madla Mafia on 29/10/2008 16:55:10
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
fix pilgrim.
Yay, page 40 without any news...
------------------------------------------
Amarr - getting screwed since 2005. |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 17:21:00 -
[1168]
Oh comeon all you idiots, Zulupark says the Pilgrim is fine! Therefore it must be.
Really, he sees them everywhere still ganking people left and right like the overpowered piwate ship they used to before the NOS nerf. Are you all blind? Get back in your Pilgrims and tackle all those Cruisers and BCs that fire missiles and run your NOS fueled tanks while breaking theirs and doing damage with your cloud of heavy drones . . oh wait
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 18:00:00 -
[1169]
Right now, the pilgrim is hopeless.
On sisi... actually quite nice. Seriously, give it a try. Missile formula+web+speed changes mean that a boat that can get in range without needing a MWD (in other words, only a boat with a COCD), has mids for an afterburner, a moderately small sig, enough lows to have a small tank, and a bonus to trackign disrupting is superb versus anything BC and up, except probably Drake/NH which do appropriate sized damage. Larger missile ships are easily sig-tanked under the new formulae.
It will still be pretty poor against other cruisers. Im not sure whether thats a good OR a bad thing - it makes sense that other cruisers and missile bc's can shred "support" cruisers, which is what recons are. It remains to be seen whether pilgrim will be used vs these on TQ, personally I think not, it will be used to prey on ratters and lone battleships/battlecruisers.
_______________________________________________
Mercenary Forces |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr
Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 06:16:00 -
[1170]
Originally by: El Yatta
Right now, the pilgrim is hopeless.
qft
-----------------------------------------
[Video] The Cruise |
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 08:34:00 -
[1171]
I have come up with a decent setup that can help out in the style that we BoB pilot fight at = large scale battles, however I am still at unease to use it, mainly because other ships can do a similar, and much better at that. Thats the problem, the very few things that pilgrim can do, other ships can do better at.
Again, why would the pilgrim only get a 100pg increase so it can fit a 150pg module = med booster?
Why not give it any more cap or cap recharge when they took away the nos advantage?
Why not boosts its tank as its a close combat web range ship?
|
sdthujfg
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:59:00 -
[1172]
Originally by: Depp Knight
I have come up with a decent setup that can help out in the style that we BoB pilot fight at = large scale battles, however I am still at unease to use it, mainly because other ships can do a similar, and much better at that. Thats the problem, the very few things that pilgrim can do, other ships can do better at.
Again, why would the pilgrim only get a 100pg increase so it can fit a 150pg module = med booster?
Why not give it any more cap or cap recharge when they took away the nos advantage?
Why not boosts its tank as its a close combat web range ship?
Exactly. There is not much point in using the pilgrim at all. They messed up its role.
|
Drek Grapper
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 18:00:00 -
[1173]
I am now able to fly a Pilgrim...
Fix it please CCP.
--
"If itĘs true that our species is alone in the universe, then IĘd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little" George Carlin |
Shira Rayborn
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 19:13:00 -
[1174]
WTF they still haven't fixed it? This thread is huge.
|
Aleus Stygian
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 19:38:00 -
[1175]
Originally by: Shira Rayborn
WTF they still haven't fixed it? This thread is huge.
Huge? Like guts? Like the guts you have to have to fly this ship nowadays?
YOU FLY PILGRIM! THEREFORE, YOU MUST HAVE HUGE GUTS!
NOS AND DRONE!
|
El Yatta
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 19:54:00 -
[1176]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: El Yatta
Right now, the pilgrim is hopeless.
qft
I see you've added selective quoting to your troll repertoire, along with such gems as "stfu noobs" and misleading inaccurate figures?
Seriously guys, I feel your pain on the pilgrim, but you'd be shocked how the sisi changes to webs, missiles and speed play into the hands of a ship like the pilgrim. Its a very clever stealth boost, and I urge you to try it on the test server. If anything, it might need some tiny tweaks to sig and armor HP, which would balance how much dps it can absorb, which might be a little light.
_______________________________________________
Mercenary Forces |
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 11:25:00 -
[1177]
Any new setups for speed nerf/web nerf, 2point scram boost?
|
Zha'doom
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 11:20:00 -
[1178]
If the Pilgrim could get more cap and ability to use 5 heavy drones (or a major large bonus to mediums) it still could be usefull, but untill then it's only good as hangar decoration!
|
DeadDuck
Amarr
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 11:27:00 -
[1179]
Well tbh I can't complain at all after this speed nerf. Curse continues in shape and the Pilgrim has reborn
________________
God is my Wingman |
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 11:29:00 -
[1180]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Any new setups for speed nerf/web nerf, 2point scram boost?
yes:
pulses
mwd (+maybe ab), tackle, ewar
tank + heatsinks
|
|
|
Depp Knight
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.11.13 23:11:00 -
[1181]
Would a large cap battery along with a ab be worth it? can you sustain 2 neuts with that?
|
Meridius Dex
Amarr
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.11.14 01:41:00 -
[1182]
Originally by: Depp Knight
Any new setups for speed nerf/web nerf, 2point scram boost?
I've been flying and getting solo kills in FW with my Pilgrim pre-patch; I killed a heavy plated Rupture using a MWD/point/2TD setup just this past week.
But today I tried my first AB setup (still concerned that I can decloak and target quickly enough within scram range on potential targets, but willing to give it a try). Been a year playing EVE, but had my first ever fight on Sisi today, using:
[Pilgrim, Ambusher II]
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Armor Thermic Hardener II
Medium Armor Repairer II
10MN Afterburner II
Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Cap Booster 800
Balmer Series Targeting Inhibitor I, Tracking Speed Disruption
X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator
Faint Epsilon Warp Prohibitor I
Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Energy Neutralizer II
Covert Ops Cloaking Device II
[empty rig slot]
[empty rig slot]
Hammerhead II x5
Vespa EC-600 x5
Hammerhead II x2
Warrior II x5
Warrior II x1
Recon IV and no rigs, but I managed to solo a rigged Ishtar. The TD and cap warfare shut down his blasters and hardeners; the scram killed his MWD and the web held him in place. His drones pounded on me pretty good, but filling that Thermic hole is worth the low slot. Overheated my lows for a few cycles, but managed to kill him with me down to 25% armor.
So it's still a work in progress, but I've had some success. The Pilgrim is just too much fun to fly, in my opinion. To each his own. The boat could use some love, certainly, but QR is a nice indirect boost to a short-range assassin like this.
--
Meridius Dex
--
Awesomeness: "When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome again. True story." |
Depp Knight
Evolution
KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 00:22:00 -
[1183]
I've been out of action. Any news on the pilgrim? Any good fits?
|
Captator
Universal Securities
|
Posted - 2009.02.07 00:36:00 -
[1184]
Originally by: Depp Knight
I've been out of action. Any news on the pilgrim? Any good fits?
Yes, but I won't give you my specific fit (mainly because I think it is awesome, and no-one has posted it yet), all I will say is this: Don't fit an injector, and do fit a plate.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N.
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 00:37:00 -
[1185]
good luck trying to kill my ratting bs without a cap inj on your pilgrim.
i fit heavy neuts in spare slots while ratting :P |
Noisrevbus
Caldari
Breams Gone Wild
|
Posted - 2009.02.09 01:08:00 -
[1186]
Edited by: Noisrevbus on 09/02/2009 01:08:07
The Pilgrim
 How do you circumvent a ship bonus you dislike?
 Use another native weapon-system, even if it doesn't recieve a bonus (and especially if those weapons are so good it's silly atm).
Then look to focus on the other bonuses of your ship, if you do have several.
 Try a Scorch-grim, HPL II /w Scorch + Drones = ~400 DPS which is very respectable for a Recon (especially with Covops cloak).
But Noisrevbus, 400 DPS isn't really that much, and the ship has to sacrifice other things to reach that damage.
The ability to pick your fights is one of the premier advantages of being in a Recon ship. In a gang, pick numerical advantageous fights.
Additionally, Recon ships usually have additional bonuses that can sway a numerical fight in your favour (the Capwar do not fill that role on the Pilgrim).
When running a full Recon (or otherwise sneaky) gang, 400 DPS is quite alot (per situation), and you fill a role your gang generally lack. Falcons can't do 400 DPS.
I'm not saying you should avoid NOS and Neut on a Grim. I'm merely saying, that if you do not wish to limit yourself to low orbit, you have options even if they are unconventional and unbonused. No other Recon fill the mimic-a-HAC approach (with a Covops cloak) as well as the Grim. Also, i'm sure Scorchgrims are nothing new, but it is an excellent approach and it can not be mentioned enough. Scorchgrims are not Zealots, but if you like having a Covops cloak and still do decent damage at a fairly decent range where you can avoid tackle and use your cloak, it's an excellent option.
Have fun, and keep up the yarr .
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 40 :: [one page] |