EVE Search - The SHC Community's List of Minor Ship Changes

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

The SHC Community's List of Minor Ship Changes

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pattern Clarc Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.10.28 05:59:00 - [1] Edited by: Pattern Clarc on 28/10/2007 06:05:50 Inspired by the recent changes to the interceptors, I set about collecting from the scrapheap challenge, a list of all the minor changes to ships that they believed the developers have overlooked - and would make there ships easier to fit and more fun to fly... If you have noticed, many of my threads have been under an initiative to remove the stress and aggrovation from fitting ships, especially those designed for a specific roles. A great example of this would be the past Deimos changes which have now really solved the ship in a way that pilots now glee-fully galivant through space knowing that there ship fly's as well as it looks. So to the changes... ------------------------------------- Global Changes Assault Frigates - Mass reduction of all assualt frigates to around the same level of t1 - Addition of a 4th role related bonus (eg 10% afterburner boost amount bonus per level) Destroyers - 20% Reduction Signature Radius Cynabal - Increase the base powergrid by +/-50 units Raptor - Increase the base locking range from 25km to 30km whilst reducing the sensor strength from 14 - 12 - Incerase power grid by 4 units - Reduce mass Ares - Increase base grid by 4-5 units Eris - Increase base CPU by 8 units Wolf - Change fall off bounus to optimal range bonus - Bring mass more in line with the other assualt frigates Enyo - Base speed increase to 245m/s Jaguar - Change optimal range bonus to fall off bonus Crane - Increase the grid by 4 (120 -> 124) Claw - Increase base locking range by to 20km (+3km) Ishtar - Increase the ships CPU by 30 units Zealot - Lower the grid, increase the CPU. Omen - Needs more grid. Ferox - +1 Turret Slot and modest increase in grid/cpu Cyclone - Increase the shield capacitity by 10% (adjust the shield recharge rate accordingly) Typhoon - shields and armour hp swtich Tempest - needs armor/shield ratio adjustment[/] Quote:* [02:31:17] ISD BH Kestrelprime > The Pally is powerful enough. [02:31:27] ISD BH Kestrelprime > All it needs is a hearthstone so it can Bubblehearth.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.28 06:24:00 - [2] Hey Pattern, i think you forgot that a few of the things there arent minor. For instance, 30 cpu on the ishtar is a huge change. As is the wolf/jag falloff/optimal change.
Pattern Clarc Infinitus Odium The Church.	Posted - 2007.10.28 06:32:00 - [3] Originally by: Goumindong Hey Pattern, i think you forgot that a few of the things there arent minor. For instance, 30 cpu on the ishtar is a huge change. As is the wolf/jag falloff/optimal change. Removed the proposed ishtar change (micro cap injectors ftw), kept the wolf/jag change as that just defys logic in relation to how the ships are actually flown. Quote: [02:31:17] ISD BH Kestrelprime > The Pally is powerful enough. [02:31:27] ISD BH Kestrelprime > All it needs is a hearthstone so it can Bubblehearth.
Transcendant One	Posted - 2007.10.28 06:34:00 - [4] I see no Moa on that list. That bothers me. Plus the Ferox needs two turrets imo. Apart from that I agree with most of those suggested changes.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Blood Corsair's	Posted - 2007.10.28 07:13:00 - [5] Originally by: Pattern Clarc Originally by: Goumindong Hey Pattern, i think you forgot that a few of the things there arent minor. For instance, 30 cpu on the ishtar is a huge change. As is the wolf/jag falloff/optimal change. Removed the proposed ishtar change (micro cap injectors ftw), kept the wolf/jag change as that just defys logic in relation to how the ships are actually flown. Why remove the Ishtar CPU increase? It's super tight on grid as it is. Bringing the CPU up a little won't do anything except let it fit a DC2 instead of an IFFA, or maybe use a second T2 scram instead of a best named. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.28 08:07:00 - [6] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Why remove the Ishtar CPU increase? It's super tight on grid as it is. Bringing the CPU up a little won't do anything except let it fit a DC2 instead of an IFFA, or maybe use a second T2 scram instead of a best named. Because its already very strong and doesnt need to be easier to fit. The low fitting keeps it from outshining all the other HACs in the short to medium range. Its already one of the better of not best HACs, it doesnt need another boost to let it fit more ewar and/or tank.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar MASS HOMICIDE Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.10.28 08:52:00 - [7] What you think apoc don 't need any change? NUTZ!! If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Lord Loom Loom Service	Posted - 2007.10.28 08:55:00 - [8] an apoc change wouldn't qualify as "minor" certain faction ships are also awfully low on grid and/or CPU (mainly frigates, some cruisers) but I CBA to check them out, people who have/fly them care to comment? ---------- KEEP TRY!!!
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.28 09:09:00 - [9] Edited by: d026 on 28/10/2007 09:09:53 The Eagle could use a 5th turret. As well as the Zealot could use another one.
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.28 09:11:00 - [10] I really agree on the Raptor. 1-4 MW powerdgrid increase would be perfect. i dont have any cpu issues with it tough..
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.28 09:36:00 - [11] Originally by: d026 Edited by: d026 on 28/10/2007 09:09:53 The Eagle could use a 5th turret. As well as the Zealot could use another one. eagle shouldnt. And as well, not minor
Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.10.28 12:28:00 - [12] Originally by: Pattern Clarc Crane - Increase the grid by 4 (120 -> 124) Yes please! Khaldari
d026 THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.10.28 12:34:00 - [13] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: d026 Edited by: d026 on 28/10/2007 09:09:53 The Eagle could use a 5th turret. As well as the Zealot could use another one. eagle shouldnt. And as well, not minor it should..
Karina Harington Port Royal Independent Kontractors Atrum Tempestas Foedus	Posted - 2007.10.28 14:46:00 - [14] Clearly some people don't understand the meaning of the word "minor". Increasing the dps on an Eagle by 25% is not minor.
Leandro Salazar The Blackguard Wolves Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2007.10.28 15:09:00 - [15] I can't believe noone at scrapheap challenge thinks of adding a 7th turret to the Fleet pest. It is the very definition of scrapheap as far as faction ships go! Or is that also not minor enough? There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction There is no 'a' in Scorpion There is no 'e' in Caldari There is no makeup in rogue drones
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.28 16:19:00 - [16] Not minor, the ferox change probably shouldnt have made it onto the list either, but the real question there is "6 turrets or 7 turrets" so it isnt really a big deal.
Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.28 16:19:00 - [17] The Omen needs more CPU, too, not just grid. Same goes for the Maller. Only problem there is that the amount of fitting space that they need is so huge that it could never be considered minor. They really are without a doubt the worst cruisers in the game.
achoura	Posted - 2007.10.28 16:33:00 - [18] Wolf/Jag bonuses are very, very old and have always been on the wrong ships. Af in general, same speed as a cruiser (usually less), heavy idk. They've just always been reversed i.e the jag shares a vagas stats and slot layout but has the arty (munnin) bonus and the wolf which shares the munnins slot layout gets the ac (vaga) bonus. It like an enyo having the ishkurs bonus, i love the jag but its just too slow and too short ranged for pvp sadly, the wolf too slow and made of paper. However it's worth noting it's the reversed bonus that makes to wolf so deadly close range (even if it should be deadly long range).
Bellum Eternus Gallente Blood Corsair's	Posted - 2007.10.28 16:56:00 - [19] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Bellum Eternus Why remove the Ishtar CPU increase? It's super tight on grid as it is. Bringing the CPU up a little won't do anything except let it fit a DC2 instead of an IFFA, or maybe use a second T2 scram instead of a best named. Because its already very strong and doesnt need to be easier to fit. The low fitting keeps it from outshining all the other HACs in the short to medium range. Its already one of the better of not best HACs, it doesnt need another boost to let it fit more ewar and/or tank. So all you're saying is "OMG, it's so good as it is now that you should be forced to pay for faction mods to fit it correctly."? Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.10.28 18:40:00 - [20] Originally by: Bellum Eternus So all you're saying is "OMG, it's so good as it is now that you should be forced to pay for faction mods to fit it correctly."? Yes, its so good now that you should be forced to make harder fitting considerations compared to other ships.
Lord Loom Loom Service	Posted - 2007.10.28 19:29:00 - [21] murderOne's eternal crusade to get rid of fitting constraints on his pwnships, while others are only balanced if they are hard to fit ---------- KEEP TRY!!!

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.