EVE Search - General Caldari Buff

All Channels

Ships and Modules

General Caldari Buff

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:13:00 - [1] Caldari ships get an agility increase. In the patch notes.
Calexis Atredies Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:33:00 - [2] They did what? So no more getting caught alligning to gates when your gang is doing a runner... or at least you wont be the last one to enter warp :) Calexis Atredies pays homage to CCP 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
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:33:00 - [3] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 28/11/2007 23:34:56 It's about time. I can't wait for the "wahh wahhh! Caldari online! wahhhh!" complaints. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
the thorn	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:34:00 - [4] http://myeve.eve-online.com/updates/patchnotes.asp
Rodran Crag Amarr Merch Industrial	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:35:00 - [5] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Link or stfu. Durr hurr, can i haz obvious things plz?
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:35:00 - [6] Originally by: Rodran Crag Originally by: Arthur Frayn Link or stfu. Durr hurr, can i haz obvious things plz? Yeah, I found it already. Shaddap. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
the thorn Tres Viri	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:46:00 - [7] Edited by: the thorn on 28/11/2007 23:46:31 no need for the minmatar to cry, caldari are still slow. (same speed, same high mass) just a bit more agile.
Niraia Gallente ScaryScaryNoobs	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:48:00 - [8] Caldari Online, etc! I don't mind, you probably need the agility to make up for your ugly portraits.
the thorn Tres Viri	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:51:00 - [9] my portrait is da bomb, so stfu :P
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2007.11.28 23:51:00 - [10] And because most of our ships are half the size of everyone elses in each ship class. -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Vladimir Antlerkov GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.29 00:25:00 - [11] Awesome, now can we please lower the mass of the Hawk so it weighs less than a destroyer?
Oam Mkoll Caldari HUSARIA Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.29 00:36:00 - [12] Originally by: Vladimir Antlerkov Awesome, now can we please lower the mass of the Hawk so it weighs less than a destroyer? What he said. The Hawk is still a frigate, make it fly like one. --- I am violence boat
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.29 00:40:00 - [13] All the assault friagtes are heavy like that, the hawk is no exception.
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.29 00:56:00 - [14] You mean we might not watch everyone else warping off before we do now??
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.11.29 00:59:00 - [15] About time. Maybe now we'll start seeing answers other than "Minmatar or Gallente" when someone asks "what ship should I PvP in?"
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.29 01:13:00 - [16] One more boost to Caldari... 40% reduction in the cap usage of ECM modules (probably to address the need to fit mwd's these days)
Kazuma Saruwatari	Posted - 2007.11.29 01:20:00 - [17] Good first step. Caldari are more competitive now. Good one. - Odd Pod Out, a blog of EVE Online
ChimeraRouge Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.11.29 02:19:00 - [18] yay! Now please increase our missile velocity across the board to catch those overpowered nano ships or fix snakes, mwds, and polycarbons.
Wu Jiun	Posted - 2007.11.29 03:15:00 - [19] Edited by: Wu Jiun on 29/11/2007 03:24:39 Now, guess whos left out in the cold. Edit: I am very curious if there will ever be a dev blog explaining all these many changes to caldari ships. Looking at the style of the latest devblogs, it probably gets announced but left unexplained.
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.29 04:41:00 - [20] Here's what someone else posted as the current known changes (not all are known atm) Raven: 0.155 -> 0.145 Scorpion: 0.155 -> 0.135 Rokh: 0.155 -> 0.15 Drake: 0.88 -> 0.79 Ferox: 0.88 -> 0.79 Caracal: 0.55 -> 0.4 Buzzard: 3.1 -> 2.8 Hawk: 3.1 -> 2.55 Kestrel 3.1 -> 2.65 Cerb 0.65 -> 0.48 Bustard 1.0 -> 0.93 Falcon 0.65 -> 0.5 Caracal Navy Issue 0.65 -> 0.52 More agility than basically any other race, just still more mass, less speed.. n'bad though
Gorion Wassenar Caldari Tsurokigaarai APEX Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.11.29 04:44:00 - [21] About Bloody time. ----- results may vary
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.29 04:57:00 - [22] Originally by: Wu Jiun Edited by: Wu Jiun on 29/11/2007 03:24:39 Now, guess whos left out in the cold. Edit: I am very curious if there will ever be a dev blog explaining all these many changes to caldari ships. Looking at the style of the latest devblogs, it probably gets announced but left unexplained. Actually, there was a dev post last week stating that they were needing to look at Caldari agility (or lack of <--his words).. guess they decided to toss it in..
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.11.29 05:29:00 - [23] Originally by: Maximillian Dragonard Originally by: Wu Jiun Edited by: Wu Jiun on 29/11/2007 03:24:39 Now, guess whos left out in the cold. Edit: I am very curious if there will ever be a dev blog explaining all these many changes to caldari ships. Looking at the style of the latest devblogs, it probably gets announced but left unexplained. Actually, there was a dev post last week stating that they were needing to look at Caldari agility (or lack of <--his words).. guess they decided to toss it in.. I don't really see that... in any of the dev blogs. Link? Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.29 05:35:00 - [24] It wasn't a blog... there was a mass influx of dev responses to questions... it was in that mess somewhere. I'll try to find it tomorrow and link it.
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.29 06:31:00 - [25] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edit: I am very curious if there will ever be a dev blog explaining all these many changes to caldari ships. Looking at the style of the latest devblogs, it probably gets announced but left unexplained. Actually, there was a dev post last week stating that they were needing to look at Caldari agility (or lack of <--his words).. guess they decided to toss it in.. I don't really see that... in any of the dev blogs. Link? Liang Here's the thread link http://www.eve-search.com/thread/631272/page/14#413 the exact quote by Zulupark is "Caldari agility is just.. well.. non-existent tbh. We don't like it and it will be looked at (if it hasn't already)."
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.11.29 06:47:00 - [26] A much needed change.
Wu Jiun	Posted - 2007.11.29 07:55:00 - [27] Originally by: Maximillian Dragonard Actually, there was a dev post last week stating that they were needing to look at Caldari agility (or lack of <--his words).. guess they decided to toss it in.. Yeah, that was the agility thing. But looking at the many changes its just not only that. Caldari recieve a big buff on several levels (considering pvp here). I'd like more detail on why certain changes where deemed necessary and some numbers/graphs that explains how it relates to the other races and balance issues. When pulse lasers were nerfed there was a big post about it from a dev who showed that he had put effort and thought into it. Explaining in depth what the problems were and how it should have been and why certain steps were taken instead of other possibilites etc. I haven't seen such things for say the torp buff or the ecm vs. the other ewar. I'd like to get real answers on certain questions. See, last year a myrmidon with 5 x bonused heavy drones, full rack of ion blasters, mwd, cap injector and dual rep tank was balanced. The dronebay was even increased up to 125 instead of 100m¦ after the initial release on sisi. Today its 2 x heavy + 2 x med + 1 x light max - quite an impressive drop in dps. Of course you get spares, but unlike last year you are gonna actually need them because of new drone mechanics. The difference in what is considered balanced is even bigger if you look at the new eos. A torp raven with uber range but bit pathetic dps was balanced. Today a torp raven outdamaging a neutron mega or mp geddon is balanced. My point is not about about the examples i used. Neither am i saying last years balance was better than tomorrows. I am just pointing out that obviously last years balance is very different from tomorrows. So, for this i'd like to hear reasons, pros & cons and some info about "the bigger picture" they might have. All very much missing atm imo.
Polcor Rodal Amarr	Posted - 2007.11.29 09:03:00 - [28] Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". It¦s customer care, nothing personal, just business. If in danger, or in doubt, run in cricles, scream and shout
Disco Flint Caldari Disco Corp.	Posted - 2007.11.29 09:31:00 - [29] Originally by: Polcor Rodal Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". It¦s customer care, nothing personal, just business. Cookies! :D
Malcanis High4Life SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.29 09:37:00 - [30] Originally by: Goumindong Caldari ships get an agility increase. In the patch notes. bugger, now I have to start going to church every day... On the bright side, I hear you get extra tasty bacon from flying pigs. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Malcanis High4Life SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.29 09:50:00 - [31] Originally by: Polcor Rodal Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". It¦s customer care, nothing personal, just business. And most of those people use their caldari ships for PvE, which will get no particular bonus from an agility boost. Come to think of it, most PvP caldari probably chose Achura for 9/9/9/93 stats and started skilling Gallante/Minmatar from day 1. Caldari ships are generally the worst for PvP - certainly solo PvP - AND the slowest AND the least agile. Now they're a little less clumsy. Not any faster, they'll just align and ac/decelerate a little faster. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Steyr Daghan	Posted - 2007.11.29 11:42:00 - [32] Originally by: Ulstan Maybe now we'll start seeing answers other than "Minmatar or Gallente" when someone asks "what ship should I PvP in?" No, we won't.
Steyr Daghan	Posted - 2007.11.29 11:54:00 - [33] Originally by: Polcor Rodal Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". BS. That's gotta be some kind of envy talking. Caldari in general and missile-boats in particular was overpowered for pve and underpowered for pvp. The torp changes makes torp-raven less uber for pve and less sucky for pvp. Agility boosts pvp and does nothing for mission-runners. These changes makes perfect sense. Im not saying that cause this char is cal. He's a missions/ratting char, my pvp alt flies gallente. So basically i am worse off with these changes, but they are still good and sensible.
Darth Felin	Posted - 2007.11.29 13:54:00 - [34] Originally by: Steyr Daghan Originally by: Polcor Rodal Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". BS. That's gotta be some kind of envy talking. Caldari in general and missile-boats in particular was overpowered for pve and underpowered for pvp. The torp changes makes torp-raven less uber for pve and less sucky for pvp. Agility boosts pvp and does nothing for mission-runners. These changes makes perfect sense. Im not saying that cause this char is cal. He's a missions/ratting char, my pvp alt flies gallente. So basically i am worse off with these changes, but they are still good and sensible. I have to agree with you that those changes makes sense. But it will be very intersting to know reason for such huge buff to ECM from different directions.
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.11.29 14:23:00 - [35] Originally by: Goumindong All the assault friagtes are heavy like that, the hawk is no exception. My tempest can outrun my hawk. When a normal battleship can outrun a frig, there's a serious problem. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Omarvelous Destry's Lounge	Posted - 2007.11.29 15:16:00 - [36] Does the Harpy get the same agility savings that the Hawk did? If so - I may not want to stand up in front of my co-workers for a couple minutes... __________________________________________________ Sup brosef! Destry's Lounge is looking for a few good drunks - contact me in game.
Victor Forge Amarr	Posted - 2007.11.29 17:38:00 - [37] Originally by: Ulstan About time. Maybe now we'll start seeing answers other than "Minmatar or Gallente" when someone asks "what ship should I PvP in?" I was hoping for some day to be able to say; "Well Amarr fsn¦t as good as Caldari in pve but at least we are the 3rd best race in pvp...... breaks down in tears
wubbo okkels Caldari The Mothers Of Invention	Posted - 2007.11.29 21:41:00 - [38] hmmmm. think im gonna get the crow out of the mothballs
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.11.29 21:51:00 - [39] Originally by: wubbo okkels hmmmm. think im gonna get the crow out of the mothballs Raptor and Crow agility will not be modified. ---------------------------------- I post therefore I am bored at work.
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.11.29 22:33:00 - [40] Quote: Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. This is just patently false. Most players are not caldari.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.29 22:58:00 - [41] Originally by: Steyr Daghan Originally by: Ulstan Maybe now we'll start seeing answers other than "Minmatar or Gallente" when someone asks "what ship should I PvP in?" No, we won't. Only because of the operative "start". Caldari are not slouches in pvp. They may be slouches in some types of pvp, but certianly no slouches.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari Advanced Logistics	Posted - 2007.11.29 23:01:00 - [42] I'm confuzzled. Is the base strength of all ECM's getting a buff, or are just the dedicated ships getting a boost? I know they are getting a cap reduction, but that is no where near a "huge buff to ECM"
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.11.30 00:12:00 - [43] Falcon, BB, and Scorp are getting a strength boost. Rook is losing a high slot and gaining a low. No generic EW strength boost (fortunately)
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2007.11.30 00:19:00 - [44] Edited by: madaluap on 30/11/2007 00:22:48 Originally by: Atsuko Ratu I'm confuzzled. Is the base strength of all ECM's getting a buff, or are just the dedicated ships getting a boost? I know they are getting a cap reduction, but that is no where near a "huge buff to ECM" +++ more EW strength for certain ECM ships +++ Rook gains a extra low increasing it jamming strenght/changes of survival ++ less capusage +- ECM has a lot more range than other EW, this makes it usefull in any (fleet, small gang whatever, any) situation +- Dampships suffer from cap issues -- Locking time damps are only usefull combined with ECM, its better to simply bring more ECM -- Damps are shortranged, so using a range script (only valuable script) will result in 1 nanoship getting within 5 km in notime and lock you with its 100% lockingspeed. At this point a ECM boat would put some (1-2) ECM modules on this nanoboat and warp off. The dampships need to suck up the damage (which they cant). --- On top of all this, damps lose a lot of strenght. Its nearly to the point that 1 damp on a nonbonussed, lvl 1 damppilot, does the same as 1 damp on a specialised recon after the patch. So train lvl 1 dampening, fit 1 damp on any ship, than lose your 2e dampbonus and thats how flying a gallente recon will be after the patch. Its way over the top. Nerf X = boost Y and boost X = nerf Y. Its the same thing, all this combined makes ECM the only EW in the game that performs well enough to justify losing damage/tank over shutting down targets. Shutting down 1 target and warpdisrupt him is all gallente can do now. _________________________________________________ Breetime A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Atsuko Ratu Caldari Advanced Logistics	Posted - 2007.11.30 02:18:00 - [45] Boosting ECM and nerfing the other modules is a totally different thing. The rook survives based on a dice roll, if it fails you have a good chance of popping in a few seconds to anyone with decent dps. Also, the lowslot is added to make it as good as the falcon (post patch, the Falcon would out-ecm the Rook if the Rook only had 2 lows, effectivly making the Rook 100% useless in any real situation.) It is true that damps were nerfed pretty hard, we've had to deal with that ourselves awhile ago. But this isn't some huge boost to ECM. ECM will not be more effective on any other ship simply because of the damp nerf. Tank will always out perform a ecm module in most situations on a non dedicated ship, same as damps now. All that needs to be changed is a boost to the dedicated damp ships' bonuses, a change that will probably come in a year or so.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.11.30 11:47:00 - [46] I think part of the problem is the general players perception of how Ewar should be balanced. I think alot of you think the Amarr, Minmatar & Gallente ewars should be as effective as the Caldari Ewar. It shouldn't and I'm pretty damn sure this was never CCP's intention. Caldari are given next to useless hulls but with a very powerful saving grace, ECM. Noticeably more powerful than the other races. For the last year or so this hasn't been the case. Damps were preferable because CCP 'over-nerfed' ECM with Revelations. Now they're straightening things out again. Take away the ECM & all of the ECM hulls are a joke in comparison to the other races Ewar hulls. Our 100% dedicated ECM bonuses also reflect the fact that these ships were designed for one purpose only. In this particular instance CCP are not looking for balance. Caldari are supposed to be leading the pack when it comes to electronic warfare. It makes up for their other crippling weaknesses in pvp. [Balance] The Caldari problem.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Isseras Manufacture	Posted - 2007.11.30 22:56:00 - [47] Originally by: Polcor Rodal Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". It¦s customer care, nothing personal, just business. Omg! You better get your tinfoil hat back on! They've gotten to you! /sarcasm off
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.30 23:49:00 - [48] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 30/11/2007 23:26:34 I think part of the problem is the general players perception of how Ewar should be balanced. I think alot of you think the Amarr, Minmatar & Gallente ewars should be as effective as the Caldari Ewar. It shouldn't and I'm pretty damn sure this was never CCP's intention. Caldari are given next to useless hulls but with a very powerful saving grace, ECM. Noticeably more powerful than the other races. For the last year or so this hasn't been the case. Damps were preferable because CCP 'over-nerfed' ECM with Revelations. Now they're straightening things out again. Take away the ECM & all of the ECM hulls are a joke in comparison to the other races Ewar hulls. Our 100% dedicated ECM bonuses also reflect the fact that these ships were designed for one purpose only. In this particular instance CCP are not looking for balance. Caldari are supposed to be leading the pack when it comes to electronic warfare. It makes up for their other weaknesses in pvp. [i]What?[/b]
Atsuko Ratu Caldari Advanced Logistics	Posted - 2007.11.30 23:54:00 - [49] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 30/11/2007 23:26:34 I think part of the problem is the general players perception of how Ewar should be balanced. I think alot of you think the Amarr, Minmatar & Gallente ewars should be as effective as the Caldari Ewar. It shouldn't and I'm pretty damn sure this was never CCP's intention. Caldari are given next to useless hulls but with a very powerful saving grace, ECM. Noticeably more powerful than the other races. For the last year or so this hasn't been the case. Damps were preferable because CCP 'over-nerfed' ECM with Revelations. Now they're straightening things out again. Take away the ECM & all of the ECM hulls are a joke in comparison to the other races Ewar hulls. Our 100% dedicated ECM bonuses also reflect the fact that these ships were designed for one purpose only. In this particular instance CCP are not looking for balance. Caldari are supposed to be leading the pack when it comes to electronic warfare. It makes up for their other weaknesses in pvp. Finally, someone that understands the basics of balancing QFT
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.12.01 00:14:00 - [50] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 30/11/2007 23:26:34 I think part of the problem is the general players perception of how Ewar should be balanced. I think alot of you think the Amarr, Minmatar & Gallente ewars should be as effective as the Caldari Ewar. It shouldn't and I'm pretty damn sure this was never CCP's intention. Caldari are given next to useless hulls but with a very powerful saving grace, ECM. Noticeably more powerful than the other races. For the last year or so this hasn't been the case. Damps were preferable because CCP 'over-nerfed' ECM with Revelations. Now they're straightening things out again. Take away the ECM & all of the ECM hulls are a joke in comparison to the other races Ewar hulls. Our 100% dedicated ECM bonuses also reflect the fact that these ships were designed for one purpose only. In this particular instance CCP are not looking for balance. Caldari are supposed to be leading the pack when it comes to electronic warfare. It makes up for their other weaknesses in pvp. [i]What?[/b] What is it Goumindong? What are you unable to comprehend this time? [Balance] The Caldari problem.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.01 00:43:00 - [51] I am wondering what in the world could have given you the idea that ECM was supposed to be better than other ewar types?
Hozac	Posted - 2007.12.01 00:53:00 - [52] Originally by: Goumindong I am wondering what in the world could have given you the idea that ECM was supposed to be better than other ewar types? Feel free to slap him around a bit when he answers back story.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.12.01 01:10:00 - [53] Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/12/2007 01:19:54 Oooo I don't know, perhaps a few of the following observations; The dedicated bonuses to all the ECM ships where as all the other races Ewar boats have mixed bonuses? In fact the other races recons even have a second ability!! Wheres the Caldari second ability? The fact that one of our battleships is entirely dedicated to ECM and nothing else? The fact that all the Caldari Ewar hulls are significantly weaker than the other races Ewar hulls when fit to operate with their bonuses? The fact that we're required to use damage mods for our ewar? The fact that the ECM skilltree is alot longer than all the other ewars skill trees? The fact that the Caldari race has little going for it in pvp without ECM? And finally and most importantly the fact that ECM was and will again be the most powerful form of ewar. Lets hear your logical explanations and reasoning for the above. I really cannot wait! edit: Actually perhaps a member of CCP staff would just put us out of our misery and let us know one way or the other? ;) [Balance] The Caldari problem.
Wu Jiun	Posted - 2007.12.01 02:19:00 - [54] Originally by: welsh wizard I think part of the problem is the general players perception of how Ewar should be balanced. I think alot of you think the Amarr, Minmatar & Gallente ewars should be as effective as the Caldari Ewar. It shouldn't and I'm pretty damn sure this was never CCP's intention. As it stands amarr and minmatar ewar is already less strong. I doubt than anyone could really argue against this fact. So why are tds nerfed even further? Its not that anywhere in the world someone in his right mind would take a pilgrim or even curse over a falcon/rook if it comes to ewar or gang support in general. Originally by: welsh wizard Caldari are given next to useless hulls but with a very powerful saving grace, ECM. Noticeably more powerful than the other races. For the last year or so this hasn't been the case. Damps were preferable because CCP 'over-nerfed' ECM with Revelations. Now they're straightening things out again. Damps aren't less good than ecm with the next patch, they are a joke compared to ecm. Not to mention Td's/Tp's. Also all recons have quite useless "hulls". They all go pop pretty fast and do low dmg thats not a caldari privilege. Admittedly caldari recons pop first and do the least damage, but as mentioned they are absolutely awesome in what they can do. If somebody wants to boost caldari in pvp why not somewhere where it really lacks? Originally by: welsh wizard In this particular instance CCP are not looking for balance. Caldari are supposed to be leading the pack when it comes to electronic warfare. It makes up for their other weaknesses in pvp. You are right CCP doesn't look for balance. That doesn't mean its good. Notice though that by your own logic caldaris other weaknesses in pvp shouldn't be solved. Can't have your cake and eat it too or how is that saying?
Revnant Caldari Uninvited Guests Cult of War	Posted - 2007.12.01 02:22:00 - [55] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/12/2007 01:50:49 The fact that the ECM skilltree is longer (2 extra skills) than all the other ewars skill trees? Que? Which 2 skills? All EWAR (damps, ecm, tracking disruptor's, target painters) Frequency Modulation Long Range Jamming ECM Electronic warfare Signal Dispersion Sensor Dampners Sensor linking Signal Suppression Tracking Disruptor's Weapon Disruption Turret Destabilization Target Painters Signature Focusing Target Painting
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.12.01 02:31:00 - [56] Originally by: Revnant ... You're quite right, Guess I saw Long Distance Jamming and assumed Frequency Modulation was for ECM only. I stand corrected! 1 reason down, lots to go! [Balance] The Caldari problem.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.12.01 02:40:00 - [57] Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/12/2007 02:41:12 Originally by: Wu Jiun You are right CCP doesn't look for balance. That doesn't mean its good. Notice though that by your own logic caldaris other weaknesses in pvp shouldn't be solved. Can't have your cake and eat it too or how is that saying? Theres a difference between intended weaknesses and generally just being rubbish/ineffective, like the Ferox, Moa or Raptor. For example the intention is that Caldari should have a tough time flying alone because of the nature of a shield tank. The intention is also that they're the slowest race because apparently shield tanks, missiles & ECM make up for it! Without making sweeping changes to game mechanics these weaknesses are racial and 'unsolvable' without simpily ignoring 4 years of Eve. This is generally acceptable if not ideal, its what makes the races different afterall. Now if a ship is just poor at performing its role or laughable in comparison to its racial counter-parts then theres stuff to balance and change! It isn't just Caldari who have problems in this department, Amarr suffer considerably too. in fact all the races do in varying degrees. Some worse than others though. [Balance] The Caldari problem.
Revnant Caldari Uninvited Guests Cult of War	Posted - 2007.12.01 02:57:00 - [58] Incidentally I have 0 problems with the ECM boost's. I would however like sensor dampner and tracking disrupter spec ships to have a role in gangs post trinity. If it gets to the point where you're told to swap out to a rapier/hugin/falcon or else bring dps instead its obviously out of wack. Until we see final stats in those areas though its just speculation of course.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.01 07:36:00 - [59] Originally by: welsh wizard Waaaaaaaaaaa. Caldari ships are slow because fast missile ships == broken. Med slots > low slots for both tanking, and ewar[and typicially leave plenty for damage mods]. If you dont want to fly in situations where this is usefull, it aint my fault. Not that this has anything to do with ECM balance Quote: Without making sweeping changes to game mechanics these weaknesses are racial and 'unsolvable' without simpily ignoring 4 years of Eve. They actually arent weaknesses, you just dont know how to use the advantages your ships have
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.01 07:45:00 - [60] Originally by: welsh wizard Edited by: welsh wizard on 01/12/2007 02:32:17 Oooo I don't know, perhaps a few of the following observations; The dedicated bonuses to all the ECM ships where as all the other races Ewar boats have mixed bonuses? In fact the other races recons even have a second ability!! Wheres the Caldari second ability? The fact that one of our battleships, three of our cruisers & two of our frigates are entirely dedicated to ECM and nothing else? The fact that all the Caldari Ewar hulls are significantly weaker than the other races Ewar hulls when fit to operate with their bonuses? The fact that we're required to use damage mods for our ewar? The fact that the Caldari race has little going for it in pvp without ECM? (subjective) And finally and most importantly the fact that ECM was and will again be the most powerful form of ewar. Lets hear your logical explanations and reasoning for the above. I really cannot wait! edit: Actually perhaps a member of CCP staff would just put us out of our misery and let us know one way or the other? ;) 1. Bonus number is not important, end result is important. 2. Bonus number is not imporant, end result is important. 3. Irrelevent to balance. Amarr has 14 ships dedicated to using lasers, this does not mean lasers should be more powerful than hybrids, autocannons, or missiles. 4. Ewar hulls are not significantly weaker than other races ewar hulls, use your bonuses well and you are the hardiest ships on the field. 5. Irrelevent, end result is relevent 6. Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha. Caldari and all med slot flush ships[which is pretty much Caldari] with high ranges are well suited to combat, maybe not the combat you do, but that isnt my fault. 7. This makes no sense. "ECM was and is and will be the most powerful" is not a valid arguement to answer the question "why should ECM be the best"
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.01 09:39:00 - [61] I think hell just froze over, as I'm actually agreeing with Goumindong on something... Whining about the Caldari ECM ships is beyond absurd. Those ships are incredibly powerful when flown right. Who cares about numbers of bonuses or not having a second ewar type. That's just silly, I would much rather have a dedicated and awesome ECM ship than a ship with weaker ECM and a secondary ewar type. Like it or not, in EVE, specialization rules all. This is why split weapon ships tend to suck so much. Unless you have some excellent synergy (such as damps + long-range warp scram), trying to do two things at once just makes you suck at both. But yes, please argue for a boost to Caldari recons. Clearly my Falcon sucks. And since all the other ships suck even more, it should be boosted to compensate. I think 8 launchers with a 95% ROF role bonus would be appropriate. Then it will be perfectly fair that we have only one pvp ship. But seriously, Caldari are mostly fine, if you actually know how to fly the ships right. Ignoring minor ship-specific issues (such as the Nighthawk's crippled fittings) the only problems for Caldari as a whole are: 1) The horrible split weapon problems on the Moa, Eagle, Ferox, Vulture, and arguably the Merlin (the Cormorant, Rokh, and Harpy are just fine). The ECM and missile lines are focused just fine, so why should the railboats be an exception? Give them equal turret slots to their Gallente counterparts and the railboat line is fixed. And to anticipate your reply, Goumindong: screw the other races. Caldari are supposed to be long-range specialists, it's only fair that they have the best snipers. Just like it's perfectly fair that Minmatar have the best speed setups, Gallente dominate at point-blank range, and Amarr.... err, look shiny? 2) Despite the agility increase, Caldari ships still have awful handling. Which makes no sense for a race with tissue-paper armor and hulls. The speed and mass nerfs are a leftover solution to a problem that no longer exists (multiple MWDs, oversized launchers, etc). Caldari ships should be the second fastest, behind Minmatar. To anticipate the reply: there is difference between "faster and lighter" and "broken missile nano-ships", especially if rigs/snakes get a badly-needed nerf. There is plenty of middle ground for Caldari ships to actually be able to keep out of range of an opponent without making the missile nano-ships everyone fears. This is even more true considering the problems Caldari ships have fitting and sustaining MWDs. 3) The missile ship line could use a bit more dps on some of the ships. While the biggest problem is with the Drake, this line has too much focus on tank over gank. The Drake just highlights it best... a ship with the damage output of an Ibis and the tank of a battleship should never have been released. The strategy of "tank until your opponent gets bored and shoots someone else" isn't fun on either end, and should be changed. My preference would be a significant damage boost at the cost of launcher/cargo capacity, cost and reload time. Missile ships would have high peak damage output, but incredibly poor sustained firepower. A missile boat flown properly should be an incredibly dangerous opponent, not "kill it last, it can't hurt us". The tradeoff being you have to pick your targets carefully, as you don't have many extra rounds to waste.
Susa Ou	Posted - 2007.12.01 10:17:00 - [62] While I know Goumindong is a level headed poster, a rare thing on these forums, anyone complaining about a general caldari buff can point the fingers directly at yourself. You went around stating with joy how caldari sucked and Minmatar ruled, and what happens? Caldari get buffed. You say the Myrmidon is the best BC, then it will get nurfed. What. . .you don't think CCP play the game too? They see wtf pawning solo myrmidons killing off 3 or 4 ships solo and they will make sure to change that. . . So what does this say? If you are training Minmatar, you may want to seriously consider whether you are going to make it in before the nurf.
Arte Warspite Developments	Posted - 2007.12.01 10:23:00 - [63] Originally by: Polcor Rodal Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". It¦s customer care, nothing personal, just business. In my opinion that is a particularly naieve statement to make. Example. I picked caldari because he looks more overtly caucasian than any of the other 'options'. (I am a white male). That was the sole reason. I had no preconceptions about any of the other races other than their looks and the descriptions. The only one I didn't want to do was amarr - not because they were going to be nerfed 2 years down the line, but because they're slavers and that didn't sit right in that small acorn of RP in me. When I rolled my toon, I had no idea about the differences between the races pros and cons, nor were there any considerations about the attributes back then. (Made some mistakes that I have learned to live with). I stated flying caldari as those were the frigate skills I had when I was first 'born'. (kestrel was first mission ship) I switched to gallente because I could use drones to protect me while mining. I have stuck with gallente pretty much since because I don't want to cross-train too much. I like my drones. I would expect that if there were a straw poll about the real reasons why players picked caldari I reckon it will turn out that there are many similar trains of thought. As the game has gotten older and word gets around then sure, a higher proportion of players might pick caldari - as they'll have heard it's easier to do missions and therefore earn money early on. Not because it's caldari online though. That's tinfoil hat stuff right there.
Xavia Cameron Caldari Southern Cross Incorporated Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.01 11:55:00 - [64] Edited by: Xavia Cameron on 01/12/2007 11:56:04 Originally by: Goumindong I am wondering what in the world could have given you the idea that ECM was supposed to be better than other ewar types? Another point to toss in is the fact ECMs are designed to be used by pretty much the ENTIRE medium rack. Yep, that same rack our tank goes in (and the other assortment of modules you pretty much need to kill something). Also, ECM is a specced Ewar, post rev I ships can't just toss an ECM on and actually expect it to jam anything. As a result, we also need "damage" mods to make them worth it... This has the added niceness of removing real damage mods. When you have to sacrifice one and a half racks to be worth bringing an Ewar type, It sure as hell better be the best. (Note: all other Ewars can hurt the opposition with just one sacrificed mid-slot.)
Wu Jiun	Posted - 2007.12.01 12:07:00 - [65] Originally by: Xavia Cameron (Note: all other Ewars can hurt the opposition with just one sacrificed mid-slot.) Maybe check the effective ranges of other ewar types and think about what consequences that has? No thats too much work. The other recons have a slightly better tank because they actually have to get "pretty" (in comparison to rook/falcon pretty damn) close to apply the ewar. Maybe make ecm a web range only ewar like neuts/nos on the pilgrim? Or 36km like on the curse? That would be more fun to you? Then i'd gladly grant you a little tank. Won't help you anyway but meh. Also a single racial jammer on a bonused ship is much more effective than a single td on a bonused ship. Same for a damp. You don't fly other recons than the falcon, do you?
Incantare Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.12.01 12:34:00 - [66] Edited by: Incantare on 01/12/2007 12:41:45 ECM is the strongest e-war type, as it should be. The reason being ecm ships have to dedicate low slot strength mods whereas others do not, and those same ships aside from the scorp have no drone bays wheareas e-war ships of the other races do. The effectiveness of ECM is the counter-balancing advantage.
Xavia Cameron Caldari Southern Cross Incorporated Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.01 12:54:00 - [67] Originally by: Wu Jiun Also a single racial jammer on a bonused ship is much more effective than a single td on a bonused ship. Same for a damp. You don't fly other recons than the falcon, do you? Incorrect. A single racial jammer on a rook with full level 5 can only jam 11 of all the T1 frigates. Maybe. If luck is on your side. Ok, now the othe modules have a base range of 45/48. And from Linkage an all level 5 curse can remove 60% of a turrets optimal range. so, from 48Km.. a turret needs an original range in the order of 110 KM to hit you. Thats all Frigates gone, most cruisers gone and some BS's gone... Hell of a lot better then a chance at a frigate. (Oh, and all other modules are guaranteed to work. They don't just randomly decide to sit out for a cycle.) (Also, god forbid the race designed, either that or HAS, to fly in gangs has Ewar capable of disabling gangs)
Polly Prissypantz	Posted - 2007.12.01 12:58:00 - [68] Originally by: Merin Ryskin 3) The missile ship line could use a bit more dps on some of the ships. While the biggest problem is with the Drake, this line has too much focus on tank over gank. The Drake just highlights it best... a ship with the damage output of an Ibis and the tank of a battleship should never have been released. The strategy of "tank until your opponent gets bored and shoots someone else" isn't fun on either end, and should be changed. You lost me here. Drake has decent damage output (400+ dps (no implants, T2 fittings, CN Scourge ammo, T2 Hobgoblins)) if you don't get all hung-up about having teh bestest passive tankz0r. CCP doesn't force pilots to fly all tank/no gank - pilots force themselves. But overall yes, missiles could use a bit more damage output.
Wu Jiun	Posted - 2007.12.01 13:26:00 - [69] Edited by: Wu Jiun on 01/12/2007 13:33:13 Originally by: Xavia Cameron Incorrect. A single racial jammer on a rook with full level 5 can only jam 11 of all the T1 frigates. Maybe. If luck is on your side. A maxed skilled rook pilot will have an ecm strength of 9 on a racial jammer. A megathron has a sensor strength of 21. That is (in case of a gallente racial obviously): 9/21 * 100 = 42.85 % chance of a jam A megathron is not a frigate btw. A multispec will still yield: 6/21 * 100 = 28,57% chance of a jam You don't even understand how these modules work, do you? I guess its safe to say you don't even fly rook/falcon. Otherwise thats just sad. Oh and that was without a single sig distortion amp. Originally by: Xavia Cameron Ok, now the othe modules have a base range of 45/48. And from Linkage an all level 5 curse can remove 60% of a turrets optimal range. so, from 48Km.. a turret needs an original range in the order of 110 KM to hit you. The 36km was aimed at the neuts if that is your concern. However thats funny. In that range regarding close range weapons only megapulses can do you any harm. So its and anti mp/scorch weapon in that range. And of course you won't be able to neut the target in that range... If we are talking about snipers how do you get so close in the first place? You'll be popped before you enter effective td range anyway. Originally by: Xavia Cameron Thats all Frigates gone, most cruisers gone and some BS's gone... Hell of a lot better then a chance at a frigate. Frigates gone? How many frigates will hit you at 48km in the first place? And how long do they need to close up? Cruisers gone? What cruisers shoot at 48km? Tds are a close range ewar essentially. Its nice to know a blasterrax/thron won't hit me at 48km because i put a td on it. Ohhh wait... BS? Only large pulses are effected. Thats 1 close range turret type out of three. Drones will still work at that range and all your computations don't include falloff. For fleet ranges tds are unusable. Thats a fact just ask someone who pvps... As i said you better use the items before talking about balancing them. Originally by: Xavia Cameron (Oh, and all other modules are guaranteed to work. They don't just randomly decide to sit out for a cycle.) (Also, god forbid the race designed, either that or HAS, to fly in gangs has Ewar capable of disabling gangs) Hell damps arent guaranteed to work. You only have to close up and eventually you will get a lock no matter how long he keeps his damps running. Admittedly with the current damps that wasn't an option because you might still need to wait 2.5 minutes after closing. But that will be changes with the next patch. You just massively talk out of your ass here. With tds there are also a lot of things that can go wrong. The optimal is reduced not diminished and then there is still falloff. The tracking effect can be countered (to a degree) with piloting especially in web range where transversal tends to be low. Also this is for you to learn some things: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=511720 Edit: There are other inaccuracies like tds/damps being chance based too once you enter falloff and such. But i am running out of characters and frankly energy to refute your pseudo-arguments.
Maximillian Dragonard	Posted - 2007.12.01 13:33:00 - [70] All this discussion would be moot if CCP would give appropriate bonuses to the dedictated ewar ships. THAT is the only real issue with the TD/RSD nerf. Were they OP on generic hulls? Sure they were, just like ECM on generic hulls was OP. BUT, unlike the ECM nerf, there's no change to the hulls, nor is there a low slot mod to increase effectiveness. Toss those two changes in and 99% of the arguments would be irrelevant.
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.12.01 13:54:00 - [71] Originally by: Merin Ryskin .... I'm certainly not claiming otherwise! ECM is great as it is (after wednesday) it doesn't need buffing any further. If Goumindong had his way then part time tracking disruptor platforms would be as effective as ECM platforms despite the fact that they've got far more going for them in other areas. ECM platforms are rubbish for anything apart from ECM. The other races Ewar platforms are generally just very good regardless. [Balance] The Caldari problem.
Xavia Cameron Caldari Southern Cross Incorporated Southern Cross Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.01 13:58:00 - [72] Originally by: Wu Jiun The 36km was aimed at the neuts if that is your concern. However thats funny. In that range regarding close range weapons only megapulses can do you any harm. So its and anti mp/scorch weapon in that range. And of course you won't be able to neut the target in that range... Of course... Close range weapons are hit worse... 36km is quite a long distance if you can only hit at 40% of your original range. Originally by: Wu Jiun If we are talking about snipers how do you get so close in the first place? You'll be popped before you enter effective td range anyway. Cruisers gone? What cruisers shoot at 48km? Tds are a close range ewar essentially. Its nice to know a blasterrax/thron won't hit me at 48km because i put a td on it. Ohhh wait... BS? Only large pulses are effected. Thats 1 close range turret type out of three. Drones will still work at that range and all your computations don't include falloff. You get close to snipers the same way everyone else does. Get a cov ops or force recon to get you a warp point. (Also, snipers would be suggested as a reasonable counter anyway... they can still hit you!) Thankfully, you can also pwn tracking of close ships to nothing. Originally by: Wu Jiun For fleet ranges tds are unusable. Thats a fact just ask someone who pvps... Handy seeings how that makes sense. Then again.. Isn't all Ewar in fleets Insta-popped anyway? Even ECMs get raped, you can only jam so many people. Originally by: Wu Jiun Hell damps arent guaranteed to work. You only have to close up and eventually you will get a lock no matter how long he keeps his damps running. Admittedly with the current damps that wasn't an option because you might still need to wait 2.5 minutes after closing. But that will be changes with the next patch. You just massively talk out of your ass here. I will give you this one, by This I meant turning on module guarantees effect applied. Also, the topic at hand is that they should be better, not why they are better... (I agree in Trinity, which is the timeframe all our references are from, they will be) Wait.. why are we arguing again?
Wu Jiun	Posted - 2007.12.01 14:02:00 - [73] Originally by: Xavia Cameron Originally by: Wu Jiun You just massively talk out of your ass here. I will give you this one Case closed.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.01 21:18:00 - [74] Originally by: Merin Ryskin 2) Despite the agility increase, Caldari ships still have awful handling. Which makes no sense for a race with tissue-paper armor and hulls. The speed and mass nerfs are a leftover solution to a problem that no longer exists (multiple MWDs, oversized launchers, etc). Caldari ships should be the second fastest, behind Minmatar. This is one of the stupidest thigns ive head in a long time. The Cerberus can already attain near invulnerable speeds and you want to make it faster than Amarr and Gallente? What is anyone supposed to do againt a missile ship? Explode? Quote: 3) The missile ship line could use a bit more dps on some of the ships. While the biggest problem is with the Drake, this line has too much focus on tank over gank. The Drake just highlights it best... a ship with the damage output of an Ibis and the tank of a battleship should never have been released. The strategy of "tank until your opponent gets bored and shoots someone else" isn't fun on either end, and should be changed. This is also stupid. Missiles already do plenty of DPS. HAMs have over twice the range of Heavy Pulses with a similar damage profile, with much fewer damage type issues and no cap use. Missiles are the longest range weapons, it means the ships need to be 1: the slowest. and 2: the least damaging.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.01 21:38:00 - [75] Originally by: Goumindong This is one of the stupidest thigns ive head in a long time. The Cerberus can already attain near invulnerable speeds and you want to make it faster than Amarr and Gallente? What is anyone supposed to do againt a missile ship? Explode? With max skills and all speed mods in the lows, a Cerberus gets 2644 m/s. This is FAR from "near invulnerable". And keep in mind, this is a setup with no grid left for a tank, and underwhelming dps. The problem comes in two places: 1) Snake implants/faction MWDs/etc. Apparently someone at CCP decided that if something costs billions of ISK, it's ok for it to be completely broken. The existence of insane faction speed mods completely breaks speed setups, a ship that is completely balanced with just T2 fittings will be god mode if you spend a few billion on the snakes. But this is true across ALL races, not just Caldari. 2) Polycarbon rigs. I have no idea what CCP is smoking on this one, making them better than the equivalent module. Remove these broken modules/implants, and even speed-fitted Caldari ships will not be that fast. A cheap throwaway T1 frigate can catch them, web them, and then your damage ships will rip them to shreds. Caldari would use speed to maintain their range advantage, not to tank. Quote: This is also stupid. Missiles already do plenty of DPS. HAMs have over twice the range of Heavy Pulses with a similar damage profile, with much fewer damage type issues and no cap use. Notice I said ON SOME SHIPS. Some missile ships have acceptable damage. Some do not. The main offender here is the Drake, a ship with mediocre damage output but an insane tank. The result being a ship that everyone hates to fight against. "Leave it for last, it can't hurt us" should NOT be a tanking strategy! And note that I do not give this improved damage (not dps) for free. I state very clearly that it should come at a cost in sustainable damage. Your pulses start to look a lot more appealing when you realize that a missile ship (under my solution) might only have 5 rounds per launcher, with only 5 more in cargo. Quote: Missiles are the longest range weapons, it means the ships need to be 1: the slowest. Wrong. Kiting is not a bad thing. "Can I get in range" should NOT be an inevitable "yes" just because you fit short-range weapons. Close-range ships already have enough advantages already, it would be perfectly fair for the long-range opponent to have a chance of actually using that range. Quote: and 2: the least damaging. Only if you accept that damage and range are the only two variables. If you consider the flight time factor, you have an argument for missiles being the most damaging.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.02 03:11:00 - [76] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Only if you accept that damage and range are the only two variables. If you consider the flight time factor, you have an argument for missiles being the most damaging. Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha A question for you. What is faster, a battlecruiser? Or a heavy missile? Quote: Notice I said ON SOME SHIPS. Some missile ships have acceptable damage. Some do not. The main offender here is the Drake, a ship with mediocre damage output but an insane tank. The result being a ship that everyone hates to fight against. "Leave it for last, it can't hurt us" should NOT be a tanking strategy! The drake has fine dps, and if you cant get fine DPS out of it, then its your own damn fault for not fitting damage mods. A Heavy Missile Drake does 513 DPS to 60km[end of drone range] A HAM drake does 618 to 20km. A Heavy Pulse Harbinger does 638 to 23. Except that it cant change to precision launchers and hit 500 DPS out to lock range. Unless you have a 5km/s Harbingber that can do 618 DPS with scorch then you have no arguement. Quote: Wrong. Kiting is not a bad thing. "Can I get in range" should NOT be an inevitable "yes" just because you fit short-range weapons. Close-range ships already have enough advantages already, it would be perfectly fair for the long-range opponent to have a chance of actually using that range. No, "can i get in range" should absolutly be an inevitable "yes". If its not then no short range ship can ever reasonably beat a long range ship
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.02 04:31:00 - [77] Originally by: Goumindong Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha A question for you. What is faster, a battlecruiser? Or a heavy missile? A question for you. Which is dumber: Goumindong or my dog? Here's a hint: it's not the dog. Missile flight time has absolutely nothing to do with ship speed. The issue is delayed damage. At long range (and you admit that missiles are long range weapons), flight time is a serious liability unless you're talking about a very small gang. While guns get instant damage, the target will often be dead or warped out by the time the missiles arrive. And even if the target lives long enough to take a few missile hits, the missile ship is still playing catch-up to the gunboats that have spent that whole flight time hammering the target. Quote: The drake has fine dps, and if you cant get fine DPS out of it, then its your own damn fault for not fitting damage mods. Drake DPS in "full gank" fitting is underwhelming at best. And the ship design not only allows, but encourages over-tanked useless paperweights that are boring to fly and frustrating to fight against. Quote: A HAM drake does 618 to 20km. A Heavy Pulse Harbinger does 638 to 23. Except that it cant change to precision launchers and hit 500 DPS out to lock range. No, the HP Harbinger can't switch to arguably broken javelin HAMs and hit insane ranges. But the Drake can't switch to close-range ammo and do 768 dps. And of course you focus on the Amarr ship, knowing that Amarr ships are weak in general. Compare those dps numbers to a Myrmidon or Hurricane and you get a very different story. Quote: Unless you have a 5km/s Harbingber that can do 618 DPS with scorch then you have no arguement. What the hell does an imaginary 5km/s Harbinger have to do with anything? If you manage to get a Drake that fast, it's because implants/faction modules are broken, not because of anything about the Drake or missiles. Quote: No, "can i get in range" should absolutly be an inevitable "yes". If its not then no short range ship can ever reasonably beat a long range ship And what we have now is so much better, right? Where no long range ship can ever reasonably beat a short range ship? Here's a hint for you: if you're out-ranged and kited, warp away. Until we get long range warp scramblers, short range ships will dominate solo and small gang fights because of the need to tackle the target. As it is now, until you get into larger fleets, the short range ship holds all the advantages. It has a speed advantage, and can run down and tackle the long range ship, at which point the long range ship has no chance of victory. If it can't, the short range ship simply walks away from the fight. Ideally, Minmatar ships would be the fastest as it is their racial strategy, Caldari ships would have the second best sustained speed, while Gallente ships would have better burst speed (Amarr ships are irrelevant as only the roleplayers use them). In other words, the Caldari ship can maintain its range advantage if the range starts long, but the Gallente ship still has the ability to run down and kill its target over short ranges (starting 30km away at a gate, for example). But I'm not sure how you would do this without a complete reworking of the MWD mechanics. Of course nothing you say here is really relevant anyway, as speed and range aren't even directly related NOW. If what you were saying is true, it would be unbalanced for an artillery Tempest to be faster than a torpedo Raven (new torps, that is). Now either: 1) Go start your whine thread about overpowered Tempests. or 2) Concede that a rail Rokh outrunning a blaster Megathron is balanced.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.02 05:07:00 - [78] Edited by: Goumindong on 02/12/2007 05:08:15 Originally by: Merin Ryskin What the hell does an imaginary 5km/s Harbinger have to do with anything? If you manage to get a Drake that fast, it's because implants/faction modules are broken, not because of anything about the Drake or missiles. Its because that is how fast the missiles go you incompitent **wit. Ships have to fly towards the ships they want to do damage too, so unless the ships that are doing the flying, are flying faster than the god damned missiles, then the missiles have an advantage. Quote: No, the HP Harbinger can't switch to arguably broken javelin HAMs and hit insane ranges. But the Drake can't switch to close-range ammo and do 768 dps. And of course you focus on the Amarr ship, knowing that Amarr ships are weak in general. Compare those dps numbers to a Myrmidon or Hurricane and you get a very different story. What is that i hear? Is it balance[And no, the Cane, new Myrm and Harbinger are, with the exception of the Harbinger being worse in every way than the cane], about as balanced as things are going to get. Quote: Here's a hint for you: if you're out-ranged and kited, warp away. Until we get long range warp scramblers, short range ships will dominate solo and small gang fights because of the need to tackle the target T2 fit tech 1 Battelcruisers can warp scramble to 32km :colbert: 24km is far beyond the short range capabilities of all ships smaller than battleships and battleships which need to tackle their targets are in a load of trouble as it is. With the exception of tech 2 fit pulse laser using ships. Which basicially means the Harbinger. Maybe you dont like the fact that you chose the gang oriented pvpers instead of the solo oriented pvpers, but suck it up and Quote:** Of course nothing you say here is really relevant anyway, as speed and range aren't even directly related NOW. If what you were saying is true, it would be unbalanced for an artillery Tempest to be faster than a torpedo Raven (new torps, that is). Now either: 1) Go start your whine thread about overpowered Tempests. or 2) Concede that a rail Rokh outrunning a blaster Megathron is balanced. There is no logicial consistancy contained in the above quote.
halykon	Posted - 2007.12.02 05:31:00 - [79] I think the largest argument everyone has with Caldari is they are very very different. They have all the missile boats more or less, they have all the shield tanking boats, they have all the ECM boats. Our mechanics are a heck of a lot different from everyone else, and because of it you can't do a direct apples to apples comparison. But since this is a thread on Caldari, here's my opinion. Missiles are broken(in a bad way) and will always be broken. They're purpose built for long range edge of the envelope encounters, unfortunately EVE isn't setup for those type of engagements to flourish. Which, negates their usefulness. Shield tanking isn't all its *****ed up to be. I don't particularly like losing half of my mid rack to be able to tank effectively, the are far too many other things that are almost required for combat now days that use mids. But hey, I'll give that one up because of the next point, at least post trinity. Our ECM is very nice. Whine and complain all you want about us having arguably the best EWAR in the game, but unless you want to take the negatives that come from shield tanking and being married to missiles... you really can't complain. Do I think it makes up for the broken missile mechanics? Nope, not by a long shot. But I'll take it, and jump up and down in joy that I get it. That being said, I don't fly an EWAR ship.. so I really don't see the bright side of this change personally. I'm happy we got it though.
Atius Tirawa Minmatar Wreckless Abandon Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.12.02 07:18:00 - [80] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Ideally, Minmatar ships would be the fastest as it is their racial strategy, Caldari ships would have the second best sustained speed, while Gallente ships would have better burst speed (Amarr ships are irrelevant as only the roleplayers use them). In other words, the Caldari ship can maintain its range advantage if the range starts long, but the Gallente ship still has the ability to run down and kill its target over short ranges (starting 30km away at a gate, for example). But I'm not sure how you would do this without a complete reworking of the MWD mechanics. Of course nothing you say here is really relevant anyway, as speed and range aren't even directly related NOW. If what you were saying is true, it would be unbalanced for an artillery Tempest to be faster than a torpedo Raven (new torps, that is). Now either: 1) Go start your whine thread about overpowered Tempests. or 2) Concede that a rail Rokh outrunning a blaster Megathron is balanced.[/quote First off, enough with the Amarr hate, really, its not only getting old, but it speak more to your own role-playing intuitions then anyone elses. Secondly, fast ships and missles should never be together, CCP did it right to make Caldari ships slow, the missles do the footwork for them, not the ships. But the problem CCP found, which you are replicating here, is a combat scenerio outside of 24k - which when it happens is a gunboats world due to missle lag. So CCP have been forced, by the massive advantage of the insain speeds reached in this game right now, to give Caldari a little more agility (that means acceleration) to help them survive. Overall the argument has become a ****ing contest, but Goumingdong holds the field with a more solid understanding of how realistic combat works - as it stands, all you are telling me is that faction based speed needs a massive nurf and that Amarr suck - I agree with the former, I disagree with the latter. -----------
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.02 08:31:00 - [81] Originally by: Goumindong Its because that is how fast the missiles go you incompitent ***wit. Ships have to fly towards the ships they want to do damage too, so unless the ships that are doing the flying, are flying faster than the god damned missiles, then the missiles have an advantage. Or how about a better idea: since, as you say, missiles are long-range weapons, we compare them to long-range guns, where you aren't spending time flying into range of the target. You just warp in, and hit F1-F8. The Drake has a 15 second flight time out to its maximum range (85 km). Now, unless you're talking about solo/small gangs, a target that is called primary will die or warp out fast enough that 15 seconds is a substantial fraction of the time damage is being applied. So let's say the target survives 30 seconds total. To compensate for the flight time and deal equal damage to the Ferox, the Drake needs double* the base dps. Missile flight time is a serious liability here. Quote: What is that i hear? Is it balance[And no, the Cane, new Myrm and Harbinger are, with the exception of the Harbinger being worse in every way than the cane], about as balanced as things are going to get. Way to switch positions here... in one sentence even! "Things are as balanced as they are going to get", but the Harbinger is obviously worse than the other two. I guess you've conceded defeat and accepted that Amarr are just going to suck forever? But really, that's just conceding the point to me. Compare the HAM Drake's damage output to a non-crippled BC (Myrmidon, Brutix, etc) and you find it seriously lacking. Quote: T2 fit tech 1 Battelcruisers can warp scramble to 32km :colbert: 1) 32km is still "short range" when talking about missile ships that have effective ranges well over 100km, and well within the effective range of short-range setups. It just requires a MWD burst to run down your target and gank it. So the point remains true: long range setups are already at a considerable disadvantage just because of the restrictions on tackling. 2) Talking about overloaded scramblers is silly, considering the short amount of time you can actually do it. 24km is the more realistic number. Quote: 24km is far beyond the short range capabilities of all ships smaller than battleships and battleships which need to tackle their targets are in a load of trouble as it is. With the exception of tech 2 fit pulse laser using ships. Which basicially means the Harbinger. Interceptors with webs. Use them. Fitting short range guns does not give you an automatic right to get in range with no effort besides hitting "approach". This completely nerfs Caldari ships by making the 20-25km range suicidal to approach. A 10km buffer zone is way too short and will be quickly crossed by the short-range opponent, at which point you die. Quote: Maybe you dont like the fact that you chose the gang oriented pvpers instead of the solo oriented pvpers, but suck it up and Maybe you dont like the fact that you chose the short range oriented pvpers instead of the long range oriented pvpers, but suck it up and Quote: There is no logicial consistancy contained in the above quote. Of course there is. You just have a talent for missing the obvious. But let me put it in simple terms: Your argument is that Caldari ships must be the slowest because of their superior range. An artillery Tempest has much longer range than a (trinity) torpedo Raven. Therefore the Tempest should be slower. The artillery Tempest is faster BY A LARGE MARGIN. Therefore you must either: 1) Admit that the Caldari speed nerf is a RACIAL nerf, not a range based nerf (otherwise speed reduction would be a property on long range modules, not the ship itself). 2) Admit that the Tempest is overpowered and start campaigning to nerf it. 3) Admit that it is fair for (for example) a rail Rokh to be faster than a blaster Megathron.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.02 08:44:00 - [82] Originally by: Atius Tirawa First off, enough with the Amarr hate, really, its not only getting old, but it speak more to your own role-playing intuitions then anyone elses. I do not roleplay. I metagame and play by the numbers. And by the numbers, Amarr suck to the point that there is no reason to train them instead of one of the other races. Therefore the only people flying (non Khanid) Amarr ships are the ones who care more about roleplaying than pure combat efficiency. Quote: Secondly, fast ships and missles should never be together, CCP did it right to make Caldari ships slow, the missles do the footwork for them, not the ships. The issue is that missiles ships are dependent on their superior range to be effective. But a slow missile ship has no ability to KEEP that range. Either the faster non-missile ship runs the missile boat down and inevitably kills it, or the non-missile ship simply disengages and warps off. And this reasoning falls apart completely when you realize that non-Caldari long range ships do not have this speed issue. An artillery Tempest has the same ability to "let the guns do the footwork for them" and hit a target from extreme range. But the Tempest does not suffer from crippled speed, and can quite easily kite a short ranged, never letting them in range. Quote: But the problem CCP found, which you are replicating here, is a combat scenerio outside of 24k - which when it happens is a gunboats world due to missle lag. So CCP have been forced, by the massive advantage of the insain speeds reached in this game right now, to give Caldari a little more agility (that means acceleration) to help them survive. Congratulations on realizing the obvious. Because of the flight time liability, missiles should have significant advantages to make up for it. And the agility boost just eliminates some of the more frustrating handling issues, it doesn't actually give them better survival options. Acceleration isn't that useful if your top-end speed is far slower than the ship you're trying to hold range on. And that's the issue, not orbiting (where agility has a factor)... in a straight line race, the Caldari ship still gets run down and ganked. Quote: Overall the argument has become a ****ing contest, but Goumingdong holds the field with a more solid understanding of how realistic combat works - as it stands, all you are telling me is that faction based speed needs a massive nurf and that Amarr suck - I agree with the former, I disagree with the latter. Read the post then, if you think I'm saying nothing. I'm saying: 1) Caldari railboats have issues and need to be fixed to have the same number of turret hardpoints as their Gallente counterparts. 1a) Screw the "balance" with other snipers. Caldari are the long-range specialists, and should have the best snipers. Deal with it. Whining about this is the equivalent of complaining that the Vagabond is better than every other race's speed HAC and should be nerfed. 2) Caldari ships are too slow, and have limited ability to actually use their range advantage. Close range ships already dominate solo/small gang pvp enough due to the lack of long range warp scrambling, so there is no reason for Caldari ships to be slow and easily run down and ganked. 2a) Objections about "speed tanked missile ships" are irrelevant. With T2 fittings, Caldari ships can not reach these broken speeds. The issue is polycarbons and implants, not the missile ships, so fix the CORRECT issue. 3) Some missile ships (the Drake especially) have too much focus on absurd tank over dps. Missiles need a damage boost (preferably a big one, at the cost of SUSTAINED firepower and logistics) and the problem ships need a major tank nerf.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.02 08:54:00 - [83] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 02/12/2007 08:54:57 Originally by: Merin Ryskin 3) Some missile ships (the Drake especially) have too much focus on absurd tank over dps. Missiles need a damage boost (preferably a big one, at the cost of SUSTAINED firepower and logistics) and the problem ships need a major tank nerf. No, the problem ships (Drake, NH) need a PG boost for a T2 active tank with (maybe) only a single fitting mod, and then passive shield tanking as a whole needs nerfed. Specifically, shield recharge should be stacking nerfed. Yes, I'm shooting my own foot. I passive tank my Drakes too. Also, all BC's have problems fitting even a single gang mod... this should really not be as much of an issue as it is. Harbinger and Drake are specifically bad at it. Liang -- Retired forum *****. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.02 09:14:00 - [84] Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 02/12/2007 09:15:16 Originally by: Liang Nuren No, the problem ships (Drake, NH) need a PG boost for a T2 active tank with (maybe) only a single fitting mod, and then passive shield tanking as a whole needs nerfed. Specifically, shield recharge should be stacking nerfed. Yes, I'm shooting my own foot. I passive tank my Drakes too. If this nerf is made, then the Drake is entitled to a damage increase. Remember, the Drake originally had 7 launchers and a ROF bonus when it was first released on the test server (somewhat more dps, much better choice of damage type). The whole reason it was nerfed is the battleship level passive tank. If you take away the tank (as you should), then it is safe to bring its damage back up. (Yes, it really was that absurd a nerf... I really want to know what CCP was smoking when they decided that the solution to an overpowered tank was to keep the tank and nerf the damage!) Quote: Also, all BC's have problems fitting even a single gang mod... this should really not be as much of an issue as it is. Harbinger and Drake are specifically bad at it. Agreed. The Nighthawk is even worse at it... at least the Drake and Harbinger are only T1 ships. The Nighthawk is an elite command ship and it can't even fit a single gang mod with a practical fitting.
Halycon Gamma Caldari	Posted - 2007.12.02 11:00:00 - [85] Okay, for starters.. my napkin version of combat... yours may differ. Short Range Combat(SRC): 5-20k Middle Range Combat(MRC): 21 - 50k Long Range Combat(LRC): 51 - 100k Extreme Range Combat(ERC): 101k++ Now as a Caldari missile boat captain, I want to be in the ERC area. Really, its were I'd rather fight from. Unfortunately for me, warp mechanics means anything over 100k from me can just warp to my beautiful boat, and even if that wasn't there.. extreme flight times on missiles at that point makes me want to weep. That being said I'd still rather start my first volley from there. But I can't, so.. I start from LRC range. At that range most anything can over-haul and ***** me since with high flight times, my grandmother, who is old and suffers from an unstable bladder, has time to go use the restroom between volleys. I can't keep them at LRC range because they can just warp out.. or because of the lack of tackle I'm now in... MRC range. Still no tackle.. they are about to overhaul me.. on the bright side my missile flight time isn't so bad now, too bad I've only got one volley worth at this range.. maybe. This is where most of my accidental combat starts, I get pulled out of warp by a dictor, or hit a gate camp. I'm just dead, not even worth playing, of course if the bubble or gate camp is setup right.. I start out in.. SRC.. I don't even have time to lament the fact that I'm about to die.. Thats about what missile combat devolves into, your mileage may vary. Not once in all of that did I complain about speed.. well.. other than the fact that everyone can catch me. What I did complain about, is flight time and tackle. As I'm a reasonable thinking man, I don't think they'll ever give us tackle at LRC. And, I'll see the inside of Scarlett Johansson's panties before we'll get it for ERC. So this leaves flight time. For gods sakes fix flight time. I'm begging you. Pleading with you, fix flight time. Even my afore mentioned grandmother, who normally loves the chance to go use the restroom, thinks flight time is too long on the occasions she remembers to take her bladder meds. And really, if you won't do it for us Caldari, do it for the grandmothers. They are old, their attention wanders, they need something active and engaging to keep them interested. For Recap: Flight Time Bad, Grandmothers Good Make everyone's grandmother happy and fix flight time. Thanks
Alexandra The Littlest Hobos Insurgency	Posted - 2007.12.02 16:03:00 - [86] Edited by: Alexandra on 02/12/2007 16:05:00 Edited by: Alexandra on 02/12/2007 16:04:24 The flight time disadvantage is by design, because missiles get 2 advantages over turrets (hybrid and laser mainly). 1. Damage selection 2. No tracking and missed shots Basically, as long as the target is in the missiles range, it's going to hit. End of story. This is a crucial aspect because a lot of short range survival tactics depend on keeping a high transversal, which won't matter against a missile that will track it's target. Now, regarding nano-ships. The only thing that a nano-ship can do is get its speed high enough to reduce the damage from the explosion velocity. But even then, it's a reduction not a complete miss. And because nano-ships sacrifice all tank for velocity, even some damage is a big concern. That is why the cerberous with precision heavy's is the only ship that hit and damage nano-ships without having to web them. Now, that's just the discussing the weapon system itself. Tackling is another argument. But tackling nano-ships is a seperate argument that all ships have to deal with, missile boats or otherwise.
Kadoes Khan	Posted - 2007.12.02 16:35:00 - [87] Quote: Most people in the game are caldari, or fly caldari ships. You have to keep your customers happy, so in terms of the game caldari wil "get all the cookies". It¦s customer care, nothing personal, just business. Just to let you know the purpose of customer care is not to keep customers happy it's to keep them paying. You can ** people off and still make them pay and in an online competitive game having a balance playing field even if it **es people off will retain more people then just giving people whatever they want to make them happy. -=^=- "Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity."
Gliding Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture	Posted - 2007.12.02 17:09:00 - [88] Originally by: ChimeraRouge yay! Now please increase our missile velocity across the board to catch those overpowered nano ships or fix snakes, mwds, and polycarbons. Spoken like a true caldari, he just wants to sit at 0.0 m/s spammin missiles. pppfffff how boring Personal signatures for 20m isk
Calexis Atredies Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.02 17:39:00 - [89] As in agreement with CCP, I lost a vulture yesterday due to its brick on top of a piece of sandpaper handling.... last man left on gate in gang, followed by a truncated killmail at the hands of a 60 man BoB gang. All I could do was sit back and lol
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.02 18:33:00 - [90] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Or how about a better idea: since, as you say, missiles are long-range weapons, we compare them to long-range guns, where you aren't spending time flying into range of the target. You just warp in, and hit F1-F8. And all the non-caldari battlecruisers do about 0 or less DPS at 85km, which makes the Drake do infinity more DPS than them. Well, its not quite that bad, but the 300 DPS that a harbinger does at 76km and the 120 it does at 86km is easily eclipsed by the 400 that a drake does at 80. The Ferox does 173 dps at 76km. The Drake more than doubles its DPS. Not to mention that the Drake can do these things without refitting, and can still attack ships at short range while the long range BCs cannot. Quote: Way to switch positions here... in one sentence even! "Things are as balanced as they are going to get", but the Harbinger is obviously worse than the other two. I guess you've conceded defeat and accepted that Amarr are just going to suck forever? But really, that's just conceding the point to me. Compare the HAM Drake's damage output to a non-crippled BC (Myrmidon, Brutix, etc) and you find it seriously lacking. The Harbinger isnt crippled, the fact that it is worse in every way to a Hurricane has no brearing on the fact that it indeed is pretty damn close to where it needs to be. Its just not so much worse that there needs to be a radical change to the ship. The Drake compares terribly favorably to the Hurricane and Brutix, especially since the Hurricane looks a lot worse due to damage type. Its DPS is going to be about half to a third of the Drakes, and the drake is going to have almost as good damage types. At 18km a full gank Hurricane does 374 dps. A drake does 600 dps. At 3km the hurricane does 809. At 20km the Brutix does 158 dps. At 2.3km its 860 The Harbinger is utterly better than a brutix in its current iteration[due to the extra low], so if the Drake is comparing favorably to the Harbinger, then how in the world is the drake going to compare bad to a Brutix? Quote: 1) 32km is still "short range" when talking about missile ships that have effective ranges well over 100km, and well within the effective range of short-range setups. It just requires a MWD burst to run down your target and gank it. So the point remains true: long range setups are already at a considerable disadvantage just because of the restrictions on tackling. 2) Talking about overloaded scramblers is silly, considering the short amount of time you can actually do it. 24km is the more realistic number. No overloading necessary. Overloaded range is 41.6km. Quote: Interceptors with webs. Use them. Fitting short range guns does not give you an automatic right to get in range with no effort besides hitting "approach". This completely nerfs Caldari ships by making the 20-25km range suicidal to approach. A 10km buffer zone is way too short and will be quickly crossed by the short-range opponent, at which point you die. Why dont you take your own advice. If short range ships are expected to have tacklers, and long range ships arent? Here is the difference. Long range ships are better in gangs than short range ships are. If you make long range ships better solo as well, then short range ships have nothing else left. Quote: Your argument is that Caldari ships must be the slowest because of their superior range. An artillery Tempest has much longer range than a (trinity) torpedo Raven. Therefore the Tempest should be slower. The artillery Tempest is faster BY A LARGE MARGIN. You are comparing long range weapons to short range weapons, this is utterly stupid. AC tempests are much shorter range than torp ravens and do a **** tonne less DPS to boot. Clearly amarr ships need to be faster than gallente ships because pulse lasers have much shorter range than railguns!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.02 18:38:00 - [91] Originally by: Merin Ryskin Read the post then, if you think I'm saying nothing. I'm saying: 1) Caldari railboats have issues and need to be fixed to have the same number of turret hardpoints as their Gallente counterparts. 1a) Screw the "balance" with other snipers. Caldari are the long-range specialists, and should have the best snipers. Deal with it. Whining about this is the equivalent of complaining that the Vagabond is better than every other race's speed HAC and should be nerfed. 2) Caldari ships are too slow, and have limited ability to actually use their range advantage. Close range ships already dominate solo/small gang pvp enough due to the lack of long range warp scrambling, so there is no reason for Caldari ships to be slow and easily run down and ganked. 2a) Objections about "speed tanked missile ships" are irrelevant. With T2 fittings, Caldari ships can not reach these broken speeds. The issue is polycarbons and implants, not the missile ships, so fix the CORRECT issue. 3) Some missile ships (the Drake especially) have too much focus on absurd tank over dps. Missiles need a damage boost (preferably a big one, at the cost of SUSTAINED firepower and logistics) and the problem ships need a major tank nerf. There you have it, you dont care about balance, you care about Caldari being the best. The best snipers, the best small gang pvpers with high gank and range, the best solo pvpers with no disadvantages[since minmitar not being able to avoid missiles are their main weakness].
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2007.12.02 19:17:00 - [92] Originally by: Goumindong The Harbinger is utterly better than a brutix in its current iteration[due to the extra low], so if the Drake is comparing favorably to the Harbinger, then how in the world is the drake going to compare bad to a Brutix? Because the Brutix typically has the ability to shape the battlefield (that is to say, get close to the enemy, web him, and actually apply that 800 DPS). Originally by: Goumindong You are comparing long range weapons to short range weapons, this is utterly stupid. AC tempests are much shorter range than torp ravens and do a ** tonne less DPS to boot. Heh heh heh. Nice one Goum. Very nice. ;-) (I <3 my Raven, but I <3 my Tempest/Mael more) Liang -- Retired forum ***. Plz tell me to STFU. Yarr?
Hugh Ruka Caldari Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2007.12.02 20:18:00 - [93] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Merin Ryskin Read the post then, if you think I'm saying nothing. I'm saying: 1) Caldari railboats have issues and need to be fixed to have the same number of turret hardpoints as their Gallente counterparts. 1a) Screw the "balance" with other snipers. Caldari are the long-range specialists, and should have the best snipers. Deal with it. Whining about this is the equivalent of complaining that the Vagabond is better than every other race's speed HAC and should be nerfed. 2) Caldari ships are too slow, and have limited ability to actually use their range advantage. Close range ships already dominate solo/small gang pvp enough due to the lack of long range warp scrambling, so there is no reason for Caldari ships to be slow and easily run down and ganked. 2a) Objections about "speed tanked missile ships" are irrelevant. With T2 fittings, Caldari ships can not reach these broken speeds. The issue is polycarbons and implants, not the missile ships, so fix the CORRECT issue. 3) Some missile ships (the Drake especially) have too much focus on absurd tank over dps. Missiles need a damage boost (preferably a big one, at the cost of SUSTAINED firepower and logistics) and the problem ships need a major tank nerf. There you have it, you dont care about balance, you care about Caldari being the best. The best snipers, the best small gang pvpers with high gank and range, the best solo pvpers with no disadvantages[since minmitar not being able to avoid missiles are their main weakness]. That would be true if Merin also wanted long range scramble ability for Caldari. Then it would be an all in one situation. However that is not true and you still either need the short range tackler/dictor or a scram range bonused recon. The short range races have it all except the range (speed, damage, tackle, some tank if chosen). Caldari have the exact opposite, range, mediocre damage, very strong tanks if chosen, no tackle. Anyway this discussion is a bit pointless from my view. Each side is overstating what fits their purpose and understating what does not. but to the acual changes: 1. Caldari agility boost - was about freaking time !!! 2. ECM cap reduction - I don't see the point. relevant ships have bonuses for this and it does not matter on the other ships 3. TDs sharind the same fate as RSDs - I REALY do not get this one. I could accept it if TDs also got a 3rd falloff reducing script. Originally by: Aravel Thon Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox............... I am so so terribly sorry...
General Coochie New Justice Minuit.	Posted - 2007.12.02 20:46:00 - [94] Edited by: General Coochie on 02/12/2007 20:46:27 I endorse the caldari buffs. Lets hope its enough to put em on them well on the pvp map, not only the raven, drake and ecm ships but the others aswell.
Halycon Gamma Caldari	Posted - 2007.12.02 21:40:00 - [95] Quote: Anyway this discussion is a bit pointless from my view. Each side is overstating what fits their purpose and understating what does not. Thats what you do with internet arguments. You overstate the extreme. To be fair thought, eve is a game of min/max and extremes. Oh, and on my earlier flight time thing.. I don't want flight time gone, far from it. But a partial reduction would be nice. Also. It doesn't matter if a rails do less damage than missiles at range, if said rail ship can keep the range open. Combat takes longer, but since they have the legs to stay out of optimal range from the opposing side, they'll win combat more often if the other side sticks around. Its basic physics. If two objects are on the same vector, going the same velocity, the tailing body will never intersect the leading body. To break that down, since the short range ship will never catch the rail boat, that means the railboat has an infinite amount of time to do damage to the chasing boat. Now, I might be a bit rusty on my algebra.. but.. last I checked, if you multiply infinity times a number.. lets say a really small number since rail boats do so little damage, how about.. one. So, we multiply infinity by the 1dps the rail ship can do.. and we get.. infinity! Amazing, the rail ship can do infinite damage to the blaster boat without worrying at all about being shot in return. Do I have to get out my slide rule, graph paper, and an abbaccas? Maybe pull out twenty-seven eight-by-ten glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one is to be used as evidence against you?(hopefully someone is old enough to get the reference).
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.02 22:03:00 - [96] Originally by: Hugh Ruka That would be true if Merin also wanted long range scramble ability for Caldari. Then it would be an all in one situation. However that is not true and you still either need the short range tackler/dictor or a scram range bonused recon. The short range races have it all except the range (speed, damage, tackle, some tank if chosen). Caldari have the exact opposite, range, mediocre damage, very strong tanks if chosen, no tackle. The problem is that you are not understanding the advantage that range is. Its a problem with Amarr and some people with their "gotta have 4 meds" mentality. In a small gang battle, Armageddons are usefull because of the DPS they can put out at the range they can put it out. About 1100 at 15km and 900 to 45km. But Ravens, even currently are in the same boat, they can put out 921 dps[Pre torp buff] to about 50km using any damage type. The Armageddon runs 113k hit points, the Raven 132k[or around 115 with a sensor booster or target painter]. Neither gets nor needs a scrambler. Alternatly the Raven can field ewar in its med slots instead of a tank. But to also have the Raven not only such a strong gang DPS platform[and it is] and also be a ship strongly capable of solo combat via speed and agility is simply preposterous. And this is what would happen with the Raven able to dictate its range. And definitly will happen with the other missile ships. And on top of that, on top of wanting to be faster than the short range ships with longer range weapons she also wants a damage boost on the ships she has deemed too tanky, ships that compete well in DPS dealt for their range and have large amounts of versitility to boot. It doesnt matter if you dont think they can tackle[they can, just fine], it matters how they would perform after the boosts. Now, i could see a speed boost for the rail ships, because the rail ships when fit with blasters are quite short range and lack the missile hardpoints to be a long range threat. But even then, not faster than Gallente.
Aedan Rackham	Posted - 2007.12.03 00:50:00 - [97] I got it, Halycon. Local radio station that claims to have recorded that song still plays it every thanksgiving at noon. Mmm... I wonder if there's any turkey left...
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.12.03 01:22:00 - [98] Edited by: Ulstan on 03/12/2007 01:25:30 Quote: I think part of the problem is the general players perception of how Ewar should be balanced. I think alot of you think the Amarr, Minmatar & Gallente ewars should be as effective as the Caldari Ewar. It shouldn't and I'm pretty damn sure this was never CCP's intention. Caldari are given next to useless hulls but with a very powerful saving grace, ECM. Noticeably more powerful than the other races. For the last year or so this hasn't been the case. Damps were preferable because CCP 'over-nerfed' ECM with Revelations. Now they're straightening things out again. Take away the ECM & all of the ECM hulls are a joke in comparison to the other races Ewar hulls. Our 100% dedicated ECM bonuses also reflect the fact that these ships were designed for one purpose only. In this particular instance CCP are not looking for balance. Caldari are supposed to be leading the pack when it comes to electronic warfare. It makes up for their other weaknesses in pvp. Very interesting way of looking at it. I wonder if you might not be right. Certainly ECM is by far and away the most fleshed out Ewar system. RSD's are one module: You have five different ECM modules, modules that do nothing but counter ECM, and then low slot modules to boost the effectiveness of ECM. And then of course there are the caldari dedicated e-war boats, (Blackbird, scorp, etc) which other races do not seem to have. And caldari-ewar ships certainly seem to give up much more of their dps and tank than do the e-war ships of other races. It certainly seems as though CCP intends ECM ewar to be a much bigger player on the field than say, tracking disruptor e-war. I still think the RSD nerf went a bit far, however.
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.12.03 02:14:00 - [99] Quote: Missiles are the longest range weapons, it means the ships need to be 1: the slowest. and 2: the least damaging. It's not that simple. There are more than two variables here. What if the longest range ships had the lightest defence instead? Anyway as long as everyone fits MWD and you have to be close range to someone to warp disrupt them, long range is a very tenuous advantage. I don't think too many fleets tell everyone to load up on the missiles for sniping engagements, thanks to the delay.
Atsuko Ratu Caldari Advanced Logistics	Posted - 2007.12.03 02:18:00 - [100] Too much whining about ECM. The focus should be on fixing other Ewar types on their dedicated ships, not complaining because ECM got a 40% cap reduction (and guess what? that was their only buff, they arn't magically awesome now.) Caldari can turn a little better, and a few ships got a bonus fix. CALDARI ONLINEZ HERE WE COME!?!?! Losers.
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.03 02:26:00 - [101] Originally by: Goumindong And all the non-caldari battlecruisers do about 0 or less DPS at 85km, which makes the Drake do infinity more DPS than them. Well, its not quite that bad, but the 300 DPS that a harbinger does at 76km and the 120 it does at 86km is easily eclipsed by the 400 that a drake does at 80. The Ferox does 173 dps at 76km. The Drake more than doubles its DPS. Fine. Pick whatever range you feel like. The simple fact is, missiles are long range weapons, but lose considerable damage to the flight time factor. So just comparing straight dps numbers is very misleading, you will not be getting those in the real world. Quote: The Harbinger isnt crippled, the fact that it is worse in every way to a Hurricane has no brearing on the fact that it indeed is pretty damn close to where it needs to be. Its just not so much worse that there needs to be a radical change to the ship. "Worse in every way" = no reason to fly a Harbinger = crippled ship. Really, I would expect you to agree with me here... after all, it's an argument for an Amarr boost! Quote: At 18km a full gank Hurricane does 374 dps. A drake does 600 dps. At 3km the hurricane does 809. At 20km the Brutix does 158 dps. At 2.3km its 860 Nice numbers. Now let's look at the key fact: these are close range ships. The difference between 18km and 5km is a few seconds of MWD-ing. The Drake has no ability to STAY at that range, and will almost immediately find itself 200+ dps lower than the opponent. Quote: No overloading necessary. Overloaded range is 41.6km. Oh yes, no overloading necessary... just a Minmatar command ship pilot in your gang. Since you know, everyone has an alt with 5 million SP in leadership waiting around to boost their scramble range. Why not just quote an Arazu's numbers and go all the way to insanity? Quote: Why dont you take your own advice. If short range ships are expected to have tacklers, and long range ships arent? Long range ships already have to. A long range ship fighting at long range (NOT "slightly less short" range, I mean using that full 100km range) can not scramble the target, and is completely dependent on having another ship do that job. Quote: Long range ships are better in gangs than short range ships are. If you make long range ships better solo as well, then short range ships have nothing else left. Long range ships will NEVER be better solo, because of the need to scramble the target. Quote: You are comparing long range weapons to short range weapons, this is utterly stupid. AC tempests are much shorter range than torp ravens and do a **** tonne less DPS to boot. Exactly. I'm doing the same thing you were doing. Earlier, you said that Caldari ships must be the slowest, because they have the longest range. A ship with longer range must have lower dps and lower speed, otherwise it's unbalanced. But here we have a ship that openly defies that pattern. The artillery Tempest out-ranges the target, but is also faster than the target. But when the ship with superior range is Caldari, then clearly it must be slower. Caldari must be nerfed at all costs! Quote: Clearly amarr ships need to be faster than gallente ships because pulse lasers have much shorter range than railguns! Thank you for highlighting the absurdity of your own argument. But let's fix it a bit... BEAM lasers have shorter range than railguns. Here we're even comparing long range weapons to long range weapons. The Amarr ship should be faster, by your reasoning. If you want to argue that Caldari railboats should be slower than Amarr ships because of their superior range, the same argument should apply to Gallente railboats. The fact that you don't argue for this proves that it's not about long range vs. short, it's about "nerf Caldari at all costs".
Merin Ryskin FinFleet Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.12.03 02:35:00 - [102] Originally by: Goumindong But to also have the Raven not only such a strong gang DPS platform[and it is] and also be a ship strongly capable of solo combat via speed and agility is simply preposterous. Nice straw man. I never argued for speed tanking Ravens. A Raven that uses superior speed to exploit its range advantage is outside scramble range, and can not kill the target solo. Now tell me, how is it better that flying a solo Raven right now is completel suicide? If you are at scramble range, your pathetic lack of speed allows a close range opponent to immediately run you down and gank you (or just warp off, if you start too far out of their range). Quote: And this is what would happen with the Raven able to dictate its range. And definitly will happen with the other missile ships. And on top of that, on top of wanting to be faster than the short range ships with longer range weapons she also wants a damage boost on the ships she has deemed too tanky, ships that compete well in DPS dealt for their range and have large amounts of versitility to boot. Read the entire post before commenting on it. I want a damage boost, at the cost of two things: 1) Tank. Missile boats (the Caldari ones at least) in my version of EVE would be eggshells with sledgehammers, capable of putting out impressive short-term damage but severely lacking in tank. 2) Endurance/logistics. Note that I said the damage increase would be accompanied by a nerf to missile SIZE, reload time, and cost. In other words, fewer rounds in the launcher, very few spares in cargo, and killing a ship with missiles will cost you a fair percentage of the ship's value. A missile ship might do impressive damage (once the missiles reach the target), but it will only be able to do that damage for a short time before it has to go back home to reload. And including missile ships in your fleet would be a significant drain on your wallet... you might kill the target really effectively, but it's hard to win a battle of attrition when every ship you kill costs you half the hull cost. Quote: Now, i could see a speed boost for the rail ships, because the rail ships when fit with blasters are quite short range and lack the missile hardpoints to be a long range threat. But even then, not faster than Gallente. Thank you for contradicting yourself. If anything, rail ships would exploit a speed advantage even better than the missile ships. A railboat can instantly hit the target, from ranges missile ships can only dream of. Forget about blasters, I'd just fit rails. Get over it, the Beagle is a terrible ship, and NOT the standard Caldari are supposed to live up to. Talking about Caldari blaster ships is just silly.
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.12.03 02:39:00 - [103] Quote: No, "can i get in range" should absolutly be an inevitable "yes". If its not then no short range ship can ever reasonably beat a long range ship Uh, no. It should be a qualified 'maybe'. If it's "Yes, always" the long range low damage guy is screwed. If it's "No, never" the short range high damage guy is screwed. It should depend on the skill and fittings of the participants, not be a sure fire yes or no.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.03 02:47:00 - [104] Originally by: Merin Ryskin .... What happens when the best gang ships are also the best solo ships?
Arthur Frayn Veterans Of Liberation Ltd.	Posted - 2007.12.03 03:42:00 - [105] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Merin Ryskin .... What happens when the best gang ships are also the best solo ships? Like the Megathron/Myrmidon/Dominix/Eos/Ishtar is? -- Eve needs a dose of Top Gun without the sweaty shower scenes.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.03 03:47:00 - [106] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Merin Ryskin .... What happens when the best gang ships are also the best solo ships? Like the Megathron/Myrmidon/Dominix/Eos/Ishtar is? Are, and no, the Megathron, myrmidon, Domi, eos and ishtar are not the best solo and gang ships. Amarr BS are better in gangs due to the range, As are Caldari for ewar and range.
Ulstan	Posted - 2007.12.03 03:47:00 - [107] Quote: What happens when the best gang ships are also the best solo ships? Are there some pwn solo ships that suck in gangs?
Niko Takahashi	Posted - 2007.12.03 04:23:00 - [108] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Hugh Ruka That would be true if Merin also wanted long range scramble ability for Caldari. Then it would be an all in one situation. However that is not true and you still either need the short range tackler/dictor or a scram range bonused recon. The short range races have it all except the range (speed, damage, tackle, some tank if chosen). Caldari have the exact opposite, range, mediocre damage, very strong tanks if chosen, no tackle. The problem is that you are not understanding the advantage that range is. Its a problem with Amarr and some people with their "gotta have 4 meds" mentality. In a small gang battle, Armageddons are usefull because of the DPS they can put out at the range they can put it out. About 1100 at 15km and 900 to 45km. But Ravens, even currently are in the same boat, they can put out 921 dps[Pre torp buff] to about 50km using any damage type. The Armageddon runs 113k hit points, the Raven 132k[or around 115 with a sensor booster or target painter]. Neither gets nor needs a scrambler. Alternatly the Raven can field ewar in its med slots instead of a tank. But to also have the Raven not only such a strong gang DPS platform[and it is] and also be a ship strongly capable of solo combat via speed and agility is simply preposterous. And this is what would happen with the Raven able to dictate its range. And definitly will happen with the other missile ships. And on top of that, on top of wanting to be faster than the short range ships with longer range weapons she also wants a damage boost on the ships she has deemed too tanky, ships that compete well in DPS dealt for their range and have large amounts of versitility to boot. It doesnt matter if you dont think they can tackle[they can, just fine], it matters how they would perform after the boosts. Now, i could see a speed boost for the rail ships, because the rail ships when fit with blasters are quite short range and lack the missile hardpoints to be a long range threat. But even then, not faster than Gallente. /qft Sorry folks i have been in eve long enough to hear the gallente whining ,and rightly so, about raven being ovepowered after this patch they will be again. So long live armor tanked uber short range torp ecm fited mwd ravens from exodus might look up the old setups again spice it up with some rigs and go for spin in my new pimp mobile
Zekarus Caldari MAIDS Antesignani Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.04 13:39:00 - [109] People better than me have presented logic and numbers on both sides, so I just wish to leave this message: I swear I've heard some forum-***s repeat the overused line "Adapt or die" when it comes to nerfs or "unbalanced" features. I remember those being thrown around when ECM was nerfed in particular. (moi is EWar specialist, almost maxed out). Where are they now? Mmm... That goes in my forum sig. -------- MAIDS. Now with black, frilly uniforms. P.S. ECMs got boost, boohoo! Now, didn't I hear some forum-***s go on about "adapt or die" when it was nerfed?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.