EVE Search - Hypothetical Amarr Thread

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Hypothetical Amarr Thread

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 15:56:00 - [1] So, let's say the impossible has happened. It is the near future and CCP has removed the "10% Reduction in Energy Turret Capacitor Use / Level" bonus (hereafter refered to as the "cap use bonus") from all Amarr ships and similarly cut all laser cap use in half across the board. Suddenly the Amarran fleet needs new bonuses so that they retain the proper number of bonuses per ship (2, 3, or 4). The purpose of this thread is to examine the existing "Amarr" bonuses, see which might be used to replace the cap use bonus, and discuss the impact of such a change. Moving right along... Here are the bonuses that show up on Amarr turret ships: 1. Damage (Very common) 2. RoF (Less common) 3. Optimal (Zealot only afaik) 4. Tracking (Coercer only afaik) Here are some Amarr bonuses that show up on some ships (obviously I won't include things like logistics, EWAR, or drone bonuses here, because they are not relevant to the amarr gunboats) 1. Armor resists (Very common) 2. Cap amount (Apoc / Paladin only) 3. Cap recharge (Khanid ships) 4. Armor HP (Augoror family only) 5. Armor Repair amount (Paladin only [and a Gallente bonus at that]) So with those out of the way, let's consider some of the problems with Amarr. 1. Cap use (Cap use of lasers has not changed, we just get an extra bonus here) 2. Vulnerability to cap warfare / relatively easy to cap out an Amarran ship. 3. Mid-range hard to enforce and not good enough to warrant ships trying to operate in midrange 4. Damage types are fixed (not so bad) and unattractive choices for pvp, in general. I personally like the idea of using cap as ammo and so I am okay with lasers using a fair bit of energy. I don't mind the fixed damage types as much and I don't think EM damage is as bad as people say it is. EM damage sucks mostly against lightly armor tanked, tech 1 ships. They tend to use EANM, DC, and plates quite a bit which gives them very, very high effective HP against EM damage. However, as ships get more slots and go T2, suddenly (T2 minmatar excepted) EM damage is the lowest, or second-lowest, resist. And as tanks get larger it becomes more likely that people will use tri-hardened tanks, again leaving EM at about the same effectiveness as anything else (with the bonus of burning through shields much faster). Amarr damage isn't really the problem (Aside from the omen and Zealot), it's that lasers and mid-range combat aren't good enough to be worth the cap use and fitting, especially on ships without damage/RoF bonuses. Additionally I'm fine with Amarr being totally helpless if capped out but in return I'd ask that they then be slightly harder to cap out. (Continued below...) __________________________________
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 15:56:00 - [2] With that in mind, I think that if the cap use on all lasers was halved I would like to see the cap use bonus replaced with one of the following: 1. Laser tracking. Amarran ships have problems keeping range due to general slowness (often made worse by armor rigs and plates) and with the problems fitting and running a microwarpdrive (25% less cap + lasers = detrimental combination). A laser tracking bonus would make Amarr more competitive against people who get under their guns, and would let them better handle ships that stay out of range going too fast for most guns to track. 2. Laser optimal. In a similar vein to the above, using the laser optimal bonus more often would make Amarr's range advantage more prevalent. It would allow them to use higher-damaging crystals further away. This, combined with an improved system to rapidly change crystals (so that we could in fact change them in a second or two), means that repeatedly changing crystals to maximize your damage as a target moves towards and away from you is no longer infeasible and would allow Amarr to better employ the wide spectrum (forgive the pun) of ranges that is available to them with basically a single cap booster 800 worth of cargohold. Why don't I ask for more damage? Well aside from the fact that an armageddon with half cap use and 25% more gun damage would be LOL DPS, Amarr doesn't (in general) really need more damage. It just needs better ways to apply the damage that it has. Alternatively, we could give Amarr bonuses that allow it to stick around to apply its damage longer. We can do this two ways: increasing (effective) hit points which delays the ship's destruction, or increasing capacitor power so that amarr can run more modules without running out of energy, or run its modules for longer. With that in mind, consider what might happen if we replaced the cap use bonus with, say... 1. Resist bonus. Suddenly amarr gunboats, while being just as easy to cap out, tank, or out-track, have 33% more armor hit points and repair amount, and can be remote-repaired that much more effectively. 2. 10% Armor hit points per level. They don't tank or shoot any better, but now they have 50% more armor hit points to chew through, and while you are shooting through that, they can shoot back, or have more time to repair to outlast you, or can call in friends... etc. Alternatively... 3. 5% Cap Recharge / 5% Cap Capacity per level. If this bonus becomes more common (preferably the former bonus as it is better in almost every respect, in my opinion) then not only can Amarr fire for quite a bit longer, but they can also run armor repairers, etc for longer. So what to do with all of this? More in the future... __________________________________
Andreask14 Alterum - Infinitus - Fabula Dragons Of Oceans	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:05:00 - [3] This all sounds too good to be true. They change single ships radically, adding boni and such, but an entire race? We can always hope. All amarrian cruisers are useless right now, so some stirred up bonuses might make them viable again. Picking one of your points, you might want to consider that a plus 5% cap does also add 5% recharge bonus on top of the extra cap when applied to the same time frame,so its the better of the two bonuses. The better tracking is also the greatest idea, sadly it wont happen.
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:05:00 - [4] What I would like to see in this case is that the Amarr gunboats would lose their cap use bonus in exchange for an Optimal Range bonus, meaning that they can make the most of their range advantage for as long as possible. Similarly the laser-wielding tanking boats (Maller, Prophecy, etc) would get a tracking bonus. Since these ships tend not to keep range as much, a tracking bonus lets them compete better against those that do keep range. This would give ships without damage bonuses a reason to use lasers - for increased tracking at reasonable range (Maller with tracking bonus and scorch has 20km range and good tracking, if poor damage). Alternatively, the tanking ships could receive one of the bonuses from group 2, but honestly I'm not in favor of this solution. Armor resists are already granted to all the appropriate ships, and a 10% armor hit point bonus means that the ships must basically passive armor tank or they still have a (somewhat) wasted bonus. Making capacitor bonuses more prevalent on the other hand is more interesting, but in my opinion not as fun or powerful as the gun bonuses listed above. __________________________________
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:13:00 - [5] Edited by: Terianna Eri on 15/01/2008 16:16:53 Originally by: Andreask14 This all sounds too good to be true. They change single ships radically, adding boni and such, but an entire race? We can always hope. All amarrian cruisers are useless right now, so some stirred up bonuses might make them viable again. Picking one of your points, you might want to consider that a plus 5% cap does also add 5% recharge bonus on top of the extra cap when applied to the same time frame,so its the better of the two bonuses. The better tracking is also the greatest idea, sadly it wont happen. Heh, posted before I was done with the thread. 25% more cap does indeed add 25% better recharge, but consider that -25% cap recharge means that you regenerate 33% more capacitor per second. 1.25 cap / 1 second = 1.25 cap/s 1 cap / 0.75 second = 1.33 cap/s Tracking is my favorite bonus but read my above post for my opinion as to how the optimal/tracking bonuses would be applied. In fact, let me go through the amarr ship lineup: Punisher: 5% armor resist, 7.5% tracking Executioner: 5% laser damage, 10% optimal Coercer: 10% tracking (already there), 10% optimal, (50% optimal) (-25% RoF) [both static] EDIT: Forgot the t2 frigs: Crusader: 5% laser damage, 10% optimal, 7.5% tracking, 5% sig radius (now THAT is a beamsader) Retribution: 5% armor resist, 7.5% tracking, 5% damage, 10% optimal (replaced AF resist bonus with normal resist bonus, AF resists will be built into the ship) Omen: 5% RoF, 10% Optimal (awesome) Maller: 5% resists, 7.5% tracking (pretty cool) Prophecy: 5% resist, 7.5% tracking Harbinger: 10% optimal, 5% damage (stepping on zealot's toes a bit...) Zealot: 10% Optimal, 5% RoF, 5% damage, 7.5% tracking (and it would get a fifth turret >_>) Absolution: 5% Resists, 5% Tracking, 5% RoF, 5% Damage (awesome) Armageddon: 10% Optimal, 5% RoF (scary) Apocalypse: 7.5% Tracking, 5% cap? (sketchy) Abaddon: 5% resist, 5% damage (but awesome with halved cap use) The one thing I may change about the above is that the armageddon would be way better with a tracking bonus, and the apoc would be better with an optimal bonus, but it could go either way (and a tracking-boosted geddon is pretty scary to be considered). __________________________________
Midnighter The Causality Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:17:00 - [6] Back in the day, it was unfeasable to survive in 0.0 for extended epriods of time unless you had lasers fitted. So lots of people fitted lasers on non Amarr ships and got good damage but crappy cap. The Amarr in comparison had great damage and better cap. But the environment changed and now with player owned starbases and POS hangers, survival is a lot easier, and almost nobody cross fits lasers onto non Amarr vessels anymore as ammo is less of a concern. So now that few non Amarr ships pack lasers it leaves the Amarr with a strange advantage that is only an advantage when you compare to non Amarr ships using lasers or non-bonused Amarr ships using lasers. If this goes away and Amarr get a straight cap recharge bonus, then it has to be tailored very carefully to have a comparable effect to the laser bonus. This would allow your average gank ship sees little change, but so there is the potential to fit non laser Amarr vessels and note a slightly improved tank, which is only made better by stacking cap recharge bonuses on it. Getting a straight cap amount bonus could be more interesting, as it could be tailored to function comparably to the capr eduction, but if you forgo lasers for neutralizers, you would see a markable difference in longevity. HP & Repair amount feel less than optimal as again you don't want to create a opening for unstoppable tanking machines. It's a challenging concept to replace and still maintain the same level of balance as before. I think approx 3% cap recharge/cap amount per level may be the best of a tough pick. ***
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:26:00 - [7] Originally by: Midnighter Good stuff Well, to be honest I don't have such a problem with other ships using lasers to good effect. Many other ships fit non-racial weapons (mostly projectiles, but I've seen a few amarr setups using hybrids) so if other people want to use lasers, more power to them. They'd still have to deal with the fitting issue and giving up their own weapon bonuses, and they wouldn't have the damage/RoF/tracking/optimal of lasers properly fitted to amarran ships. If you're concerned about other races' ships fitting lasers, you could always make the 50% cap use built in to Amarran ship hulls, but then other people might complain "omg amarr gets an extra bonus over all of us" which to be fair is a reasonable complaint. I'm not great at the math so I'm not sure what cap bonus would be good if it becomes more prevalent, but 5% recharge /level seems pretty good. __________________________________
Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:40:00 - [8] didn't read everything (just some), but I would say that toning down grid usage of the small and med top tier guns would be something. As it stands, the only frigate-sized ship that can slap medium beams is the retri, and even so, it requires some sacrifices. tbh in my opinion the only fitting restraint on amarr ships should be CPU. Amarr ships should have the biggest omfg grids on the game. --- planetary interaction idea!
Andreask14 Alterum - Infinitus - Fabula Dragons Of Oceans	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:44:00 - [9] The grid constraints were valid when lasers were the kings of damage at any optimal they could reach, but these days are long gone.
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:46:00 - [10] I think that making lasers powerful enough to justify their fitting is more interesting than reducing their fitting, but that's an idea too. I'd also be for a slight PG requirement on small and medium lasers, but nothing really big - maybe like 5% less PG use. __________________________________
Midnighter The Causality Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:49:00 - [11] Edited by: Midnighter on 15/01/2008 16:52:55 I wasn't worried others would use lasers, I was more pointing that a long time a go LOTS of people used lasers, so the Amarr bonus was usefull as ship vs ship they had better cap efficiency. Now almost nobody uses them outside Amarr ships, so the bonus gives no advantage over other players. But 10% per level is still better than nothing. And if you max Controlled Burst, you only use 25% of the listed cap which sounds really strong. Sadly I have to admit I don't use lasers except on frigates and I find little effect on my cap levels from this. Does a max skilled cruiser or battleship find it differently? Ultimately without the 10% per level bonus lasers would be nigh unusable, so replacing the bonus anywhere but in capacitor use will leave Amarr ships gimped. You could thoeretically also ask for cap use on lasers to go down, but where does that become acceptable and how does that effect the comparison to hybrids and projectiles? The balance concern is very interesting, and I sadly think things are fine as they are for now. This is mostly down to the number of Amarrian laser boats we fight day to day and the extremely tough fights they give us. If these ships became even more cap efficient I would live in fear. Hence why I would want any bonus to be leave ships comparable to how they operate now, but to allow a little more adaptability. ***
The Djego Minmatar FORTES FORTUNA ADIUVAT CORP. The Dawn of Darkness	Posted - 2008.01.15 17:42:00 - [12] Nice one I had simlar in Mind and posted it here: Amarr Change Idea. As a bit diffrent I took a little Hand on the Laser Base stats also. So the Range Bonus would be only 25% or 0% compared by now(25% reduction on general Laser Range). Aswell as the Tracking Bonus only would be 27.5%(10% reduction on Laser Tracking). So basicly the Ship makes the Laser track better with a shorter Range(and a bit puffed up Cap and Armor on this Ships) or hit further with a lower Tracking. Also some little other improvements(-10% Cap use so they get the same as Blasters) aswell as a slight Damage Boost at Puls and a slight Powergrid Reduction to beams. Not to mention the slightly better Damage distribution by switching 1-4 Points from EM to Thermal on the Crystalls. So basicly my Idea was to seperate close and long range ships with the Tracking/Optimal Boni and beafing up the surviability for the close Range Ships(not the long Range Ships) by a slight Cap and Armor Boost. Also I had the new Boni for Gedon and Apoc the other way around, because I would like the the Apoc as a Sniper and the Gedon as a Laser Ship with less Range(-25%) but better Tracking(+27%) since the Optimal diffrence will make no diffrence in short Range using AN Multis or Conflag and 40km Range with Scorch would be still very good. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Jonny JoJo 425 II In PVE? Surely hybrid users use Blaster in PvE.
Kruel Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.01.15 17:45:00 - [13] Originally by: Terianna Eri theoretical ship bonuses TBH I love these ideas and the cap "bonus" that most laserboats get needs to go. Though I'd give the Apoc an optimal bonus and the Geddon a tracking bonus rather than the other way around.
Beylir A'lar	Posted - 2008.01.15 17:59:00 - [14] I love this idea. Let's hope the Devs have something like this in the works.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:07:00 - [15] TBH, I was thinking cap amount or cap recharge as the replacement bonus. I could see tracking or optimal though. The Geddon with a ROF bonus would make me lol though. ;-) -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
Kaileen Starsong Amarr True Foundation Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:12:00 - [16] Edited by: Kaileen Starsong on 15/01/2008 18:13:18 I've seen quite a few of similar propositions. The problem with halving the cap use of lasers and replacing bonus is that you buff already good ships, some of them over the top imo. There're ships that could use a buff like prophecy, omen, maller, apoc, zealot(maybe) and such. Geddon, Abaddon, Harb and some others don't really need that much of love though. Imo some minor tweaks to lasers - i.e. reducing cap use a bit, as well as fitting reqs, narrowing the gap between lower and higher tiers(FMP<>HP, DHP<>MP and so on) - and working on the problematic ships would be better. As for these exact changes - yea, a proposed Maller/Omen is what could be a flyable ship, but look at Geddon - 67.5km optimal with MP/Scorch? Also, lessening EM:Therm ratio is BAD. That way everyone will fit therm hards, and you'll end up in a worse situation than now. At least EM is great for anti-nano and T2 gallente/caldari shooting. Therm would be utter crap after the change though. Quote: The Geddon with a ROF bonus would make me lol though. ;-) I sincerely hope you meant optimal, cos it had ROF bonus for years now
Skeiron	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:17:00 - [17] Tbh when I opened this thread I though "omg another amarr whine" but instead I'm pleasantly surprised that it actually has some good stuff in it The biggest problem with a change of this size will be balance of course. I can imagine the devs trying to pre-balance it (ie. before the change) but that will just be a horrible, horrible task and take ages. Better will be to just do this and afterwards see which ships will become imbalanced and nerf / boost as necessary. (Plus I'd like to see the rest of the races whine for a while about how overpowered Amarr is change of scenery is always appreciated) /signed ------------------------- No more alt-posts!!!
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:31:00 - [18] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 15/01/2008 18:31:29 Originally by: Kaileen Starsong I sincerely hope you meant optimal, cos it had ROF bonus for years now No, I meant damage... as in the Tempest/Hurricane's Dmg + ROF bonus. It seems that I should break out EFT while I'm forum whoring at work so I can verify absolutely everything before I post. -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:44:00 - [19] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 15/01/2008 18:31:29 Originally by: Kaileen Starsong I sincerely hope you meant optimal, cos it had ROF bonus for years now No, I meant damage... as in the Tempest/Hurricane's Dmg + ROF bonus. It seems that I should break out EFT while I'm forum whoring at work so I can verify absolutely everything before I post. -Liang Or do your job ;) _________________________________________________
Kaileen Starsong Amarr True Foundation Sex Panthers	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:48:00 - [20] Edited by: Kaileen Starsong on 15/01/2008 18:48:29 Originally by: Liang Nuren No, I meant damage... as in the Tempest/Hurricane's Dmg + ROF bonus. One can hope that devs aren't THAT ********[st00pid] to even consider this
Arana Tellen Gallente The Blackguard Wolves Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2008.01.15 18:54:00 - [21] The only change I support is grid reduction on some of the high caliber lasers. --------------------------------- Oh noes!
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.15 19:01:00 - [22] Originally by: madaluap Or do your job ;) There is always that! I was doing my job though, its why all my posts while I'm at work are short and to the point. Off to a meeting! -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2008.01.15 19:04:00 - [23] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: madaluap Or do your job ;) There is always that! I was doing my job though, its why all my posts while I'm at work are short and to the point. Off to a meeting! -Liang Youre probably logging on a alt to continue forumwhoring. :P _________________________________________________
Terianna Eri Amarr STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.01.15 19:05:00 - [24] Originally by: Midnighter Ultimately without the 10% per level bonus lasers would be nigh unusable, so replacing the bonus anywhere but in capacitor use will leave Amarr ships gimped. You could thoeretically also ask for cap use on lasers to go down, but where does that become acceptable and how does that effect the comparison to hybrids and projectiles? I think you may have missed one of the first lines in the first post, where I said that CCP scrapped the cap use bonus in general in lieu of an overall 50% reduction in capacitor. Even with controlled bursts and good skills, cap use on a full rack of lasers hurts pretty hard. Running lasers isn't the problem, but running anything alongside them is. Originally by: Kruel Originally by: Terianna Eri theoretical ship bonuses TBH I love these ideas and the cap "bonus" that most laserboats get needs to go. Though I'd give the Apoc an optimal bonus and the Geddon a tracking bonus rather than the other way around. I pointed this out in my third post I think - but for consistency I gave the DPS ship an optimal bonus and the tank ship a tracking bonus, for reasons listed above (I feel that really good DPS plus really good tracking is a lot more powerful than really good dps and pretty good range). The apoc would work better with optimal and the geddon with tracking of course but for the sake of consistency - and for the sake of not making every single amarr laserboat an absolute monster - I chose not to assign it that way. I certainly wouldn't complain if that's how they turned out though Liang: RoF / Damage bonused Armageddon? That would be the most brutal ship in the game. Kaileen: I agree, EM damage is fine, and we don't want to make thermal too overtanked. And yes, these changes would make the already good amarr ships really frightening, which is why I avoided further damage boosts. None of the proposed changes make amarr tank or shoot better from a numerical perspective, but they make them shoot longer. I don't think the proposed harb would be overpowered - just quite good. Those of you who have pledged your support - I have read your replies, just didn't want to clutter the thread because my replies would be redundant with those already in place, but thanks for your support (and /signed's ) __________________________________
jam6549 Our Leitmotif	Posted - 2008.01.15 19:20:00 - [25] ooo an amarrian dream thread! :dance:
Kruel Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.01.15 19:21:00 - [26] CCP hire this man. He can't be any worse than Zulupark and at least his ideas sound practical.
TigerWoman	Posted - 2008.01.15 20:06:00 - [27] optimal bonus on any amarr bs would be overpowered.
Liang Nuren The Avalon Foundation Knights Of Syndicate	Posted - 2008.01.15 20:09:00 - [28] Originally by: TigerWoman optimal bonus on any amarr bs would be overpowered. Hmm, why? -Liang -- Originally by: "QProQ" When they said to put 'stabs on your 'cane, they meant GYROSTABS!
Kadavreski	Posted - 2008.01.15 20:13:00 - [29] Terianna: i have nothing to add to this thread as i'm far to new to really know anything, but your sig is the best i've seen, you utter legend
Talani Fynolds Die dunkle Bruderschaft	Posted - 2008.01.15 20:13:00 - [30] I don't think you want an amarr BS with an optimal bonus. With scorch and some tracking mods you would get about 100km range. That doesn't feel right. Maybe amarr could make use of an effecive module, that reduces cap use of weapons. Effective means, that one is slightly worse than a typical ship bonus at level 5 and two are clearly better than that ship bonus. The rigs that exist now don't really make a difference.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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