| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
NichoTBE
The JORG Corporation
Terra Incognita.
   |
Posted - 2008.02.06 11:50:00 -
[181]
wish they'd taken the high slot away instead of the low. I though the deimos was a decent ship as it was. Had cap problems at times but i used that extra high for a nos and it improved greatly. Take away its extra high and give it a 5,4,6 setup.
|
Djerin
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 13:22:00 -
[182]
 Originally by: Hunter Vonnegut
HEY CCP!
IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT!!!
/signed
----
Sarmaul's crosstrainorgtfo |
LordInvisible
Gallente
FinFleet
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 15:47:00 -
[183]
signed
and
signed..
deimos got its share of boost, now DONT "boost" it anymore in anyway..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Heelay Ashrum
Caldari
Santhe Sienar Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 16:30:00 -
[184]
Edited by: Heelay Ashrum on 06/02/2008 16:32:32
Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: Heelay Ashrum
So the cost of a 4th medium is to loose 1 ( of the 6 ) low slots?
What's all this whine? Do you realy dont understand what this is u bust and not a nerf?!?
a cap injector is a huge bust (powercore permitting), and for those that realy say that they dont need it,.. well put a damp/ecs burst/what the hell u will . There is a lot of nasty things u can do with a med slot.
indeed, the deimos will be busted by this change
jokes aside, have you ever flown one?
I used it a lot around 2-3 years ago ( jsut after HAC release), but not recently ( im aware of the changes since then), but never liked it so much so i switched to other gallente ships ( ishtar/bs's). I think i simply never liked the fliing style ( pure gank & paper-thin ship). Maybe i just consider it a worthles ship since a brutix can make the same job with much less isk and even more survivability.
Tested it again after the changes made recently ( -1 turret & lesser mass) on test server, but still dont fit my taste. the changes make this ship more brutix stile, but personally i welcome this change. ( even an ecm burst that break others lock its useful as 4th slot)
Sincerelly i havent triied the ship on test server, but if it have powercore for a injector and, a good plate + rep it will last much more doing combat. All people already started imemdiatly to whine, but they have really tested if those changes sucks or they are just too lazy to test and find new setup?
it's obvious that the ship need a powercore change, but.. "what the hell!!!" .. give them the time to make those changes!!
|
Bronson Hughes
Knights of the Wild
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 16:34:00 -
[185]
Hey, think of it this way: now you can use the Deimos for missions or as a passive shield-tanked nano-rail boat. Really, I think those roles are far better suited to the Deimos than a close-range blaster boat.
[/sarcasm]
Risk <--> Reward.
Has CCP forgotten that idea completely? It's possibly the riskiest HAC to fly when gank fit but it can provide the most rewards in terms of DPS. It's balanced just fine. If you so much as look at it the wrong way, let alone web it, nos it, neut it, etc., it's dead, but if you leave it alone it will wipe the floor with you faster than you can say, 'Would you like that floor cleaned with Pinesol or Murphy's'?
If these changes go live, any gank-oriented Deimos pilot may as well recycle their ships and fly Brutixes: you'll get similar performance, a better tank, and they'll be a hell of a lot cheaper to lose.
So yeah, /signed.
--------------------
"I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne |
kveldulfson
LFC
FreeFall Securities
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 17:00:00 -
[186]
This change on sisi is a travesty, if it getes onto Tq then I see a lot of deimos being scrapped as the will be useless.
I have to agree that pointless ship tweaking is a waste of time when there are more important things that need fixing.
But if CCP need to twaek ships at least let someone with a brain do it 
|
Teyrala
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 17:56:00 -
[187]
/signed
TBH, I am not a pvper, but I understand why they are annoyed at this nerf - the ishtar is for missions, the deimos is for pvp.
|
Havok Pierce
Gallente
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 20:37:00 -
[188]
If it's not broken... do not make a mistaken attempt to repair it.
Better words: Good design demands good compromise. I assert that the previous setup was a good compromise (speaking as a pilot). Not fast, but not particularly slow either: a mix of gank and tank.
In my honest opinion, the design for the Deimos has been the quintessential blastboat: Survive long enough to get in range and then tear the enemy a new orifice. Requiring the ship to carry cap booster charges (all 8 of them with cap 800s) is a unnecessary hobble on the design and does not quantify "good compromise", as the ship will not be sustainable for any string of combats larger than two or three (thereby reducing operational range). It is not a good compromise. In addition, the ship MUST trade the following to get a fit (all calculations done with STOCK Antimatter Charge M assuming 0% resistances, compare the #s against your ship setups to get a proper blow-for-blow tank survey):
Approximately 16% damage overall in terms of DPS (375/445), with a volley reduction of 21% (1039/1406) at a range penalty of 0.4+1.7 (20% penalty).
Increased tank to roughly 235 DPS (after resistances, hybrid damage), up from 189.
Extra midslot will nominally go towards injector (although I can see uses for some manner of Ewar) if active-tank. Otherwise you will cap out in just under two minutes with the repairer on and no MWD, half that with both active.
One heavy neutralizer will still ruin your day.
That last highslot is still useless (unless elecron blasters are fit, but that completelely destroys the per-volley damage (around half) and kicks the DPS down to 351 kin/therm as well as cutting the range another 20%).
With the turret disruption changes, this ship relies on its falloff.
Even though I can see some bright spots with the changes, I still cannot agree that the ship was broken to begin with. I implore CCP to make some more revisions and put them on Singularity to get tested more thoroughly than they can do internally.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
There's a Community petition category??
|
ShepherdBook
|
Posted - 2008.02.06 22:56:00 -
[189]
Edited by: ShepherdBook on 06/02/2008 22:57:33
/signed
Deimos is my favorite ship, I fly it often. This change is ridiculous. Deimos is a truly unique ship atm with a specific role, very well balanced. The change proposes that it'd be a typical "hey I'm Gallante and I can beat you" ship.
|
Angelina Silver
|
Posted - 2008.02.07 12:02:00 -
[190]
Deimos doesn't really have the grid to support a cap injector anyway.
As it stands it is one of the better ships in the game and one of the more entertaining ones to fly.
WTF do you guys do at CCP? Sit back and say hey, lets take the funnest ship in the game and **** it all up just for ****s and giggles?
CCP - You can't even fix broken things without breaking something else. So FFS stay the hell away from things that arn't even broke to begin with.
|
|
|
Aenemah
|
Posted - 2008.02.08 10:51:00 -
[191]
Please keep Deimos flyable - means don't think about turning these changes in, thanks from gallente and others :)
|
JustAddWatah
Convergent
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 04:30:00 -
[192]
Stop picking on the deimos!!
/signed
|
NeoTheo
Caldari
Dark Materials
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 12:02:00 -
[193]
I am not even a demo pilot, but ANYONE can see this is total madness, hell mess with the ishtar if you have to, but why mess with the demo, its NOT BROKEN.
|
ChalSto
Divine Retribution
Divine 0rder
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 13:48:00 -
[194]
ok ok.....
Dear responsible Dev (dont worry....we¦ll find
out who u are...),
YOU realy want to "fix" the Deimos? (I say "you", becouse
noone else "want" to fix it, maybe becouse its fine as it
is?).
It should compare with the other HACs? (I want a Dev reply,
were he can explain me, how a Deimos should compare with
a Vagabound (hit/run role), a Sacrilege (nano role ),
Munnin (sniper role), or a Zealot (tank))
Sooooo......a Deimos should compare with all of these Hacs.......lemme see:
Then we need 100 m/s more speed (becouse it should compare with Vaga), 2k more armor (compares with Amarr HACs), 100% more weapon optimal range and falloff (yes yes.....we want to sniper with it......who needs a Munnin.....) and not
to forget an amarr....er.....sry....armor-repping bonus.
[sarcasm off/]
Dear community,
plz let us spend some Isk together for this Dev
to buy him a GTC,
so he might actually can play the game to give
him a small idea how to play EvE
Evil will allways triumph, becouse Good is dumb
|
Asteryos
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 22:29:00 -
[195]
/signed
No words can describe what i think of ZuluParks epic idea of balancing a ship...
|
Akilum
Gallente
Gr0und Zer0
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 22:31:00 -
[196]
/signed
IF IT'S NOT BROKEN, DON'T FIX IT! |
TKane
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 00:26:00 -
[197]
Changes:
No more MWD cap penalty removal.
Removing low slot for mid slot.
Adding 7.5% per HAC level of rep amount bonus.
Removing the MWD capacitor penalty reduction and adding 250en to the capacitor results in a 1523en capacitor. This ship normally starves for capacitor, giving it the extra mid slot for a cap booster will help this immensely, itĘs just the sacrificing of the low slot to get there that troubles me. This nerfs the damage output from 1475/volley & 724 dps to 1396/volley & 658 dps (T2 Ions, assuming max skills). In a world where your ship has to operate in web range, dps is highly important as you have to break your opponents tank before he breaks yours, as you are webbed and warp scrambled as well.
Having the cap booster in there gives makes that 6th high slot completely useless, unless you use rigs. Sacrificing this slot makes much more sense to gain the mid. The ship then sustains itĘs firepower and simply ads staying power ability with a cap booster fitted.
The addition of the rep bonus is nice, I do like that idea. I just wonder how useful it will be in a ship that when it comes under fire, rarely lasts long enough to get even 2 rep cycles in due to it's thin armor. Will have to test some more to see.
|
Spenz
Gallente
Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 03:27:00 -
[198]
IMO if they really must put a repair bonus on one of the HAC's, put it on the Ishtar (remove the hybrid bonus). Maybe that will give ishtar pilots an incentive to stop nano-fitting them (since apparently that is the only way they can survive according to the pilots).
Leave the deimos alone or 5/4/6 it. A repair bonus would be so useless on that thing. Even worse, due to the loss of a low slot, it only makes me believe that they wanted to remove a low slot in the first place, but added the rep bonus as an after-thought because they realized that it would die even faster than before.
A bonus that is simply there to let the ship function is NOT a bonus.
If I had an Alt I would probably post with it... |
TajelejaT
Gallente
Lithuanians
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 12:11:00 -
[199]
Edited by: TajelejaT on 13/02/2008 12:15:41
Best what I could fitt in Deimos (SiSi):
High: 5 x Ions T2, Small Neutralaiser T2;
Med: 10MN mwT2, Medium Elektr.. Booser (800), Scramble T2, Balmer Tracking Disruptor/web;
Low: Med Rep T2, 2x Energized Adaptive T2, Expl. Hardener T2, Damage Control T2;
Rig; Anti-Em, Anti-EXp.
Drones 5xhammer's
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0802/Deimos_sisi.png
Pls CCP i would like to see Deimos fitt, why u made 6*4*5 ? 
P.C. Em rezist just 50, now when ammar is boosted it's realy harder to tank. Run if u'l se minmatar with emp :)
|
rafaman
Unsafe Flying Ops
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 15:14:00 -
[200]
Edited by: rafaman on 13/02/2008 15:16:49
I strongly believe that CCP should either leave deimos as it is or remove the 6th useless high slot and add the middle one. It would be something like 5-4-6 .
Deimos is a combat ship that has a very specific role. Go in fast... do a lot of dps... kill.. leave or die. Thats it. Thats why its a great ship and thats why I love to fly with it.
I usually fit 5 ions, 1 mwd, 1 cap booster or a web, 1 warp disruptor and on lows a rep, a dcu, resistances and a mag stab. My setup allows me to go over 1600ms and I usually have someone else on the gang that can use a web. IOn that case I can fit a cap booster. The reasoning behing adding one more med slot is to fit a cap booster as I have read. Why?!? Whats the point?
Right now I can already fly deimos with MWD bonus and a cap booster. If the MWD bonus and the low slot is removed then Deimos will have a completly diffrent role. It will be a ship that will rely on tank but with reduced firepower... Whats the point of using a ship like Deimos then?
The only way I could accept a change on the med slots and MWD bonus is if CCP changes the setup to 5-4-6 and not 6-4-5. That way at least I will still be able to fit a mag stab and have the same damage dealing. The drawback would be a much more cap boosters dependent ship but at least it would hold the tank a bit more. But hey... guess what... the cargo space on Deimos only allows you to take at most 8 charges (800). That change would make sense if the ship had more cargo space. It doesnt. Its a cruiser sized ship.
Rep bonus on a BC, Command Shp or BS is one thing. Rep Bonus on a small ship like Deimos is useless IMO. Deimos is a feared ship not because of its base reistances but because of it damage capability.
If this change goes through we may as well throw to the trash can the 30 days or more that takes to train HAC at level 5.
And please stop nerfing gallente. I know this seems like winning of some but think a bit on this.
You guys nerfed gallente CPU with the EAN t2 cpu req change. Nerfed Drones Shield regeneration reducing a lot the drone durability in combat, one of the primary weapons for gallente (why the hell did I spent one month training drone intarfacing level 5?? I cant destroy a launcher on a Caldari ship can I?? But anyone can destroy all of my drones with a smartbomb. Great.). Then further nerfed Drones with ridiculous bandwith in some ships, like Myrmidon (both drones nerf basically almost killed the ship). Now it seems that you will further nerf gallente changing a ship that does not need a nerf (it is a nerf as you can read from all the feedback here. there no other way to look at it.) plus looks like we have a new nerf on the way... with the EM change on armor.
WTH is going on with you ppl? Did you wake up one day and said... "lets see how far we can go with a race before we start losing customers??"
EVE is a game and I pay to play. I would like to be able to continue to enjoy the game... but spending weeks or months training for a certain ship and drones to make full use of its capabilities only to see it changed in such a drastic way is not, in my opinion, compatible with a good gaming experience. And its all about that isnt it? Keeping the player base interested and wanting to spend moer time in game.
Sure we can all adapt and overcome. But why do I need to do that? Why cant I adapt to fly other ships but continue to fly the ones I trained for with the same specs (or better) that made me want to spend so much time training to fly them in the first place?
Its not only about this particular change. Its about all the changes made during the last months and the ones comming in our way.
|
|
|
Spenz
Gallente
Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 17:42:00 -
[201]
Edited by: Spenz on 13/02/2008 17:43:15
Originally by: rafaman
Edited by: rafaman on 13/02/2008 15:16:49
stuff
You forgot the ishkur, lachesis, arazu, and eos, but I digress. Yeah it is kind of suspect but I won't worry about it (for fear of being called a whiner by the biggest whiners in eve: Caldari/Amarr).
I just don't want these deimos changes to go through. They are so unbelievably ill-thought it boggles my mind how this could even get past in-house testing let alone get on sisi, for once something actually makes it on Sisi, there is an infinitely higher chance that it will be put on Tranq. than if it was never introduced at all. Anyone else remember what ultra-unpopular idea made it into tranq. after it was stealth-introduced on Sisi?
*cough*150m3T1modules*cough*
If I had an Alt I would probably post with it... |
rafaman
Unsafe Flying Ops
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 18:24:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Spenz
You forgot the ishkur, lachesis, arazu, and eos, but I digress. Yeah it is kind of suspect but I won't worry about it (for fear of being called a whiner by the biggest whiners in eve: Caldari/Amarr).
Dont remind me of EOS. I feel depressed just to think about it. EOS was a great ship I would train for next if it wasnt for the MEGA NERF. Sure it needed some balancing with others but I would have prefered that the other command ships where boosted to level them with EOS. At least we would still had a ship that we could actually justify the investment.
I may consider Astarte now... but the way things are going, I bet it will be nerfed soon. And by that I mean targeted specifically by the anti-Gallente movement at CCP. Because if we all see things as they are, gallente have been nerfed across the board.
Wanna bet that next they will nerf ECM and Damp drones? I give you 1 month tops.
If I was to join EVE now and I was reading the forums, most probably I would not go for Gallente.
Cheers
|
DigitalCommunist
Obsidian Core
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 18:54:00 -
[203]
After testing it on SISI, I can say..
1. I love the rep bonus and hope they keep it even if the MWD bonus doesn't get compensated by extra base cap.
2. Cap rigs are no longer optional but a must have, and only adds to the cost of the ship. It also limits me from using armor or speed rigs. Overall, its ironic that my Deimos has more cap concerns after obtaining a slot for cap injector.
3. Fitting the injector isn't hard, if you forget about using neutrons or that 6th utility slot. Essentially, CCP undid the last powergrid boost where I was able to upgrade from small nosferatu/neut to a medium one. I'm not gonna cry over it now that nosferatu are even less useful than before - and I am completely used to the fact that trying to fit neutrons on anything is a wild joke.
My recommendation for anyone that is listening at CCP HQ, is to remove the 6th utility slot instead of a low slot. Make the ship 5/4/6 instead of 6/4/5. A good incentive for doing so, is that if the new Zealot proves too much competition you may end up with players clamoring for a 6th turret :p
If you wanted to throw blaster pilots a bone that makes the ship compete with the new Zealot without increasing damage further, you can compensate the loss of MWD bonus with a slight boost to base cap.
1500 cap total after skills is not just not funny. If it stays like that, fitting an injector will be mandatory. Again, I would not cry over it but I dislike using one single boring, and highly predictable setup.
If I'm going to slam into someone at point blank range, I should have more control over the style of tanking my ship has - whether its plated, active, or injector driven. Being versatile in combat style is not something the Deimos is, but at least you can allow people the choice to approach it in different ways.
The entire reason people love the Deimos (those that do) is because you can get damage and tanking that is superior to Gallente blaster frigates, but without resorting to the injector-powered nonsense of Gallente BC/CS/BS. I like injectors for making bigger blaster ships perform their function, but if I have to start using them on small ships with fewer slots I will go balls deep in crazy. I want to be free to run around without docking up to restock after every fight, or risk going into fights gimped on cap. It would limit me to operating within a few jumps of my base, which completely defeats the mobility of HACs.
So to reiterate;
5 high
4 med
6 low
Armor rep bonus instead of MWD bonus + slight increase to base cap.
Simple enough, really. I don't believe in God, but I'm going to pray for the Deimos. And for anyone that screws it up..
_______________________________
http://epicwords.net/ |
Ripcha Headov
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 19:17:00 -
[204]
Well said digital, 5 lows on a cruiser that is meant to tank well is not enough, even with an armour rep bonus. the Deimos should have 6 lows and NEEDS 6 lows. it does not need 6 highs and never did. please ccp reconsider your slot alterations, i think everybody that flys the deimos can confirm to you that the 6th high is rarely if ever used, and every single last 1 of the lows is always used.
Personally i don;t see a problem with how its at the moment on TQ.
With all the previous ship and mod nerfs ccp has put in place even if i havn;t liked them because they have effected me negatively i HAVE however seen the point of them. This however i really cannot see the point of. its just needlessly messing with an otherwise very well balanced ship.
|
Dirtee Girl
Omega Enterprises
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 19:26:00 -
[205]
kind of reminds me of the classic cyclone with the 4 midslot shield tank 
looking at the eagle+zealot changes was kinda puzzling but fine ok whatev.
but seriously we seem to be drifting towards a more inter-dependant form of pvp where ships are forced to rely on each other to survive in combat the new deimos looks like it's going to need a "tag along" guardian to work .
is this what ccp is aiming for where no ship can survive on it's own and must be supported by logistics during combat ? C/D
*
* |
Theron Gyrow
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 19:40:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Spenz
Originally by: rafaman
stuff
You forgot the ishkur, lachesis, arazu, and eos, but I digress. Yeah it is kind of suspect but I won't worry about it (for fear of being called a whiner by the biggest whiners in eve: Caldari/Amarr).
He also forgot that the torp boost pretty much obsoleted the Blasterthron. And I understand why some Caldari/Amarr players react the way they do - apparently whining long enough hard enough really works and they want to preserve the current status quo.
Originally by: Spenz
I just don't want these deimos changes to go through. They are so unbelievably ill-thought it boggles my mind how this could even get past in-house testing let alone get on sisi
This. There is no need to completely change the function of the ship on basis of some 1-vs-1 fights. 1-vs-1. God.
--
Gradient forum |
TasMan HUN
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 20:12:00 -
[207]
Originally by: Hunter Vonnegut
HEY CCP!
IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT!!!
/signed
|
XLR Eight
Viziam
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 21:02:00 -
[208]
Still not everyone trains for Caldary ships (only about 80% of the pilots) so yeah, nerf this bird (but call it balancing ofc).
|
nemississ
eXceed Inc.
eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 21:23:00 -
[209]
Well From what i heared This little gift (Nerf IMO) Is from our great friend zulupark same guy who decided that the dictors were broken and decided to fix those aswell. The deimos as is works FINE its not broken and we dont want it "fixed". leave the damn ship alone if you want to add a mid swap it for that highslot but leave its bonuses and lows as is The thing is an armor tanker not a shield tanker it NEEDS lots of low slots not less.
How do you expect me to fit a full rack of neutrons plus reps plus hardners run it all at once plus my mwd and tackle gear because face it this thing NEEDS an mwd to get into weapons range.
All i can say is if it aint broken dont fix it, go work on fixing real broken ships like AF's dont add new Af's FIX THE ONES YOU HAVE give them a real combat role.
Now this thread needs a seriouse Dev reponse this is clearly somthing that isint needed and should not be bothered with tho props for boosting amarr they have needed it for a long time.
|
ChalSto
Divine Retribution
Divine 0rder
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 22:46:00 -
[210]
/bump
PS 1: 5/4/6
PS 2: Fire zulupark, give us tux back
Evil will allways triumph, becouse Good is dumb
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |