Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 22 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Amaldor Themodius
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 05:43:00 -
[541]
Hey i dont have a problem with boosting Ammar.. do it no problems here..I do have a problem with the game being reduced to a straight shoot em up.. and of making all ships the same.. and these changes are a step in that direction.. ships shouldnt need to have identical fighting characteristics... the game should have heavy tankers and heavy gankers, and all races shouldnt be equal in all ship classes.. the balance should be delivered on a whole after consideration of all vessels.. Likewise the current trend to direct all combat to a stand and shoot em up is a regression of strategy and tactical ability.. There need to be more options to kill each other / fight than simply tank and gank.. Having played the game for a couple of years now i have found most eve players are not looking for a straight forward combat experience (Thats what WOW is 4) rather we delight in a dynamic, rich and vibrant tactical game flow where there are endless pathways to victory. Nerfing ew options like the nos, damp, ecm, bandwidth, and continually modifying ships to a generic model of "fairness" are all steps toward dumbing the gaming experience down..
Come on CCP put the thinking caps on.. sack Fendahl (Guy hasnt had a good idea yet).. and get the show back on the road by being creative and pushing the boundaries of the game to new frontiers.
|
Igetshotalot
THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 06:37:00 -
[542]
Edited by: Igetshotalot on 11/02/2008 06:39:09 I really really cant see how removing deimos a lowslot does help its tank.. Also i dont see why to give it a bonus which does almost never get utilized. Imho completely unecessary change for the worse. I like the deimos just as it is -.-
well i still have the completely ridiculusely oerpowered nano ishtar:)
|
Aphotic Raven
Gallente E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 08:57:00 -
[543]
Originally by: Igetshotalot Edited by: Igetshotalot on 11/02/2008 06:39:09 I really really cant see how removing deimos a lowslot does help its tank.. Also i dont see why to give it a bonus which does almost never get utilized. Imho completely unecessary change for the worse. I like the deimos just as it is -.-
well i still have the completely ridiculusely oerpowered nano ishtar:)
Shutup before they decide to "boost" the ishtar.
I think they'll probably nerf drone boats again in an attempt to cut down on lag while leaving carriers as they are because of the crying that any change to carriers generates.
Save the deimos.
|
Lilynn
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 11:08:00 -
[544]
Some kind of offtopic but I think CCP should also take a look at Covetor (yes this game isn't only pewpew). I don't think that it is good balanced that you have to learn Astrogelogy V AND Mining Barge V to fly a Covetor and than you can change to Hulk within only 4 days by learning Exhumers III. I think it would be nice if Covetor would only need Astro 5 and Barge 4, from a Retriever this would be around 16-20 days and you will still need another 28 days to learn Barge 5 and Exhumers 3 to fly a Hulk. I think that way it would be more balanced. |
SkyCrane
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 11:21:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Takeshi Yamato
Quote: Now tell me how that is balanced?
Nobody uses tracking comps or enhancers on pulse ships.
How do I change my nick to "Nobody"? I really think i should, seeing as I do use both tracking computers and enhancers when I use pulse.
Seriously though.. Do you (CCP) plan on changing the Navy Apoc too? I've quickly scanned through the thread without seeing any answers.. You really can't change the Apoc without caring a little for the Navy Apoc too, can you? ------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Please feel free to ignore typoes... I suck at typing... :) |
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 14:15:00 -
[546]
Edited by: Wu Jiun on 11/02/2008 14:16:33
Originally by: Ravoc ECM got nerfed in general strength for the sake of balance. Sensor Dampening got nerfed in general strength for the sake of balance. Now it's time to nerf Tracking Disruption in general strength too.
Td's were nerfed with script introduction in the same way as damps. So get your facts straight before you come here crying.
Edit: Up to now pulses were the only close range weapons that suffered from range reduction in any noticeable way. That wasn't a balance problem now was it? But hey if poor minnies get ewared we need a nerf asap.
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 14:18:00 -
[547]
Originally by: SkyCrane How do I change my nick to "Nobody"? I really think i should, seeing as I do use both tracking computers and enhancers when I use pulse.
In Pvp? Maybe nobody isn't that good of a choice. How about "i can't fit a pulse boat"?
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 14:58:00 -
[548]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 11/02/2008 14:58:05
Originally by: Wu Jiun
But hey if poor minnies get ewared we need a nerf asap.
QFT. You see amarr has been sub par for so long that amarr players have had to be better strategic, fitting and skill-wise to be competative. Now when they fix our ships we will steamroll the 1 button pushing noobs -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Del Narveux
Dukes of Hazard
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 15:21:00 -
[549]
Wow. The best thing to happen to my personal fleet in 3 years and I dont even notice for a week. Anyway, heres my thoughts on the fixes
Omen: FINALLY. Its DPS will be on par with caracal, vexor, etc. Heck, it might actually become a viable combat ship at this rate.
Zealot: See Omen, hella good changes make it competitive with other HACS. But, and I may be misreading this, why the comparison with 'other close range HAC' like Deimos and Sac? I always thought of zealot as something of a beamsniper, or at least a medium-range pulse boat.
Apoc: HALLEUJAH!!! It will be useful again, yay! And so will Tachs, for possibly the first time since Castor-era heatsink stacking. But maybe cut the cap boost down to 20%, after all its keeping the cap-use reduction and all this is going to do is really highlight the problems with this line of bonus.
Deimos: Seems pretty godlike already, not really sure why the change. And the extra midslot just means itll fit more scramblers. But whatever.
Moa/Eagle: YESSS!!! Every dog has its day, as with zealot maybe itll get put back in the running as an option for a fleet ship. Will the number of missile points be getting changed? Grid shouldnt be a problem since these ships are designed to use a PDU or two in the lows.
Ferox: Good change, still wont be DPS demigod like brutix but its sniper ability might make it at the very least a viable alternative to drake. And, as has been said, Vulture should get the 6th turret too to keep things in line with ferox and other CS.
Craptor: Why the grid reduction? 125mm will be bad enough to fit along with the requisite MWD, and a faction fitted crow can already do the 30km thing much better so I dont really see the point.
All in all, good changes, pretty common sense and hopefully it will make combat a bit more interesting than gallente drone*****vs minmatar nanolame. _________________ [IMAGE REMOVED] -- aka Cpt Bogus -- Is that my torped sig cloaking your base?
|
Ravoc
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 20:26:00 -
[550]
Originally by: Wu Jiun Td's were nerfed with script introduction in the same way as damps. So get your facts straight before you come here crying.
Edit: Up to now pulses were the only close range weapons that suffered from range reduction in any noticeable way. That wasn't a balance problem now was it? But hey if poor minnies get ewared we need a nerf asap.
Not enough as you only need one effect (which is at full strength with the script), unlike the sensor boosters/dampeners.
Lasers do pretty much full damage over their whole range due to high optimal. Reducing that optimal will limit your target area but it will STILL allow you to do FULL damage at that shortened range. But both Blasters & ACs already LOSE damage after a few km due to lower optimals and higher falloffs. Blasters lose it more quickly then ACs, but ACs do least damage overall. Reducing that falloff will completely CRIPPLE both!
To put it yet again very simple for you all: optimal > falloff
Oh, and I fly mainly Gallente.
Originally by: Del Narveux All in all, good changes, pretty common sense and hopefully it will make combat a bit more interesting than gallente drone*****vs minmatar nanolame.
Expect to see more drones, missiles & nano coming...
|
|
Potes
Amarr Dkiller Delta Force Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 20:47:00 -
[551]
not sure if its already been mentioned... but will the changes in the apoc follow on to the paladin.. as the paladin could seriously do with the cap boost that the apoc is gettin! any ideas on this one chaps?
potes
|
Potes
Amarr Dkiller Delta Force Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 20:47:00 -
[552]
not sure if its already been mentioned... but will the changes in the apoc follow on to the paladin.. as the paladin could seriously do with the cap boost that the apoc is gettin! any ideas on this one chaps?
potes
|
Lobster Man
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 20:50:00 -
[553]
Well if you want to see what people think of the deimos changes...the prices in the forge are already coming down, and I imagine that they will go way down once the changes take effect.
|
Gaun Arel
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 21:09:00 -
[554]
Was wondering about the Paladin as well. Can't say I think it really needs the optimal bonus, and I speak here as a pilot of the said ship. A change like that would take the paladin past the Kronos, methink
The Omen change: very nice. I am happy to see that it becomes an alternative to the Maller and Arbi of sorts.
The Apoc change: most needed change. The PG boost will help heaps for the pilots I know that flies it.
The rest I've got no real interest or opinion of...
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.11 21:50:00 -
[555]
Originally by: Lobster Man Well if you want to see what people think of the deimos changes...the prices in the forge are already coming down, and I imagine that they will go way down once the changes take effect.
Thats good isnt it? We have cool ships like pilgrim and curse going for around 50mill too -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Loba Sorrateira
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 17:50:00 -
[556]
The falloff change to TDs needs to be carefully balanced. I would suggest to start with a much lesser penalty for falloff range compared to the optimal range. As it has been mentioned before, falloff is NOT free extra range for blasters and ACs. Every time you start using the falloff range on those, you're giving up DPS. At one falloff distance, you're already down to HALF the DPS. Also, if you cut optimal and falloff at the same time, you force these pilots to stay so close to the target that, besides having to operate under the effects of ALL conceivable negative effect modules(web, scramblers, NOS and Neuts, even smartbombs), you now also run the constant risk of getting to 0 distance and NOT HITTING AT ALL.(please CCP, while you're at it, fix that so 0 distance means automatic hit, instead of automatic miss...)
On the Deimos changes, it changes the role of the ship. It goes from glass canon to a half-assed tank with guns that won't be able to hit/damage ****. The Phobos will be a better compromise at the same job... Leave the Deimos as it is. If it needs more tank, give it more PG so that people can fit bigger plates or a second rep.(yes, on the current role, a Deimos fight does not last long enough for ANY kind of active repair to be worth the trouble) I want also to mention that the current argument for these changes specifies a setup for the ship. It is true that the MWD bonus also does that(but it is almost a given since it will use blasters...), but the changes proposed will force the pilot to use two reppers and a cap booster. I tought CCP wanted pilots to figure out their own setups... If that is not the case, make the deimos have these modules as default...(I think you get what I mean...)
I like the Amarr changes, although I am worried the Zealot might be getting too many bonuses at the same time...
Loba
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 17:58:00 -
[557]
Originally by: Loba Sorrateira
The falloff change to TDs needs to be carefully balanced. I would suggest to start with a much lesser penalty for falloff range compared to the optimal range
You forgetting that total range is opti+2xfall off?
Originally by: Loba Sorrateira
Every time you start using the falloff range on those, you're giving up DPS
Thats why AC dps is balanced IN FALL-OFF. If ACs would have largely optimal and less fall off ccp would REDUCE their dps. Why? Because its a balance issue to have ACs work just as well as other weaponry when they have high tracking, all damage types and NO CAP USE. Thats why you cant whine about "loss of dps" in fall off. Its intended AND CALCULATED.
Originally by: Loba Sorrateira
I like the Amarr changes, although I am worried the Zealot might be getting too many bonuses at the same time...
Zealot should be feared in mid range and should have a gank that is not laughed at. Why? Because its the ONLY thing it can do. It doesnt have drones so it cant defend itself agaisnt fast tacklers and it cant fit gank+any reasonable tank. It also only has 3 mids. Its fine. Its balanced, finally. People are just used to having their allround op ships that can be fit to outperform any amarr ship, well this is one ship they wont outperform in its niche. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 18:26:00 -
[558]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Loba Sorrateira
I like the Amarr changes, although I am worried the Zealot might be getting too many bonuses at the same time...
Zealot should be feared in mid range and should have a gank that is not laughed at. Why? Because its the ONLY thing it can do. It doesnt have drones so it cant defend itself agaisnt fast tacklers and it cant fit gank+any reasonable tank. It also only has 3 mids. Its fine. Its balanced, finally. People are just used to having their allround op ships that can be fit to outperform any amarr ship, well this is one ship they wont outperform in its niche.
and that is why I, as a deimos pilot, don't mind the new zealot. hell I'll be amarr cruiser 5 in half hour, and I can't wait for the changes to go live so that I fit it like a deimos (HPL's, mwd, scram, web, 3 HS and passive buffer tank... probably a CPR to make them laz0rz run a bit better).
however, the web might be swapped for another thing upon testing.
the deimos changes however are another thing. but that issue has been debated more than many. ---
planetary interaction idea! |
Ravoc
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 18:44:00 -
[559]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer You forgetting that total range is opti+2xfall off?
ROFL, do you even fly anything else than laserboats?
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Thats why AC dps is balanced IN FALL-OFF. If ACs would have largely optimal and less fall off ccp would REDUCE their dps. Why? Because its a balance issue to have ACs work just as well as other weaponry when they have high tracking, all damage types and NO CAP USE. Thats why you cant whine about "loss of dps" in fall off. Its intended AND CALCULATED.
1. Laser tracking stopped being an issue a long time ago when it received a global 25% tracking boost. 2. Minmatar boats already have lowest cap (even less with the default mwd) while amarr have highest and further cap bonuses. But that's off topic. 3. Give me 1 example of an AC battleship doing more damage than a pulse battleship, at whatever range you want. |
Merdaneth
Amarr PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 19:07:00 -
[560]
Edited by: Merdaneth on 12/02/2008 19:07:24 Omen The additional turret is a excellent idea. Fittings don't need to be changed for me. I like choices, and with lots fitting room you are actually reducing the fitting choices you can make, since you can always can fit an 'optimal' fit. Now you have to choose between all-gank, no tank, tank but no gank or some combination thereof. If anything, I would like other race's ships reduced in fitting room rather than have the Omen buffed.
Zealot Good change as well. Zealot had plenty fitting room before, it will become a bit tighter now. This will increase variety in setups.
Apocalypse I'm happy that it finally has some distinguishing and unique characterstics in comparison to the Geddon and Abaddon. I hope you will change the Navy Apoc as well, I would find it odd if my Navy Apoc would have less grid and cap than its base version (yes, I only have Amarr battleship IV). Deimos No idea why you wanted to change this. Saw the ship plenty, was effective without being overpowered and it users seemed happy with its performance. The thing that shocked my the most is that you seem to think that a Capacitor Booster is essential if you want to repair actively. As far as I'm concerned the number of *essential* mid slot modules is too high already. Scram, web, MWD, capacitor booster are standard equipment for most PvP ships. If it is such an essential module, you might as well not have it take up a slot, since its not really a choice or is it?
Moa, Eagle, Ferox Only fly Amarr, and don't encounter these ships enough for an informed opinion.
Raptor The sacrifice of grid still leaves the possibility of a sniping Raptor, but an expense (rigs, slots), which increases significant choices, so good from my point of view.
Tracking Disruptors I had personally stopped using Tracking Disruptors in favor of ECM, even on bonused ships, since they were largely useless (at least, less useful than ECM), so I hope that it will make them a viable option again. For those unfamiliar with the limitations of tracking disruptors:
Tracking Disruptors do not have any effect on: 1. Missiles 2. Drones 3. Neutralizer/Nos 4. Remote Assistance (remote repair, energy transfer etc.). 5. Electronic Warfare (Other TD's, ECM, Damps etc.) 6. Scramblers and Webifiers
Both other major EW systems, ECM and Damps, can be effective against all these groups mentioned above. People usually include just turrets vs. other weapon systems in their comparison, but jamming or dampening can also disable the target's scrambler, webifier, remote repping etc. etc. ECM and Damps can always disable loads of more modules than Tracking Disruptors can, even when used on a turreted ship. Tracking Disruptors already suffered a lot in comparison to the other modules from this property. Additionally, tracking disruptors were defeatable by smart flying (closing, reducing transversal) and using other already benificial modules (webifiers), while ECM and Damps could only be countered by other ECM and Damps.
Furthermore, EVE is divided into close range and long range fights. Tracking Disruptors lack the range to make a difference in long range fights. In short range fights, they lacked the effect against all but lasers when considering reduction of optimal. Reducing tracking only helped with defending smaller ships from bigger ships (TD'ed Battleship vs. a Cruiser). Effect on a BS vs. BS fight is minimal, since the battleship that is the target of a TD'ed battleship will usually be webbed. The tracking reduction does not do enough to avoid anything more but minimal damage. Just do the math and use the tracking guide, a Megathron webbing a Geddon at 4km will not lose any damage due to poor tracking, the Geddon won't be able to make enough transversal considering its signature to make a significant difference.
So, the change is welcome, certainly not overpowered, perhaps even slightly underpowered still, but perhaps somewhat useful again. ____
The Illusion of Freedom | The Truth about Slavery |
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 19:25:00 -
[561]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 12/02/2008 19:25:57 Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 12/02/2008 19:25:40
Originally by: Ravoc
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer You forgetting that total range is opti+2xfall off?
ROFL, do you even fly anything else than laserboats?
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Thats why AC dps is balanced IN FALL-OFF. If ACs would have largely optimal and less fall off ccp would REDUCE their dps. Why? Because its a balance issue to have ACs work just as well as other weaponry when they have high tracking, all damage types and NO CAP USE. Thats why you cant whine about "loss of dps" in fall off. Its intended AND CALCULATED.
1. Laser tracking stopped being an issue a long time ago when it received a global 25% tracking boost. 2. Minmatar boats already have lowest cap (even less with the default mwd) while amarr have highest and further cap bonuses. But that's off topic. 3. Give me 1 example of an AC battleship doing more damage than a pulse battleship, at whatever range you want.
Do you even play this game or are you a Bong?
ACs have advantage over pulses when they shorten range. More dps and getting under pulse tracking. ACs stay at range when facing blasters. Blasters cant reach em, but ACs still do dps outside blaster range.
WTH are you on about ACs??? Youre first mentioning about tracking and then totally ignoring it 2 rows below that. An AC boat that is going in at 500m against a pulse boat will win the dps race. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Ravoc
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 22:11:00 -
[562]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer ACs stay at range when facing blasters. Blasters cant reach em, but ACs still do dps outside blaster range.
True, I pointed that out myself. But the AC damage will be crappy and not enough to beat the blasterboat's stronger tank. Add drones and the AC boat is outmatched.
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer WTH are you on about ACs??? Youre first mentioning about tracking and then totally ignoring it 2 rows below that. An AC boat that is going in at 500m against a pulse boat will win the dps race.
Point 1 was a response to your post, where you mentioned tracking first. And even at point blank (0m), a pulse bs will do more dps than an AC bs. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 23:31:00 -
[563]
Originally by: Ravoc
And even at point blank (0m), a pulse bs will do more dps than an AC bs.
If you count tracking a maelstr and an abaddon do the same damage to eachother when they are up close. Mael has cap less weapons. Its a fair trade. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Ravoc
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.02.12 23:52:00 -
[564]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer If you count tracking a maelstr and an abaddon do the same damage to eachother when they are up close. Mael has cap less weapons. Its a fair trade.
Fair enough. Now add the tracking disruptors (range) to both equally. Which will weaken more? :) |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 00:27:00 -
[565]
Originally by: Ravoc
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer If you count tracking a maelstr and an abaddon do the same damage to eachother when they are up close. Mael has cap less weapons. Its a fair trade.
Fair enough. Now add the tracking disruptors (range) to both equally. Which will weaken more? :)
Both will suffer enough. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Aphotic Raven
Gallente E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 11:46:00 -
[566]
Edited by: Aphotic Raven on 13/02/2008 11:47:36
Originally by: Grimpak
Originally by: Ravoc And even at point blank (0m), a pulse bs will do more dps than an AC bs.
wrong actually. only weapon that will do damage at 0m will be missiles.
try it out
but enough nit-picking.
I came with a terrifying conclusion when I started to play a bit with numbers a bit.
the new zealot, in gank fit with passive tank (HPL's + 3 HS and suitcase + 2 ANP's + 2 trimarks), will have nearly the same DPS (-30 to 50 dps with scorch, when comparing with the glass cannon deimos setup of null'ed neutrons and 3 MFS) and nearly the same effective HP.
functional differences between both will be the increased range of the zealot and the dronebay on the deimos.
scary thought. I'm liking the new zealot more and more.
Yes, in the right hands the zelot is already very good as it can stay out of web range and still be in optimal with pulse lasers. After the boost it will be completely overpowered when compared with a deimos or any hac really.
CCP forgot the part where close range hac meant close range and not able to hit at 15-30km.
Hopefully this is the start of a buff period for the slower gun boats, after so many nerfs to gankage I hope CCP are trying to fix the slow hacs (deimos/zelot are fast but try tracking anything at high speed) to make them a threat to tanked BS's again. They are murdering the deimos in the process but for now it is only an idea.
Shame they couldnt do the same for its little brother the enyo (i still cant figure out why the enyo is red, and has a missle bonus for its 1 launcher when it is obviously the little blaster brother of the deimos? taranis/deimos bonus would actually make it flyable.. if it was given a cpu buff i suppose.. Khanid mk II was all about this, but the gallente need it to go the opposite direction, away from missles and split weapons)
Save the deimos, Deimos the Enyo, gallente = happy
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 13:28:00 -
[567]
Originally by: Aphotic Raven
Yes, in the right hands the zelot is already very good as it can stay out of web range and still be in optimal with pulse lasers. After the boost it will be completely overpowered when compared with a deimos or any hac really.
Uhm, how about this: Zealot doesnt have drones = ZERO protection against fast frig tackling and ZERO protection against ecm-drones (wich is the FOTM) because it has 13 sensor strength and doesnt have room for a crappy eccm and cant fit ecm-drones of its own.
How about you try out deimos vs zealot and you fit some ecm-drones in deimos. Zealot is balanced by its flaws. DPS isnt the ONLY aspect of a ships balance, but I guess thats hard to explain to people that have chosen the high dps race. -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Grimpak
Gallente Trinity Nova
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 17:51:00 -
[568]
Edited by: Grimpak on 13/02/2008 17:52:08
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Aphotic Raven
Yes, in the right hands the zelot is already very good as it can stay out of web range and still be in optimal with pulse lasers. After the boost it will be completely overpowered when compared with a deimos or any hac really.
Uhm, how about this: Zealot doesnt have drones = ZERO protection against fast frig tackling and ZERO protection against ecm-drones (wich is the FOTM) because it has 13 sensor strength and doesnt have room for a crappy eccm and cant fit ecm-drones of its own.
How about you try out deimos vs zealot and you fit some ecm-drones in deimos. Zealot is balanced by its flaws. DPS isnt the ONLY aspect of a ships balance, but I guess thats hard to explain to people that have chosen the high dps race.
that's why that I didn't said it was a bad thing for it to be so equal to the deimos.
also both ships suck for solo engagements. the deimos sucks less, but still sucks nevertheless.
the diferences in how to use the ships will be basically in the engagement distances. While the deimos needs to get REALLY close to the enemy, and to do so the dronebay helps there, the zealot, wich is basically a golden turret platform can do the same job as the deimos but at a safer distance.
in gangs, both options are viable.
solo however, why are you solo'ing in a deimos in the first place?
anyways I finished amarr cruiser 5 yesterday, and now I can't decide between the zealot or sacrilege for next buy ---
planetary interaction idea! |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Dark-Rising The Dawn of Darkness
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 18:10:00 -
[569]
Originally by: Grimpak
anyways I finished amarr cruiser 5 yesterday, and now I can't decide between the zealot or sacrilege for next buy
For fleets: Zealot
Sacri shines more solo/small methinks -------------------------------------- The Inquisition III - Relentless Retaliation |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.13 18:17:00 -
[570]
Originally by: Grimpak
the new zealot, in gank fit with passive tank (HPL's + 3 HS and suitcase + 2 ANP's + 2 trimarks), will have nearly the same DPS (-30 to 50 dps with scorch, when comparing with the glass cannon deimos setup of null'ed neutrons and 3 MFS) and nearly the same effective HP.
No, the deimos will do 16% more DPS before the 158 dps[which is about 28% of the DPS that a 3 HS, 5 Heavy Pulse, AN MF M Zealot will do and 34% of what it does with scorch]
That puts a plated Deimos at 691 DPS with long range ammo, 3mfs, and neutron blasters. Which is a 50% increase in DPS over a Zealot with scorch[and 23% above its an MF M numbers when the blaster is using null and NOT CN antimatter M]
The Zealot does have a lot of range, but don't confuse its DPS as being close to that of the Deimos
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 22 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |