| 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) |
|
CCP kieron
   |
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:28:00 -
[1]
Following up on Zulupark's blog with the Amarr updates, Fendalh has some updates of his own. Not only are there some proposed changes for Amarr ships, but also a few changes for the Caldari railgun platforms and even tracking disruptors.
Want to know more, see what's happening and who gets extra turrets? Head on over to Planned Ship Balancing Changes.
|
|
Cadiz
Caldari
No Quarter.
Vae Victis.
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:38:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Cadiz on 02/02/2008 06:39:53
Hooray for Amarr. Lord knows you guys have been waiting for something like this for a long, long time. 
That aside, however...
The Deimos changes are frankly rather silly, because with the ship's grid, by the time you've put a medium armor repper & a cap booster on it, you're now looking at fitting electrons and not a whole lot more - which makes a total mockery of its entire "most damaging HAC" line of thought.
Give back the low and gut the utility high which rarely gets used for anything of value in lieu. That's a start. Then look at the fact that it simply doesn't have the fittings to do an active injected tank without utterly hamstringing its damage output, and realize that it's a do-or-die boat in its finest form and would much sooner benefit from, say, a tracking bonus than a tanking one.
------
Director, No Quarter
"There is no problem that cannot be solved by the judicious application of violence." |
ThunderGodThor
KIA Corp
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:45:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Cadiz
Edited by: Cadiz on 02/02/2008 06:39:53
Hooray for Amarr. Lord knows you guys have been waiting for something like this for a long, long time.
That aside, however...
The Deimos changes are frankly rather silly, because with the ship's grid, by the time you've put a medium armor repper & a cap booster on it, you're now looking at fitting electrons and not a whole lot more - which makes a total mockery of its entire "most damaging HAC" line of thought.
Give back the low and gut the utility high which rarely gets used for anything of value in lieu. That's a start. Then look at the fact that it simply doesn't have the fittings to do an active injected tank without utterly hamstringing its damage output, and realize that it's a do-or-die boat in its finest form and would much sooner benefit from, say, a tracking bonus than a tanking one.
Second and basicly what he said.
|
TerrorWOLF
PURE Legion
Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:46:00 -
[4]
Will the Omen and Zealot be modified in fittings as well? The omen has a fitting problem at the moment with 4 guns.
May Your Death Be Slow And Painful
|
Kynes Harkonnen
HAZCON Inc
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:50:00 -
[5]
And adding more turrets to amarr ships... Need to boost their base cap aswell to run them?
|
Daan Sai
HAZCON Inc
Knights Of Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:54:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Daan Sai on 02/02/2008 06:54:27
Originally by: Fendahl
Deimos:
Slots: 6/4/5 (+1 med, -1 low)
Capacitor capacity: 1625.0en (+250en)
Bonuses:
5% bonus to medium hybrid turret damage per Gallente Cruiser level (no change)
7.5% bonus to armor repair amount per Gallente Cruiser level (replaces the MWD capacitor penalty reduction)
The above mentioned changes to the Deimos and Zealot allow them to better compete on even term with other close range HACs, such as the Sacrilege.
If you change to the same cap injectors that every one is using, will there be a cargo expansion to fit the caps in? Also a lot of 6 low slot tank setups are going to suffer - possibly reducing their defenses. Isn't it simpler to leave the slots and just boost the cap more?
|
Flamewave
Contempt.
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 06:58:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Flamewave on 02/02/2008 07:00:37
I like all the changes except the Deimos change. What I find wrong as of the current sisi build is the Deimos lacks the fitting to accomodate a cap booster and still be an effective ship.
What I would do is instead of removing a low slot from the ship would be to remove a high slot (it has six and the sixth commonly goes unfitted) and add enough fitting to accomodate a cap booster with max fitting skills. That or it remain unchanged because this isn't cool - it's gimped.
edit: In my opinion, the Zealot could also stand a bit of a fitting boost with the new turret, it was tight fitting beforehand.
__________
|
Rionus
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:03:00 -
[8]
Any chance the helios can get a hi-slot to bring it on the same level as other covert ops?
|
BlackHorizon
Caldari
Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:04:00 -
[9]
Edited by: BlackHorizon on 02/02/2008 07:05:04
Excellent changes.
However, the Apocalypse optimal range bonus may be a bit overpowered particularly with pulse lasers. For example, with the correct combination of tracking links, combat boosters, and hardwire implants, it is possible to achieve 140 km optimal range on Mega Pulse II with Scorch L.
With beams, however, the Apocalypse also outclasses most other snipers in the game in terms of tracking and damage output. Certainly, this is the Apocalypse's role and Amarrian philosophy, and I see no problem with this.
|
Mastin Dragonfly
Absolutely No Retreat
Synchr0nicity
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:07:00 -
[10]
Quote:
While the damage output of the enhanced Zealot is massive, in particular in combination with the resistance changes mentioned in Zulupark's blog, we feel that this is where the close range Heavy Assault Ships ("HACs") need to be at in order to stay competitive.
I like the extra turret on the zealot but am a bit surprised you're classifying it as a close range HAC while it has a range bonus. 
|
|
|
Jameroz
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:09:00 -
[11]
Looking good!
I especially like the turret disruption changes.
While the Craptor grid changes not so much 
|
Sakura Nihil
Stimulus
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:13:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Sakura Nihil on 02/02/2008 07:13:53
On the whole, a good balance, except for the Deimos. Before you say "quit whining", I don't fly the ship, let's be clear.
I think it was just fine as it was, and that on the whole, this new repping bonus will be underused and underperforming, saved for NPCing in its myriad forms. Regardless of the bonus, I do think the wrong slots were switched around, and find it ironic you're trying to boost the ship's defenses by giving it a repping bonus, only to take off a lowslot that either gives it the power it needs to stay competitive or a letting it tank better.
Should be -1 high, +1 mid, tbqh. Otherwise, not bad, the script that hurt both optimal and falloff does look like it might be unbalanced though, as it is the only dual-modification one I'm aware of.
|
GeneralNukeEm
Free Collective
The OSS
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:16:00 -
[13]
Edited by: GeneralNukeEm on 02/02/2008 07:16:32
Edited by: GeneralNukeEm on 02/02/2008 07:16:24
How is a raptor supposed to fit 3 125mm railguns and an MWD in any meaningful setup with the proposed grid changes? At 26 base grid, and fitting current module requirements, a raptor with three t1 125mm railguns and a t1 MWD will use 33.9 of 32.5 powergrid at max skills. Compare this with a crusader that can fit all its guns, in t2 form, as well as a t2 MWD while having all of its low slots left over to dedicate to speed modules.
|
Elirel
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:20:00 -
[14]
What about Lachesis and Arazu? And what's the point of tanking bonus on deimos? Give it 5% MWD bonus per level or something that will boost it intended role.
|
Soyemia
Minmatar
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:26:00 -
[15]
YOu even boost TDs before TPs. TPs are still utterly useless on minmatar ships (recons especiallt).
Also what about muninn? It should be boosted also. How many muninns you see there? 1 in thousand ships?
|
QwaarJet
Gallente
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:27:00 -
[16]
I like the turret addition to the Moa and Eagle, however the Deimos change is insanity.
|
Atsiz Zhurenh
Minmatar
modro
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:38:00 -
[17]
I really like the upgrade to the Apoc. Now it actually has a purpose in the game. It'll be nice to have an Amarr sniper.
|
Kynes Harkonnen
HAZCON Inc
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:41:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Sakura Nihil
...the script that hurt both optimal and falloff does look like it might be unbalanced though...
Will the optimal range Tracking Comp script also boost falloff to balance this change?
|
Seramyr l'Ethia
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:42:00 -
[19]
Unless we're somehow looking at completely different ships, the TQ Raptor can't fit three 125 rails assuming a T2 MWD, disruptor and wildcard, much less three 150 rails. With AWU V, no less.
How does reducing its grid still further by 4mw on SiSi nudge us towards fitting 125s?
|
Wu Jiun
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:45:00 -
[20]
Some nice changes for amarr. But a few questions:
1. Omen
Will it get more fitting? Because it can't be fitted competitively with 4 turrets right now.
2.Apoc
Nicely done. But for closerange it stays pretty unviable. The only reason to chose it over a geddon or abaddon when it comes to closerange would be if you'd like to use an active tank. It doesn't really have the cpu for active tank + mwd and tackling gear.
More specifcially i'd like to fit:
8 x mp2
mwd, web, scram, inject
lar, plate, triple hardeners, dcu, heat sink
Too much too ask? Keep in mind it would still get obliterated by most close range ships including those of its own race. But it would be some soloing option for this ship without stepping on gallentes/minnies toes.
3. Maller
You mention it in your blog. Will there be anything done about it?
4. Prophecy
Same as number 3.
5. Paladin/Navy Apoc
Will they also get the according change? At least the navy apoc should get it.
6. Lasers and fitting in general? Is there something planned? Are you looking into it?
However thanks for the work you've already done. You made a lot people happy i'd guess.
|
|
|
Goumindong
Amarr
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 07:45:00 -
[21]
Ill keep this short:
The Eagle is now overpowered: These are anti-support ships, it does too much damage at the Muninn and Zealots optimal range
The Apoc is now overpowered: This thing is the best sniping battleship in the game hands down.
The deimos change is probably for the worse. I dont fly deimos's so ill let someone else discuss this, but it has to do with the EHP of a plated setup.
The Muninn, in all this HAC mangling, didnt get a 6th low slot that it needs and has for a while[and dont take away one of its highs, no need for that]
|
Merin Ryskin
FinFleet
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:05:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 02/02/2008 08:07:29
Independent of the HAC mess (please don't hijack another thread with Moa vs. Zealot, I would like a response on this), the Vulture also needs at least a 6th turret (though really, the Ferox and Vulture both need 7, but 6 is critical), for two reasons:
1) Currently the TQ Vulture matches the Eagle's firepower, beating it by a slight margin if you don't have HAC V. This is reasonable and the relative balance works just fine. Even without the gang mods, there is still motivation for Eagle pilots to upgrade to the Vulture. But with a 5th gun on the Eagle, it now has 6.25 effective guns to the Vulture's 5, making the Vulture completely redundant as a sniper. At least a 6th gun slot on the Vulture is needed to maintain the relative balance between the Eagle and Vulture, and keep the Vulture an appealing option as a combat ship.
2) Comparing the two hybrid-using fleet commands, the Eos and Vulture both currently have 5 gun slots. However, the Eos gets a massive drone bay in addition, allowing it to get considerably better firepower. For the same reasons the Ferox/Brutix comparison makes a 6th (if not 7th) gun on the Ferox necessary, at least a 6th gun on the Vulture is necessary as well (and if not necessary, not overpowered).
Also, it's just a T1 frigate, so fewer people care, but any chance of the same change to the Merlin and Navy Hookbill? For the Merlin at least, the gun hardpoints are already built into the model. It would be nice to have a proper railboat at the frigate level, both for consistency and to avoid scaring newer players away from the Caldari railboat line with an awkward split weapon layout on their first ship.
|
Nahia Senne
Black Eclipse Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:13:00 -
[23]
If these changes stay, next patch will be made of pure WIN.
|
Nofonno
Amarr
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:17:00 -
[24]
I fly only Amarr ships and only sub-BS ships at that, so I can really relate only to the Omen/Zealot, which I will test on sisi, but they look much better now to me.
Having said that, I somehow missed a table or something on new ship resistances... Or is there another blog planned for that? Or the changes listed by Zulupark previously are all that there's to it?
And loving the tracking disruptor change too!
A scientist must be an optimist at heart - to have the strength to rally against a chorus of voices saying "it cannot be done". |
Kodiak31415
An Eye For An Eye
Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:25:00 -
[25]
Amarr: Cool, finally a real amarr boost.
Caldari Gunboats: Another needed change, maybe look at the vulture.
Deimos: WTF are you thinking? The ship wasn't broken. If you wanted to make it better then why not take the extra high and make it a mid or a low? If "one of the main problems of actively repaired Deimos setups is the high energy requirement." why are you taking away the MWD bonus that helped with the energy problem in the first place? Someone needs to have their head examined if they think these changes are making the deimos a better PVP ship.
_______________________________
Pleese exucse any seplling erorr's in tihs psot |
Jiks
Caldari
Prophets of Doom
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:30:00 -
[26]
Overall, excellent stuff!
The caldari snipers really needed a hand given earlier changes had been pushing them towards redundency, tracking disruptors good, most Amarr changes look very helpful for those guys.
I'd love the raptor to have a bit more grid and the Amarr doubtlessly need more love in general but a massive step in the right direction IMO.
Jiks
|
ArmyOfMe
Exotic Dancers Club
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:32:00 -
[27]
For the love of god dont ruin the deimos this way, nobody has even complained about it at all now and still you go and change it without even asking the ppl that fly it a lot.
If you want to change it then at least move the 6th high slot to a mid, but taking away a low slot will ruin what this ship does best.
|
Kuolematon
Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United
Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:46:00 -
[28]
Cool that Zealot gets buff but .. how on earth you gonna fit tank and HPL II's there? I got 2 CPU free on my current fitting and thats with IFFA! Another turret is IMPOSSIBLE to fit 
"The Amarr are the tanking and ganking floating rods of gold"
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar
The Ninja Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 08:56:00 -
[29]
Hello? Pilgrim? Useless?
Jesus ******* christ, do you you even read the forums?
Project: Gank - Solo Pilgrim Video |
Dlardrageth
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.02.02 09:00:00 -
[30]
Caldari sniper changes are a nifty surprise I have to admit. Seeing how many Caldari players in my Corp go straight for all-missile so far and how relatively few for turrets this looks like a chance at rebalancing this (especially from the view of a Corp with many newer players). Full agreement there without crunching the numbers down to the last point of DPS more or less in comparison to other ships.
Zealot and Deimos changes, I quote from the blog:
Quote:
[...]The above mentioned changes to the Deimos and Zealot allow them to better compete on even term with other close range HACs, such as the Sacrilege.[...]
Do I understand this right, that the changes on the Zealot will be geared towards shorter ranged setups when it comes to revamped PG/CPU values? Making it harder/unattractive to fit beam laser turrets to gain more range? If it is, I would suggest to reconsider to leave that issue open to player likings. Because, like you stated in the quoted excerpt above, the Sacrilege is already the Amarr HAC geared towards close-range.
Changes to the Apocalypse look very positive so far, although the final judgement has to be reserved till changes to laser/cap use and the beam laser fitting requirements are published IMHO. But they can be expected soon, I presume...
The Tech-1 cruiser issue had me a bit confused by the phrasing in the blog. I quote:
Quote:
[...]The Omen has long suffered from a lack of damage compared to the Maller even though the Omen is intended to focus on offense at the expense of defense. The rate of fire bonus to energy turrets only compensates for the additional turret hardpoint the Maller has, so the Maller is a better choice in almost all cases. Because of this[...]
Does that indicate that the Maller is not getting changed at all and just the Omen buffed to be competitive with the Maller? I hope not, as that would simply lead to a change of role as "most shunned cruiser" probably. Of course the changes the Maller needs are minor compared to the Omen. In my opinion a change of the "Amarr cap bonus" to something else and eventually a minor drone bay (mainly for PvE) of perhaps 10 m¦ would do. The Maller being the Tier-3 cruiser it should still be preferable after the ship changes, I reckon.
And finally as a little (probably not needed) reminder - the Pilgrim still desperately needs some looking at.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |