EVE Search - Maybe the Destroyer fix really is this easy.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Maybe the Destroyer fix really is this easy.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Anubis Xian Vertigo One	Posted - 2008.04.20 17:18:00 - [1] The primary complaint I hear about destroyers is that t2 frigs kill them relatively easy, they do decent damage, don't tank at all, and are too easy to hit by larger ships. They also have a 25% RoF penalty. What if that was removed? Destroyers would do a lot more damage, maybe even in some cases more DPS than cruisers. But is that a bad thing? I don't think it is. It would give them the kick they could use and wouldn't help their survivability...infact would reduce it (well not the Thrasher). It would make them able to handle t2 frigs, yet should still die easily to anyone that got tired of seeing them. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal. I'm the Juggernaut, *****!
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Vae Victis.	Posted - 2008.04.20 17:30:00 - [2] Sure, but even better is more than a single Tier 1 destroyer, like a Tier 2 and Tier 3 destroyer! Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions! I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 17:34:00 - [3] Originally by: Anubis Xian The primary complaint I hear about destroyers is that t2 frigs kill them relatively easy, they do decent damage, don't tank at all, and are too easy to hit by larger ships. They also have a 25% RoF penalty. What if that was removed? Destroyers would do a lot more damage, maybe even in some cases more DPS than cruisers. But is that a bad thing? I don't think it is. It would give them the kick they could use and wouldn't help their survivability...infact would reduce it (well not the Thrasher). It would make them able to handle t2 frigs, yet should still die easily to anyone that got tired of seeing them. The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer at all are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given.
Liang Nuren Black Sea Industries Insurgency	Posted - 2008.04.20 17:39:00 - [4] Originally by: Reem Fairchild The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer at all are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. I've killed destroyer with my Crow... and I'd put money on the Sentinel taking out destroyers. -Liang -- Naturally, I do not in any way speak for my corp or alliance.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 17:50:00 - [5] Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Reem Fairchild The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer at all are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. I've killed destroyer with my Crow... and I'd put money on the Sentinel taking out destroyers. -Liang Let me rephrase: The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer with a pilot who knows how to fit and use his ship, are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. My artillery Thrasher has no problem killing or forcing away even pimped out 10+ km/s interceptors. In the case of the assault ships it depends on if the destroyer is fit for that situation. For example, an autocannon Thrasher with a medium shield extender stands a good chance against a lot of assault ships.
Dheorl The Scope	Posted - 2008.04.20 17:52:00 - [6] Originally by: Reem Fairchild Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Reem Fairchild The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer at all are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. I've killed destroyer with my Crow... and I'd put money on the Sentinel taking out destroyers. -Liang Let me rephrase: The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer with a pilot who knows how to fit and use his ship, are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. My artillery Thrasher has no problem killing or forcing away even pimped out 10+ km/s interceptors. In the case of the assault ships it depends on if the destroyer is fit for that situation. For example, an autocannon Thrasher with a medium shield extender stands a good chance against a lot of assault ships. Lol, wanna give my sentinel a go sometime .
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 18:03:00 - [7] Originally by: Dheorl Originally by: Reem Fairchild Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Reem Fairchild The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer at all are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. I've killed destroyer with my Crow... and I'd put money on the Sentinel taking out destroyers. -Liang Let me rephrase: The only tech 2 frigates that can kill a destroyer with a pilot who knows how to fit and use his ship, are the assault ships and then it's still not necessarily a given. My artillery Thrasher has no problem killing or forcing away even pimped out 10+ km/s interceptors. In the case of the assault ships it depends on if the destroyer is fit for that situation. For example, an autocannon Thrasher with a medium shield extender stands a good chance against a lot of assault ships. Lol, wanna give my sentinel a go sometime . Even heavily tracking disrupted an artillery thrasher will be able to kill the drones because they have to get into web range. And that's all your damage. It will be a draw. That is unless you can keep its cap so low that it can't even turn on a web. But between mwd, neutralizers, tracking disruptors, and a warp disruptor to keep the destroyer from simply warping away, well I just really don't think that's workable cap wise. At the very least one of those things has to go, and that means you can't kill it.
Sqalevon Masuat'aa Matari Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2008.04.20 18:24:00 - [8] You do realise that a Sentinel gets a bonus to tracking disruptors?
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 19:08:00 - [9] Originally by: Sqalevon You do realise that a Sentinel gets a bonus to tracking disruptors? Yes. Do you realize that with destroyer 4 (my main has 5) a destroyer has 40% bonus to tracking? That's a defense against one, bonused, tracking disruptor built in. A second on top of that is not going to keep a destroyer from taking out webbed drones. Especially not if it has at least one tracking mod on it (which it should). A solo destroyer will not be able to take out a Sentinel flown well, but neither will the Sentinel be able to take out the destroyer.
Radcjk Caldari Dark Star LTD Atrocitas	Posted - 2008.04.20 20:04:00 - [10] Oh look, another epeen fight. Surprised I am not. You know, of all the "Fix Destroyer" threads I've seen (and there have been some horrible ideas) the OP may be on to some thing. The RoF penalty does suck... I can't think of any other ship off the top of my head that has a role penalty. Think about it ? No other ship gets penalized in damage or rof or anything else for fitting it properly. I'd also like to see them lose the signature of a small cruiser, but I actually like this idea better than most. /endorsement.

Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 20:07:00 - [11] Originally by: Radcjk Oh look, another epeen fight. It's not. It's simple facts.
Radcjk Caldari Dark Star LTD Atrocitas	Posted - 2008.04.20 20:19:00 - [12] Originally by: Reem Fairchild Originally by: Radcjk Oh look, another epeen fight. It's not. It's simple facts. Thats great...how about adding to the discussion instead of side tracking it with "I got you, you didnt get me !" disputes like two kids playing cowboys and indians ? In short, add to the thread with out derailing it.
Kyreax Neuronix	Posted - 2008.04.20 20:26:00 - [13] Destroyers are the most unloved ships in the game by the devs How about make them worthy of the title "Destroyer" and start with the OP suggestion Remove the rate of fire penalty. Then reduce the signature radius to something reasonable. Then let the fun begin. --------------------------------------------------- It's a Templar, an Amarr Fighter used by Carriers.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 20:29:00 - [14] Originally by: Radcjk Originally by: Reem Fairchild Originally by: Radcjk Oh look, another epeen fight. It's not. It's simple facts. Thats great...how about adding to the discussion instead of side tracking it with "I got you, you didnt get me !" disputes like two kids playing cowboys and indians ? In short, add to the thread with out derailing it. How is pointing out how and why destroyers are good ships "not adding to the discussion"? Do you fly destroyers?
Corstaad Minmatar Vardr ok Lidskjalv	Posted - 2008.04.20 20:38:00 - [15] I think there a good ship to. To me they make alot more sense then all of the AFs. With a 2 mil fit I will pretty much kill every frig size ship other then the super-tanked AFs. I don't want to get into "what ifs" but if I have a chance to kill a decent tanked AF with a el cheapo low skill trasher, thats a damn nice ship.
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2008.04.20 21:14:00 - [16] Originally by: Radcjk You know, of all the "Fix Destroyer" threads I've seen (and there have been some horrible ideas) the OP may be on to some thing. The RoF penalty does suck... I can't think of any other ship off the top of my head that has a role penalty. The RoF makes some sense. First off, it goes along withthe third bonus they get despite being T1 ships. Second, they get as many bonused weapon slots as a BC or BS, and as many slots total as most Cruisers. Third, it biases them towards a role and a flavor: long range, high alpha weaponry. Personally, I think they need a boost, but they should keep the penalty. Instead, I'd suggest increasing their character and competence in their role, plus a few tweaks. The things I'd like looked at: - Increase their role optimal bonus. - Increase their targeting range. - Increase their scan resolution Then the tweaks: - Increase their total hp somewhat. Approx 75% of the low tier Cruisers. (They still wouldn't have the slots or fitting to approach that percentage in reality.) - Decrease their sig size somewhat. Approx 60% of the low tier Cruisers. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Vae Victis.	Posted - 2008.04.20 21:41:00 - [17] Epeen fight people, look, i suggested having more than a single destroyer, how is that idea? Less sig that small crusier is good too... Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions! I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.20 21:53:00 - [18] Originally by: Dristra Epeen fight people, look, i suggested having more than a single destroyer, how is that idea? If they do different things and aren't just better at the same thing, then yes I'd agree. I don't think there is any pressing need for it, but it wouldn't hurt. But if you are going to have destroyers that are simply better than the current destroyers at what the current destroyers do (to justify the higher tier) you are going to have ships that are overpowered. Don't mess with something that allready works perfectly.
Spud Gunn	Posted - 2008.04.20 21:56:00 - [19] Edited by: Spud Gunn on 20/04/2008 21:56:26 Originally by: Radcjk You know, of all the "Fix Destroyer" threads I've seen (and there have been some horrible ideas) the OP may be on to some thing. The RoF penalty does suck... I can't think of any other ship off the top of my head that has a role penalty. Can you think of any other ships which can fit more than twice as many turrets as anything else of a comparable size? Destroyers are all about long range, good tracking and high alpha, which they do just fine. The ROF penalty is a perfectly valid tradeoff for the fact that they can fit as many guns as a battleship.
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Vae Victis.	Posted - 2008.04.20 22:05:00 - [20] Originally by: Reem Fairchild Originally by: Dristra Epeen fight people, look, i suggested having more than a single destroyer, how is that idea? If they do different things and aren't just better at the same thing, then yes I'd agree. I don't think there is any pressing need for it, but it wouldn't hurt. But if you are going to have destroyers that are simply better than the current destroyers at what the current destroyers do (to justify the higher tier) you are going to have ships that are overpowered. Don't mess with something that allready works perfectly. How is not higher tier ships better in almost every way? Just look at the system. I do agree with your views though, i whould love to remove the whole tier system, and have all the ships in each class equal, but with different roles! Support the introduction of well thought out Amarr solutions! I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them.

Forgo Gallente Cartographers Union	Posted - 2008.04.20 22:32:00 - [21] interdictor is the t2 destroyer.....same model, and requires dessy 5 skill. Not sure if removing the rate of fire would be the best solution, essentially its a frigish ship with 6 guns after the rof penalty. (8 - .25(8) = 6) still quite a bit of firepower. Consider in the cost and its a great cheap ship that outdoes t1 frigs, and some t2. Consider the cost of a t2 frig and their resist bonus' and a dessy should be a little under par on those imo. But even still, as others here have said, it isn't a given that a t2 frig will win every time. My opinion anyhow, seems like a decent mix for an upgrade to frigs, while not being a cruiser.
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2008.04.20 23:05:00 - [22] I would love to see another T2 Dessy. It would justify me training to get the interdictor right before it got it's base speed nerfed. There's plenty of ideas floating out there. Dessy vs cloaked. (Destroyers are the original enemy of submarines after all). A command frigate was mentioned on the live dev blog. BC are to cruisers as dessy is to frigates. Or just a beefed up version would be nice.
Ruah Piskonit Amarr PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris	Posted - 2008.04.20 23:43:00 - [23] T2 comments aside, I think 'you get what you payed for' when it comes to destroyers. . .its a T1 ship that can dominate all T1/T2 frigs if flown well - and gets eaten alive by cruisers. . .this is assuming of course you know how to fly the thing, but I do not cound idiocy as one of my MO's. ----
Xia Xiou	Posted - 2008.04.21 00:43:00 - [24] Destroyers are extraordinarily useful ships. I use mine probably every day. My Catalyst has 3 cap relays in the lows, an AB and cap recharger in the mids, and 4 tractors and 4 salvagers in the highs. Nothing short of a battlecruiser could do its job nearly as well
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.21 00:51:00 - [25] Originally by: Xia Xiou Destroyers are extraordinarily useful ships. I use mine probably every day. My Catalyst has 3 cap relays in the lows, an AB and cap recharger in the mids, and 4 tractors and 4 salvagers in the highs. Nothing short of a battlecruiser could do its job nearly as well An Execuror does that job a hundred times better. (And you're not really being funny.)
Radcjk Caldari Dark Star LTD Atrocitas	Posted - 2008.04.21 01:01:00 - [26] Edited by: Radcjk on 21/04/2008 01:03:47 Edited by: Radcjk on 21/04/2008 01:03:14 Originally by: Reem Fairchild How is pointing out how and why destroyers are good ships "not adding to the discussion"? Do you fly destroyers? Because 'What Ifs' and 'if I have these skills and you don't' scenarios usually snow ball into Special Olympics type debates. I apologize if you felt it was a direct attack on you. It was intended to just keep things on the fix it track. I worded it poorly. And yes I do, T1 and 'dictors. Originally by: Tsanse Kinske The RoF makes some sense. First off, it goes along withthe third bonus they get despite being T1 ships. Second, they get as many bonused weapon slots as a BC or BS, and as many slots total as most Cruisers. Third, it biases them towards a role and a flavor: long range, high alpha weaponry. To some degree I agree with you. However, battle cruisers also have a third role bonus as a T1 ship, being the larger scale of a cruiser (just as a destroyer is to a frigate) and are not penalized for it. There is no penalty for using Warfare mods, aside from using up your high and possably mid slots, thus affecting your over all fit. Also, sniper cruisers and battleships are only gimped by their own fittings and role, not an aversive penalty applied to the ship due to its role or fitting. I've yet to see a Sniper Megathron incur a 25 % RoF penalty because it chose rails over blasters as a mild example. Originally by: Reem Fairchild If they do different things and aren't just better at the same thing, then yes I'd agree. I don't think there is any pressing need for it, but it wouldn't hurt. But if you are going to have destroyers that are simply better than the current destroyers at what the current destroyers do (to justify the higher tier) you are going to have ships that are overpowered. Don't mess with something that allready works perfectly. [/quote I'm in agreement with you here. Multiple, tiered, destroyers could be cool, but only if they functioned differently. Say A Caldari rail boat and t1 missile boat, a Gallente rail boat and a destroyer class drone boat, etc... it does get harder to fit a large distinction for the Amarr and matari ships however.
Radcjk Caldari Dark Star LTD Atrocitas	Posted - 2008.04.21 01:05:00 - [27] And the box of text following the second Reem quote is mine.. in the edit box the bracketed quote is fine, I cant fix it so that my statement isn't all small under the quote. My apologies.
Reem Fairchild Minmatar Shadow Forces Inc.	Posted - 2008.04.21 01:47:00 - [28] Originally by: Radcjk Because 'What Ifs' and 'if I have these skills and you don't' scenarios usually snow ball into Special Olympics type debates. I apologize if you felt it was a direct attack on you. It was intended to just keep things on the fix it track. I worded it poorly. I did a longish reply, but the board ate it. Anyway, to put in very few words (cause I don't feel like rewriting): I don't see how I, or anyone else, was doing any of that, and I don't agree that the destroyer needs any fixing. So far, the only problem being pointed to in this thread is that "it is easily killed by tech 2 frigates" which is very obviously not true (unless killing ratting newbies in poorly fitted ships count for game balance issues) except for assault ships, and even then it is not always a sure thing.
Aegis Osiris Gallente Demonic Retribution Un-Natural Selection	Posted - 2008.04.21 01:58:00 - [29] The Destroyer fix is fairly simple. 1. Remove ROF penalty. Its not really needed any longer, even if it made a little sense at the time (not much maybe, but a little). 2. Mild buffs to both hp and sig radius. 3. Give the ship a good role. Doing so may even provide reasonable room for seperate tiers. a) Tier 1 get a bonus to salvage. Still ok lower end combat, but useful in a role that makes them a better choice then a cruiser. b) New Tier 2 get a bonus to astrometrics of a particular sort....new skills and probes that would enable the destroyer to probe out and locate cloaked ships. Make it % based, modified by player skills vs. types of ships and cloaks being scanned against (proto cloaks easiest, cov ops cloak on cov ops frig effectively impossible). That provides a unique role that would add to gameplay. ________________________________________________ This thread does not exist
Forge Lag	Posted - 2008.04.21 02:14:00 - [30] Remove ROF penalty. Remove two highs. We end up with easier to fit ships with better cap. We also get rid of the stupid ideas that pure gank ship should be used as research vessel. Now the only issue with that solution is it will not really make you guys happy. Just realize that the area around cruisers is pretty much dominated by the cruisers and destroyers and assault frigs have it hard in their niches.



Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.