Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 60 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Christopher Newport
Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:26:00 -
[511] - Quote
I'm curious about the decision with the Vaga to give it an active shield tanking bonus when it's already a weak capacitor boat. Does anyone actually fly them with an active shield tank? |
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
118
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:26:00 -
[512] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote: I'm on my phone
Sarkelias Anophius wrote: half the sig and half again the active tank of a Cinnabon.
haha |
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
118
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:26:00 -
[513] - Quote
doublepost |
Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:28:00 -
[514] - Quote
Aloe Cloveris wrote:doublepost
wat |
Anaphylacti
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
8
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:28:00 -
[515] - Quote
can we get some more speed on eagle and munin 175-185 compared to the next lowest at 205... |
JEFFRAIDER
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
264
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:29:00 -
[516] - Quote
Anaphylacti wrote:can we get some more speed on eagle and munin 175-185 compared to the next lowest at 205...
i completely disagree with this |
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
389
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:32:00 -
[517] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:Sacrilege changes are not enough, it is still bad. do something else with it or it will now have replaced the eagle as the worst hac
rest are decent changes though
Yeah Sacrileges are really bad. Need some buff more. Ditch the capacity bonus and give it explosion radius or velocity one. BALEX is recruiting -----> tinyurl.com/oscmmlv |
XvXTeacherVxV
Nightmare Machinery Illusion of Solitude
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:33:00 -
[518] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:XvXTeacherVxV wrote:I don't think anyone suggested an either/or weapon system for the Muninn. Again, that directly contradicts the specialized nature of the Muninn. I think you're arguing with thin air, if that's what you're arguing against.
Would love to see some of your Muninn killmails, Maximus Andendare, otherwise I think you're EFT-warrioring instead of telling us about your actual experiences with the ship.
I'd still rather have a Hurricane any day of the week. My argument is that you seemed to wanted to switch the Muninn to a missile boat. I countered that there is racial flavor in having both Minmatar HACs be projectile boats, but if one was to go missile, it could do so using an either/or weapon system, though that in itself would cause problems due to the 4x damage bonuses. This would likely not happen, since ScyFI, (rebalanced) Claymore and (rebalanced) Huginn will likely be effective as Minmatar missile boats, solving the "where's my Minmatar missile boat?" question. Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't advocating in making the Muninn a missile boat, though, for the record.
The cyclone, talwar, breacher, bellicose and typhoon (not to mention the hound) are now all dedicated missile boats without split weapon systems. I think the Minmatar missile flavor has changed drastically in the past few updates so I'd vehemently disagree than any Minmatar missile boat has to be an either/or system (that is false on the face of it).
So.... where' my Minmatar missile HAC? |
JEFFRAIDER
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
264
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:33:00 -
[519] - Quote
Anaphylacti wrote:can we get some more speed on eagle and munin 175-185 compared to the next lowest at 205...
troll post please ignore him |
Sakura Nihil
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
296
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:33:00 -
[520] - Quote
On the whole, I like this. However, it feels like the Deimos is getting nerfed more than boosted.
Noticeably, it's losing its utility highslot (which is normally a small Nos) right before the Nos are likely to get boosted, as well as loosing a substantial amount of armor and hull HP. For a ship that's already tough to keep alive, charging into a brawl to apply high DPS, this is only going to make it riskier and discourage its traditional role. Glory |
|
Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:35:00 -
[521] - Quote
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:XvXTeacherVxV wrote:I don't think anyone suggested an either/or weapon system for the Muninn. Again, that directly contradicts the specialized nature of the Muninn. I think you're arguing with thin air, if that's what you're arguing against.
Would love to see some of your Muninn killmails, Maximus Andendare, otherwise I think you're EFT-warrioring instead of telling us about your actual experiences with the ship.
I'd still rather have a Hurricane any day of the week. My argument is that you seemed to wanted to switch the Muninn to a missile boat. I countered that there is racial flavor in having both Minmatar HACs be projectile boats, but if one was to go missile, it could do so using an either/or weapon system, though that in itself would cause problems due to the 4x damage bonuses. This would likely not happen, since ScyFI, (rebalanced) Claymore and (rebalanced) Huginn will likely be effective as Minmatar missile boats, solving the "where's my Minmatar missile boat?" question. Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't advocating in making the Muninn a missile boat, though, for the record. The cyclone, talwar, breacher, bellicose and typhoon (not to mention the hound) are now all dedicated missile boats without split weapon systems. I think the Minmatar missile flavor has changed drastically in the past few updates so I'd vehemently disagree than any Minmatar missile boat has to be an either/or system (that is false on the face of it). So.... where' my Minmatar missile HAC?
In purgatory with the Loki missile sub. |
Aliventi
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
239
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:35:00 -
[522] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:So you're demanding that Tech 2 cruisers are as cheap as, ... i don't know, a battlecruiser? No. A BC costs around 45 mil isk. I am looking for them to cost around 75-85 mil isk. It is a specialized Hull. It does have significant abilities a Cruiser doesn't. However a BC has abilities a HAC doesn't. Namely in fitting and tank. It still retains its pain cost when lost. It is just a little more reasonably priced for it's effectiveness. "tbh most people don't care about removing local from highsec. They want it gone from nullsec. I want to be able to solo roam hunt without everyone knowing I am there without them actually seeing me jump through the gate. Effortless intel is bad." ~Me |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1667
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:35:00 -
[523] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:Aliventi wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote: You said 'If HACs cost like 5 times more than Tech 1s they will be heavily used, but 10 times is to much!!1'. I showed you how HACs basically cost only 5 times the price of a Tech 1 cruiser. I don't care what a battleship costs, it fulfills a whole different role than a battlecruiser - Being able to take heavy fire and survive in fleet fights.
The theorem is not fulfilled by ship and fitting, it is fulfilled by hull itself. Fitting cost doesn't matter. You clearly don't understand that. So you're demanding that Tech 2 cruisers are as cheap as, ... i don't know, a battlecruiser?
Yes, otherwise BCs and t1 cruisers will be used instead as the performance increase for the price you're asked to pay just isn't there at all.
|
Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:38:00 -
[524] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote:Aliventi wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote: You said 'If HACs cost like 5 times more than Tech 1s they will be heavily used, but 10 times is to much!!1'. I showed you how HACs basically cost only 5 times the price of a Tech 1 cruiser. I don't care what a battleship costs, it fulfills a whole different role than a battlecruiser - Being able to take heavy fire and survive in fleet fights.
The theorem is not fulfilled by ship and fitting, it is fulfilled by hull itself. Fitting cost doesn't matter. You clearly don't understand that. So you're demanding that Tech 2 cruisers are as cheap as, ... i don't know, a battlecruiser? Yes, otherwise BCs and t1 cruisers will be used instead as the performance increase for the price you're asked to pay just isn't there at all.
At the very least they need to come down to the 80-90m range. Otherwise they're just not worth getting.
I won't discuss how many are in my hangar, though.
|
glepp
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
92
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:38:00 -
[525] - Quote
I love the new mid on the Deimos, but is it really supposed to be slower with less applied dps than a Thorax (because of no tracking bonus)? And a little tiny bit extra CPU so you can fit an extra ewar mod in the mid would go a long way. Dropping the small nos or neut in the utility high means you're down about 5-6 cpu to fit anything useful on a standard armor Deimos.
And what's with the HP nerf? These things are marginally flimsy enough already. |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
346
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:43:00 -
[526] - Quote
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:XvXTeacherVxV wrote:I don't think anyone suggested an either/or weapon system for the Muninn. Again, that directly contradicts the specialized nature of the Muninn. I think you're arguing with thin air, if that's what you're arguing against.
Would love to see some of your Muninn killmails, Maximus Andendare, otherwise I think you're EFT-warrioring instead of telling us about your actual experiences with the ship.
I'd still rather have a Hurricane any day of the week. My argument is that you seemed to wanted to switch the Muninn to a missile boat. I countered that there is racial flavor in having both Minmatar HACs be projectile boats, but if one was to go missile, it could do so using an either/or weapon system, though that in itself would cause problems due to the 4x damage bonuses. This would likely not happen, since ScyFI, (rebalanced) Claymore and (rebalanced) Huginn will likely be effective as Minmatar missile boats, solving the "where's my Minmatar missile boat?" question. Sorry for the confusion. I wasn't advocating in making the Muninn a missile boat, though, for the record. The cyclone, talwar, breacher, bellicose and typhoon (not to mention the hound) are now all dedicated missile boats without split weapon systems. I think the Minmatar missile flavor has changed drastically in the past few updates so I'd vehemently disagree than any Minmatar missile boat has to be an either/or system (that is false on the face of it). So.... where' my Minmatar missile HAC? It's likely going to come in the form of the rebalanced Huginn, rebalanced Cyclone and Scythe Fleet Issue when fitted with missiles.
And you're still mistaking the either/or argument. The either/or is because it's extremely unlikely to see the Muninn changed to be a dedicated missile boat. It'll keep its long range projectile niche, and so in order to accommodate a long-range arty Muninn AND make it a missile boat, it'd have to go to an either/or missile boat. But I agree this isn't likely nor is it likely it would lose its long-range projectile niche.
Instead, it's far more likely that the Huginn and Claymore will fill the missile boat role for Minmatar T2 and it's likely the Loki sub that is currently dual damage will go to strictly missile when T3s have their pass through the wringer.
P.S. If you note in your list above, there is no "traditional" Minny missile cruiser, since the Bellicose is technically a disruption cruiser. It's similar to how Amarr's only drone boat is technically a disruption cruiser as well, despite them having a drone destroyer, BC and laserboat-turned-drone BS.
As soon as you step onto the battlefield, you're already dead, born again at the end of the battle to live on and fight another day. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
4372
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:49:00 -
[527] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:Sacrilege changes are not enough, it is still bad. do something else with it or it will now have replaced the eagle as the worst hac
rest are decent changes though Yeah Sacrileges are really bad. Need some buff more. Ditch the capacity bonus and give it explosion radius or velocity one. That would be good, although to be honest I can think of some handy uses for that capacitor recharge rate.
It also got a nice boost going from 3 lights to 5 medium drones. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Orakkus
Winds of Dawn Kraken.
108
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:55:00 -
[528] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: MUNINN - The Muninn will lose one of its highs and gain a low, which should fit its role as a long range platform extremely well. It also gains a little speed.
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire 5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret optimal range 7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking speed
Slot layout: 6H(-1), 3M, 6L(+1); 5 turrets, 1 launchers(-2) Fittings: 1160 PWG, 355 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1580(-2) / 2000(-4) / 1400(-6) Capacitor (amount) : 1250 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 210(+14) / .571 / 11750000 / 9.3s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 294 / 6(+1) Sensor strength: 14 Ladar(+1) Signature radius: 130
I do have one question regarding the Muninn. Since the armor is considerably heavier than shield, and for a shield tanker having just three mid slots is.. pretty weak, is there any chance that the Muninn will get Tech 2 resists reflected on their armor resist stats instead of shield resists? |
Danny John-Peter
Stay Frosty.
220
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 21:59:00 -
[529] - Quote
My initial impressions are positive-ish with this, the Deimos tank nerf was pretty derp and unwaranted I'm still formulated opinions on Eagles and Cerbs but so far good thoughts overall.
However;
Dat Vaga;
A shield boost bonus on a ship with four mids, terrible base buffer, poor fitting and terrible cap.
What were you possibly thinking with that, its genuinely one of the most stupid decisions I have seen in a balance pass, not only will it be largely pointless for anything other than lolnicheXLASB Vagas (And no, just because you flew them Kill2 doesnt mean they are the norm, or better than a normal vaga in most cases) it doesn't fix the actual issues with the hull which are it has Anemic DPS generally, but particularly out to range despite its range bonus.
It also doesnt fix the fact that the Cyna is still better in every way, even if you wanted to XLASB it the Vaga is worse, just use that spare mid on the Cyna for an SBA and magically you have a better hull, again.
|
XvXTeacherVxV
Nightmare Machinery Illusion of Solitude
18
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:01:00 -
[530] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:If you note in your list above, there is no "traditional" Minny missile cruiser, since the Bellicose is technically a disruption cruiser. It's similar to how Amarr's only drone boat is technically a disruption cruiser as well, despite them having a drone destroyer, BC and laserboat-turned-drone BS.
There's no "traditional" Amarr missile cruiser, and yet they have a Missile HAC. Thoughts?
Maximus Andendare wrote: it's extremely unlikely to see the Muninn changed to be a dedicated missile boat. It'll keep its long range projectile niche, and so in order to accommodate a long-range arty Muninn AND make it a missile boat, it'd have to go to an either/or missile boat.
Why? Because you just say so or because you don't think CCP knows how to change their minds? See industrial rebalance thread. In fact, see every EVE rebalance thread ever. You are simply guessing and the fact that you're suggesting it would have to be an either/or system before a dedicated missile system is based on what exactly? Precedent? The precedent is in the middle of being totally revamped in case you didn't notice. |
|
Dirk Morbho
Mindstar Technology Fatal Ascension
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:04:00 -
[531] - Quote
Chop F*****ing Chop.
Give us 1.1 already |
theelusiveyoda
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
17
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:12:00 -
[532] - Quote
yes, yes, yes, a million times yes! |
Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:12:00 -
[533] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:My initial impressions are positive-ish with this, the Deimos tank nerf was pretty derp and unwaranted I'm still formulated opinions on Eagles and Cerbs but so far good thoughts overall.
However;
Dat Vaga;
A shield boost bonus on a ship with four mids, terrible base buffer, poor fitting and terrible cap.
What were you possibly thinking with that, its genuinely one of the most stupid decisions I have seen in a balance pass, not only will it be largely pointless for anything other than lolnicheXLASB Vagas (And no, just because you flew them Kill2 doesnt mean they are the norm, or better than a normal vaga in most cases) it doesn't fix the actual issues with the hull which are it has Anemic DPS generally, but particularly out to range despite its range bonus.
It also doesnt fix the fact that the Cyna is still better in every way, even if you wanted to XLASB it the Vaga is worse, just use that spare mid on the Cyna for an SBA and magically you have a better hull, again.
I'm pretty sure the point is that the Vaga is buffed by the sig bonus, retains its former capabilities, and can now mount a fierce ASB tank to help with solo work. It lost nothing and gained some neat stuff.
I'm not sure I agree that Cinnabons are better in every way. I personally prefer the Vaga's pricetag. |
Danny John-Peter
Stay Frosty.
220
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:17:00 -
[534] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:Danny John-Peter wrote:My initial impressions are positive-ish with this, the Deimos tank nerf was pretty derp and unwaranted I'm still formulated opinions on Eagles and Cerbs but so far good thoughts overall.
However;
Dat Vaga;
A shield boost bonus on a ship with four mids, terrible base buffer, poor fitting and terrible cap.
What were you possibly thinking with that, its genuinely one of the most stupid decisions I have seen in a balance pass, not only will it be largely pointless for anything other than lolnicheXLASB Vagas (And no, just because you flew them Kill2 doesnt mean they are the norm, or better than a normal vaga in most cases) it doesn't fix the actual issues with the hull which are it has Anemic DPS generally, but particularly out to range despite its range bonus.
It also doesnt fix the fact that the Cyna is still better in every way, even if you wanted to XLASB it the Vaga is worse, just use that spare mid on the Cyna for an SBA and magically you have a better hull, again.
I'm pretty sure the point is that the Vaga is buffed by the sig bonus, retains its former capabilities, and can now mount a fierce ASB tank to help with solo work. It lost nothing and gained some neat stuff. I'm not sure I agree that Cinnabons are better in every way. I personally prefer the Vaga's pricetag.
Price cannot be used as a balancing factor, yes the sig bonus helps but being able to avoid damage and tanking was never its issue, its DPS and projection were, which are not being resolved.
It also cant fit an XLASB and still mount a decent ranged kiting fit, so I dont really see the bonus having any point at all beyond lolscramXLASB vagas.
Edit; that seems to fit into the general trend towards making all PVP sub ABC being Approach>Heat>Scram/Web>Hope your numbers are better. |
sten mattson
1st Praetorian Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:29:00 -
[535] - Quote
The zealot needs either another high/mid or at least a flight of light drones plz.
You did that for the stabber so why not now ? :D IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!! |
Voith
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
130
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:32:00 -
[536] - Quote
sten mattson wrote:The zealot needs either another high/mid or at least a flight of light drones plz.
You did that for the stabber so why not now ? :D Are you really asking why Winmatar and Amarr aren't treated the same? |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1667
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:32:00 -
[537] - Quote
Danny John-Peter wrote:
Price cannot be used as a balancing factor, yes the sig bonus helps but being able to avoid damage and tanking was never its issue, its DPS and projection were, which are not being resolved.
Normally I agree with you 100%, but if they dont take price into consideration now then the HAC's will stay where they are on the dusty shelf of non use because they will still be outclassed or matched by several options that are significantly cheaper, so in this case talking about price is actually a thing that needs to happen.
The Goal: Make HACs viable in EVE again.
The Result with these changes: t1 cruisers, bcs, and ABC's (tier 3 bcs) still do all the jobs they do at a lower cost so they wont be used, just like now.
Lower the hull cost in most cases by 100-150% (to between 50-80 million, somewhere in that ball park) and you'll see competition in ship usage between t1 cruisers, regular Bc's, tier 3 bc's, and hacs. Leave them as is price wise, and nothing will change in the current ship META because these changes do nothing to promote any change from the 'what is good'.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1146
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:33:00 -
[538] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC? You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck Ships that don't suck? Have you SEEN the T1 cruisers? They are far superior to HACs when cost is considered. In some cases they are simply better than their T2 variants, cost be damned. Apparently the applied damage with the buffed medium weapons will be superior to the applied damage from an ABC's large guns vs medium/small targets Idk who thought this would happen but thats not whats going to happen. You bring in a t2 hac snip fleet adn the other guy brings in a t3 ABC snipe fleet and you trade shots, at the end of the day your t2 dead hac fleet is worth 5 times the same amount of dead t3 ABCs, and the result will be the same as now: people will simply fly t3 ABCs because you're GOING to die eventually. I understand that price can't be the sole balancing factor but if CCP can't admit that in some cases players will always take price into account then the balancing they're doing on t2 ships is simply a waste of time.
indeed if angular velocity = 0 then tracking/sig resolution are moot. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Hybrid tech I ammo boost |
Violet Winters
Angelic Eclipse.
92
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:40:00 -
[539] - Quote
Deimos is the only ship I like in this whole set of "buffs".
The vaga is just a ship Korovix and fanboys can fly around with, instead you should of given a better bonus supporting it's role of being a terrible cynabal. Obviously now it's just a "bringing solo back" waste of a hull.
Overall: Meh. Anglic Eclipse.
Lee told me to remove my signature Minmatar and Gallente FW |
Danny John-Peter
Stay Frosty.
221
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 22:40:00 -
[540] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote: SNIP
indeed if angular velocity = 0 then tracking/sig resolution are moot.
Well, your right.
But for the wrong reasons.
In larger scale engagements every "sniper" composition is heavily comped with Huginns, so tracking and applied damage are less of an issue, sheer DPS is usually the deciding factor, and in that the ABCs still have an advantage. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 60 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |