Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
7684
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 01:58:00 -
[121] - Quote
Hey guys, I'm not going to be posting a lot in these threads between now and Monday, when these changes hit sisi. Just want to reassure you all that I'm still going to be reading every post in this thread and that I appreciate the feedback. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
Galphii
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
184
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:03:00 -
[122] - Quote
Just a little more lock range would be good. A teeny tiny bit. Also, I recall seeing a new model for the crow/raptor/condor at one point - are we likely to see this new model for this expansion (or ever for that matter)? X |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
638
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:05:00 -
[123] - Quote
Galphii wrote:Also, I recall seeing a new model for the crow/raptor/condor at one point - are we likely to see this new model for this expansion (or ever for that matter)?
IIRC that was proved to be a fake some time ago -áwww.promsrage.com |
Julius Foederatus
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
214
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:05:00 -
[124] - Quote
A few things. I won't comment too much on the Ares, but for the love of god, do not make it a missile-only boat.
With that out of the way, the Taranis needs more fitting. It has a pathetic amount of fitting compared to its t1 counterpart, the Atron. What's the point of all those nice slots if we can't fit anything in them?
Lastly, and this may be slightly controversial, why not give us something on the interceptors that's not almost completely useless (bubble immunity) and make them able to tackle supers. Bubble immunity in low sec means diddly ******* squat, but having a light ship capable of tackling supercaps would be immensely useful to everyone, and it would let newer players be involved in supercap warfare in a way that they couldn't before.
And before all you ******* whiney super pilots come in here and cry about my proposal, consider that we're talking about an incredibly paper ship with terrible sensor strength and lock range. A good group should be able to deal with them without much trouble. This change would at least stop this chicanery of supers lolling their way through low sec fights without fear of reprisal from anyone except PL. |
Gallastian Khanid
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
17
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 02:18:00 -
[125] - Quote
Great changes.
I think with the Malediction getting a 4th low for a high and not losing any PG the MWD MSE Point fit is going to end up substantially stronger than the Ares now. The Ares needs an MAPC to do the same, so where before the Malediction had lower mass, lower speed, and came out very close with both fitting 2 speed mods now the Malediction can look at fitting 3 speed mods. The two ships are differentiated in other ways so it doesn't matter. For the record, I'm a Malediction ppilot, not an Ares pilot, so this is an observation not a complaint.
Please keep bubble immunity on the combat Ceptors. That bonus is going to be a great quality of life improvement when soloing.
More lock range would be nice, but I like the choice between fitting one lock range mod and performing better once tackle is established vs putting two lock range mods on to get initial tackle as quickly as possible.
I'd be slightly concerned that the Crow is going to perform better across the board than the Stiletto in practice. It appears that you want the Crow to be tankier while the Stiletto is faster/more agile. However, in practice the Stiletto is going to have to put a little more effort into lock range and a little more effort into packing a tight fit on there. I am guessing without EFT that the ~standard fits~ on the Crow are going to have an MSE II while the Stiletto settles for a Medium Azeotropic Ward Salubrity. I think you should give the Stiletto either more fitting than the Crow or more lock range than the Crow rather than throwing the advantage in both fields to the Crow. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2390
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 03:04:00 -
[126] - Quote
I'm not seeing all that much to sell me on the new Raptor. It's not as terrible as the version currently on TQ but then it couldn't be much worse. Your description says it all - a Taranis with less DPS and less EHP, exchange for more mobility and range (but not as much as the other races' tackleceptors). Would a 4th mid really be too much to ask for here?
The crow is looking extremely nice though. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Clendestined
Apologetic Tendencies
1
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 03:16:00 -
[127] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Nice.
Couple of things. The Taranis only gets 1 frig bonus. Why? The Ares has split weapon ones. I thought you were moving away from that? If you wish it to be missiles, then make it so.
This. |
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 04:04:00 -
[128] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:Garviel Tarrant wrote:stuff It's basically a faster, smaller, closer range Slicer. You fly it a similar way, but it's much much better suited to fighting other fast ships than the Slicer is. I think the easiest way to understand it would be to think of it as the stopgap between the Retribution & Slicer. Combined with the fast warp and bubble immunity, this'll be a really really fun ship to fly Interceptors are meant to be the fastest means to gain tackle on a target. That includes moving through excessively bubbled systems.
With a interceptors speed they can already move VERY fast though bubbled systems. As it is now bubbles are basically the only way to catch a interceptor.
By making them nullified that takes out the one real way of possibly catching a interceptor. We already have nullified T3s, and MJD battleships. With the addition of nullified interceptors we might as well just remove bubbles from the game.
As a fast tackle, interceptors would benefit greatly from immunity to the MWD canceling effects of warp scramblers.
|
Gallastian Khanid
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
18
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 04:21:00 -
[129] - Quote
Teth Razor wrote:With a interceptors speed they can already move VERY fast though bubbled systems. As it is now bubbles are basically the only way to catch a interceptor.
By making them nullified that takes out the one real way of possibly catching a interceptor. We already have nullified T3s, and MJD battleships. With the addition of nullified interceptors we might as well just remove bubbles from the game.
As a fast tackle, interceptors would benefit greatly from immunity to the MWD canceling effects of warp scramblers.
Wow friend. Think about that a second. 'Interceptors are too hard to tackle. With bubble immunity they will be uncatchable. We should make them immune to scrams instead so they can burn through our bubble at 5km/s.'
Also bubbles aren't what catches interceptors. Fastlocking, gatecamping scrubs in Recons catch Interceptors. I don't think I've ever died without having my MWD shut down (neut or scram) and of those 95% has been scrams.
You are also suggesting that combat Ceptors with scrams fit should be able to dictate range against everything in Nullsec that doesn't have a 90% web.
Just wow. |
Rockstara
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
30
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 04:24:00 -
[130] - Quote
I think the idea of a combat interceptor when it is outclassed by every other frigate in the game in that role is kind of silly.
There was a period when the damage output at close range and speed to close the gap of the taranis made it a feared ship - the ideal blaster ship. However, frigates have moved on and none of the combat ceptors seem capable of holding their own against even a t1 frigate. They should be fast moving and extremely hard hitting such as -50% optimal+falloff +100% rof. |
|
Teth Razor
Chicks on Speed
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 04:49:00 -
[131] - Quote
Gallastian Khanid wrote:Teth Razor wrote:With a interceptors speed they can already move VERY fast though bubbled systems. As it is now bubbles are basically the only way to catch a interceptor.
By making them nullified that takes out the one real way of possibly catching a interceptor. We already have nullified T3s, and MJD battleships. With the addition of nullified interceptors we might as well just remove bubbles from the game.
As a fast tackle, interceptors would benefit greatly from immunity to the MWD canceling effects of warp scramblers.
Wow friend. Think about that a second. 'Interceptors are too hard to tackle. With bubble immunity they will be uncatchable. We should make them immune to scrams instead so they can burn through our bubble at 5km/s.' Also bubbles aren't what catches interceptors. Fastlocking, gatecamping scrubs in Recons catch Interceptors. I don't think I've ever died without having my MWD shut down (neut or scram) and of those 95% has been scrams. You are also suggesting that combat Ceptors with scrams fit should be able to dictate range against everything in Nullsec that doesn't have a 90% web. Just wow.
On jump in its next to imposable to catch a inty if he just crashes the gate. usually intys get caught on drag bubbles, especaly if they are ahead of their fleet. So in a scenario like that webs and neuts are more then enough to kill a inty, even if he has immunity to mwd cancelling.
All im saying is if they become nullified nobody will EVER catch them if they choose not to fight.
More nullified is BAD, REALLY BAD for null sec. |
Xindi Kraid
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
610
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 05:11:00 -
[132] - Quote
Rockstara wrote:I think the idea of a combat interceptor when it is outclassed by every other frigate in the game in that role is kind of silly. What exactly is the point of combat interceptors nowadays anyways? What do they specifically bring to the battlespace that you can't find anywhere else. As a group all interceptors are designed to be super fast tackle, but that's not a role that relies much on dps. I know I fit a taranis for skirmisher/hunter killer duties for mauling frigates, but that's something I can easily fit a half dozen other ships for just as well or possibly better. ===
Regarding the ares: I do get what people are saying about gallente ships not being missile ships, but Roden has always said it is a missile ship manufacturer. it's not really any different from Khanid ships being T2 missile users on a guns/drones race. I enjoy the variety, and I believe it helps serve to encourage players to cross train a bit, which is something I do like to see. I should note, though, if both Amarr and Gallente are going to have T2 missile boats, Caldari and Minmatar need some love and get some drone boats.
Now, all that said, I don't know the real reason for the change; the use of hybrids fit just fine and worked well enough, and in the past roden hasn't meant missile bonuses, it has meant, oh this ship has one extra missile slot, which, granted is a bit of a cop out as far as that description goes. A note in favor of not doing missiles is the fact that if you aren't a missile user, you are limited to just one other ship, so you can't choose which ship role you want in that case, but that goes for the other tree races as well. I sometimes begin to think maybe a few new ships need to be slotted in to give us a bit more weapon variety. |
Tragedy
The Creepshow
80
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 05:15:00 -
[133] - Quote
What the **** are you doing to the ares? All this rebalancing... you've fixed so many broken crappy split damage ships. Now you're putting one back in? It doesnt work. If you wanna have split damage for gallente let it be in drones and hybrids. Hybrids and missiles are ******* terrible. |
Boris Amarr
Viziam Amarr Empire
73
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 05:29:00 -
[134] - Quote
What about increasing Max Targeting Range ?
Over heated Warp Disruptor - 36 km Max Targeting Range - 27.5 km
is it joke? may be Max Targeting Range should be rebalanced?
Also Crusader must have bonus for Optimal. Now Imperial Navy Slicer more dangerous then Crusader, because any Interceptor in close range = dead Interceptor
you can repleace:
5% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage per level -> 15% bonus to Small Energy Turret optimal range per level and increase total Capacitor amount instead of this bonus |
Prometheus Exenthal
mnemonic.
638
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 05:45:00 -
[135] - Quote
To clear a couple things up;
- The rocket bonus on the Ares is crap. It's a mere 10dps per T2 rocket launcher, assuming you can even fit one. Rather have the tracking bonus back.
- The "max targeting range" numbers are the stats prior to skills, implants, rigs, or bonuses
- The "single damage bonus" on the Taranis is actually two bonuses combined. If you were paying attention when the change was made you would know that it's actually TWO 5% damage bonuses. If you'd prefer, I'm sure CCP wouldn't mind splitting it to make the other frig bonus the tracking, and the 2nd inty bonus damage.
-áwww.promsrage.com |
Alghara
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 06:21:00 -
[136] - Quote
hi CCP Fozzie,
The modification for acceleration is great,
About nullifier, I believe now it's very too difficult to catch them, and it's not really interesting to have this bonus. Because already the new acceleration make the interceptor really good.
But they have one thing to modified. The interceptor must be fast, and can tackle the ennemy. With new module micro jump drive, it's difficult to tackle this ship because the bonus on the scramble is not good on the interceptor. 5% per level is too short when you have already a short distance.
full skill 11.5.
That will be usefull to have :
5% / level disrupt range 100 % and the scramble range (ship bonus).
Crusader :
increase the capacitor. |
Valleria Darkmoon
Heretic Army Heretic Initiative
128
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 06:33:00 -
[137] - Quote
Fozzie,
On the Malediction description, it says you're converting the rocket damage modifier to a light missile RoF bonus but it then lists the bonus as a RoF bonus for rockets and light missiles.
If the bonus is correct as listed I'm all for it but I generally like rockets on my Malediction and would very much like to keep the option open. Clarification on this would be greatly appreciated.
-Val. |
Catherine Laartii
Perkone Caldari State
34
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 06:42:00 -
[138] - Quote
Liang Nuren wrote:The Crusader's problem is that small pulse doesn't have enough range to be really useful without a utility high for a nos. Then you go and kill the utility high (for a nos) from the Malediction too. Seriously man, why do you ******* hate utility highs?
-Liang
The Crusader is designed to use beams effectively with kiting, hence the tracking and cap reduction bonuses. The increase in fitting along with better cap allows for it to actually make a decent fit a reality, as it was severely wanting in CPU before. Do not use pulses on it since it doesn't get a range bonus; that's what the slicer is for.
|
Xio Zheng
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 06:48:00 -
[139] - Quote
That moment when the ship you fly gets buffed in every way possible. Thank you for the new maladiction. |
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
2143
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 06:53:00 -
[140] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote: - The rocket bonus on the Ares is crap. It's a mere 10dps per T2 rocket launcher, assuming you can even fit one. Rather have the tracking bonus back.
Not Empty Quoting.
Ch+½j+ì Katrina Oniseki ~ (RDC) Chief Operations Officer ~ [I-RED] Director of Public Relations |
|
Chessur
Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension
156
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 06:58:00 -
[141] - Quote
Fozzie,
Please consider getting rid of a rather useless role bonus on the ceptors.
Imagine: A drag bubble is placed. Ceptors go chasing after enemy fleet, and warp along with friendlies. Friendlies are caught in the bubble, while the ceptors land where.... 100K Away? How in the hell is that useful? Ceptors never had a problem with bubbles. Hell they can all travel close to 8KS+ When heated / linked. Bubbles do not stop nor scare them. You can travel 50K in about 6.5 seconds. Why in the hell do you want bubble immunity?
As for 'chasing' targets through warp, the ceptors now with actually applied warp speed in space, will easily allow them to catch gangs.
What ceptors really need is a way to actually bring some utility to a fleet, besides a fast long point. Why has the idea not been explored about giving the ceptors increased survivability in scram range? Because currently, if a ceptor comes near a neut / web its insta popped. None of the changes you have given them does anything to rectify this- or at least make them viable frig PvPers.
|
Angelus Ryan
One Ronin
41
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 07:11:00 -
[142] - Quote
Give them something resembling an actual lock range, for heaven's sake... |
Azula Kishtar
Lonely among the Stars
26
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 07:20:00 -
[143] - Quote
The new Malediction looks great. I'll very much fly it with joy.
Crusader needed that fitting buff. The lack of a third mid still hurts it. I'm not of the opinion that every ship needs to be able to fit prop mod plus full tackle, but in case of the Crusader it kinda does hurt a lot.
Crow will work very, very well as the new fleet Ceptor. It has (for Interceptor standards) very good lock range, four mids and can even hit with the missiles at great ranges. It is basically what you'd expect from a T2 Condor. Did i mention i hate Condors?
I'm not sure what to think about the Raptor. Giving it enough PG to actually possibly be able to fit Rails on a not completly gimped fit was needed of course. I really think you should give it the fourth mid the Crow has though.
Taranis remains great. The warp changes alone ensure this ship got buffed even in Low despite the EHP loss.
Again, i'm not sure what to think of the Ares. Not a fan of the split weapon bonus at all. I'd favour a tracking bonus.
Claw suffers from the exact same thing as the Crusader.
Stiletto remains good, though is now probably pretty much overshadowed by the Crow.
All in all, warp changes and bubble immunity mean all of these ships are better off as a net result. However, i think the inter-class balance could have been better.
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
583
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 07:40:00 -
[144] - Quote
Hey you know I always complain at first iteration !
So....
This time I wont. Good job
Edit : Oh wait I found something : The shield bonus on the raptor is USELESS. G££ <= Me |
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
878
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 07:58:00 -
[145] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:make them able to tackle supers.
Pff, half-measures.
All ships should be able to tackle supercaps. No combat ship should have penalty-free, built-in WCS. This isn't 2006 and we're not flying stabbabonds any more. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2392
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 08:13:00 -
[146] - Quote
I'm not a fan of the Ares as a missile platform, but if that's the direction you're pushing them in then....ok. Fine. But split bonuses and only 2 hardpoints for each is pretty lacking. Either go all-in on the missiles, add a third missile hardpoint and take away the hybrid bonus, or add a missile and turret hardpoint option in a Scythe Fleet Issue style so we can at least choose to specialise one way or the other. As it is we have a theme of 'Roden Shipyards favour missiles, but they're not very good at it'.
(Preferred option: Drop the Roden = Missiles angle completely and give them a proper Gallente theme to work with) Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Suitonia
Corp 54 Curatores Veritatis Alliance
194
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 08:36:00 -
[147] - Quote
These changes look pretty good although there are a few things that stand out to me.
The Claw and the Crusader still lack a third mid-slot. The option to fit Dual-Propulsion is the main reason why the Taranis is still the only current "combat" viable Interceptor. I think the Claw & The Crusader could probably use some adjustments to the fitting slots. The Crusader also lacks a utility high-slot which really hurts its ability as a close range laser platform. And the Imperial Navy Slicer performs better than it in direct combat for anyone looking for a ship to engage outside of scram range. Although I'm sure some people will complain of 'sameness', Adapting the slot layouts to be similar to the Taranis would probably make them all more viable while still retaining different racial feel between them.
What I'd recommend doing; Crusader: Remove a Turret Slot. Change the 5% laser damage bonus to 10% replacing the Cap bonus. Add 5m3 drone bay and bandwidth. (This makes up for the DPS loss, it will suffer slightly more cap consumption due to shooting 3 effective turrets than the 2 (4 x0.5) but I think that's a fair trade-off. Move a Low-Slot to a Mid- Slot. (Similar to what happened with the Coercer). This will give it the option of the utility high-slot, and better mid-slot options such as dual-prop or a combination of tackle mods. The Crusader lacks the CPU required to fit multiple damage mods, the Malediction is the better dedicated tackler, and the Slicer is the better ranged kiter so it cannot really use that low-slot for much.
Claw: Low-slot to Mid-slot.
The Ares bonus still feels like garbage. Give back the tracking bonus it's much more useful than the missile bonus.
|
Luscius Uta
Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation
54
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 08:40:00 -
[148] - Quote
The good:
-finally this class is going to be able to actually "intercept" other ships, due to changes to warp acceleration -built-in interdiction nullifier (on a related note, I think we won't wait long 'till someone loses an interceptor with a bunch of expensive blueprints somwhere in 0.0)
The bad:
-I'm gonna be a millionth person in this thread to say that Interceptors need more lock range (aside from Caldari ones). What's the point of having longer warp disruptor range than your actual lock range??
-Raptor gaining resist bonus but not having enough midslots to actually make use of it. Even with the Powergrid boost and MAPC, you probably won't be able to fit a MSE without degrading to Electron blasters/75mm Rails.
-Ares having a bonus to missiles to silly. Missiles are not part of Gallente philosophy (yes, that means I would remove the missile bonus from Eris and Lachesis as well). I would give it a 20-25 m^3 drone bay and replace missile bonus with some kind of drone-related bonus, while nerfing the Small Hybrid Turret damage bonus to 5% per level. The old boring 10% to drone hitpoints and damage would be OP on such a small ship, but a bonus to drone microwarpdrive speed should fit well within its designed purpose.
The ugly:
Yes Fozzie, I'm looking at you |
Xio Zheng
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 08:49:00 -
[149] - Quote
did some number crunching on the maladiction. It is late, so there may be errors. So far ive got this:
Highs 3x Light Missile Launcher II
Mids Warp Disruptor II Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron Gistii B-type 1mn microwarpdrive
Lows 2x Overdrive injector II 1x nano II 1x Ballistic Control System
Rigs 1x Ionic Field Projector 1x Bay Loading Accelerator
fits with the boost to CPU
All Skills V, no booster, no implants Speed : 5183.46 m/s Lock range : 42.98 km DPS : 95.1 at 42.2 with navy 116.12 at 31.6 with fury 83.09 at 21.1 with precision point : 30km TP : 45 km cap stable
The Boost to CPU, the change in slot layout, change to interceptor bonus, and the increase in base lock range all contribute to more then doubling the dps of this ship. Very good CCP, very good. Ive been flying this thing with 44 dps for ages, death by a thousand cuts and all, now it has some ok teeth. |
SubStandard Rin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2013.10.03 09:00:00 -
[150] - Quote
Goldensaver wrote:Nice to see the EHP nerf is less than was worried. On to read more.
The role bonuses: Fantastic. Well deserved, glad to see these will be able to hold point like the T1's at least.
Crusader: The fitting buff was well deserved. I'm very happy to see that. I'm still quite disappointed by the lack of mids though. It's not going to cut it for fast tackle whatsoever with only 2 mids. It could probably also have used more cap. I don't think this is enough. Still hurts for lock range, though doesn't need it as much as the fleet 'ceptors because of the lower point range. But more wouldn't hurt it.
Malediction: The extra CPU is very nice. Glad to see it. The extra low is nice, but the loss of the utility high will hurt it as it will have to give up another launcher for a nos if it wants to keep full tackle against neuts. I guess it is a decent fleet oriented change though, as it didn't need that damage anyways, and the EHP makes up for it. Another mid would have been nice though. The lock range though... Needs a bigger buff then that. It's a fleet inty and needs more range for the long points.
So far the overarching issues I'm seeing are: low cap regen, low lock range. The role bonus helps with the former, but more would be nice.
Would it hurt too much to add a slot or two to the class, mostly mid slots to make it more realistic to fit full tackle and *maybe* a tank as well? 3 mid slots should be the bare minimum on an Interceptor. Also, scan res would be nice. The Slasher has more than the Stiletto. As far as fast tackle, they're still not that great compared to the T1.
You know what? I can't be bothered to write up my opinions on the remaining 'ceptors. The fleet 'ceptors seem to be lacking in lock range, mids (on some), and cap life to keep them tackling. The combat 'ceptors... They seem alright, but more like squishy AFs than anything else.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 26 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |