|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 17 post(s) |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 16:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:Vigilant: Keeping the web bonus
does nobody else remember that huge thread we had where we all got mad about webs, and in particular, 90% webs? I'm fairly sure some CCPs agreed that webs are stupid. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 16:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Quote:Vigilant: Keeping the web bonus does nobody else remember that huge thread we had where we all got mad about webs, and in particular, 90% webs? I'm fairly sure some CCPs agreed that webs are stupid. What bonus could you possibly give the Vigilant other than that that differentiates it from the Deimos
you could leave it, but nerf webs down to 50%. they could let it dictate range with web or scram resistance or immunity. 90% webs are dumb and break the game. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
Suitonia wrote: I think the Cynabal needs to find a new niche;
wtb rep bonus |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Suitonia wrote: I think the Cynabal needs to find a new niche;
wtb rep bonus vaga has that already
vaga has no mids though because shields. dual rep dual prop web scram would be nice. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kmelx wrote:Please reconsider and remove the 90% web bonus from all serp ships or nerf it , removing it from the ashimmu is a great start, but don't leave it on the serp hulls.
web range bonuses are also overpowered |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
598
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Also, here is an idea:
For all ewar bonuses (webs, tds, etc), make the bonus apply fully only to the 1st (best) ewar mod, and then have diminishing strength on further ewar.
So a curse might have 1 60% td, 1 50% td, and then normal strength tds after that.
Huginn might have 1 56km web 1 40km web, 1 20 km web, normal webs after that.
or make it so all its webs are 20km |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:26:00 -
[7] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Guess we should remove Lokis, Huginns and Hyenas as well cause someone might get slowed down
not remove, just nerf massively |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
the relevance of frigates that aren't interceptors or very long range ewar frigates |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Stop crying about the serpentis ships, they were legitimately the only really unique ships left in game that didn't suck.
Oh god no not the massive herds of 90% web ships ruining the game...oh wait thats not a thing never mind stop crying about being webbed.
Awesome changes Rise
so its ovepoweredness is determined by how many people use it? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 17:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Stop crying about the serpentis ships, they were legitimately the only really unique ships left in game that didn't suck.
Oh god no not the massive herds of 90% web ships ruining the game...oh wait thats not a thing never mind stop crying about being webbed.
Awesome changes Rise so its ovepoweredness is determined by how many people use it? In EVE, yes, when its broken, everybody uses it, if everybody isn't using it, its probably not really broken and just strong in a certain niche of the game, that niche might happen to be where you are, but I'm sorry, EVE needs more ships that are strong in a certain area and weak in others, its called uniqueness and it makes the game better than everything being some generic hodgepodge of our standard stats. Serpentis ships excel in certain areas, and only in those areas, in everything else you can do they're mediocre at best, which is good game balance.
they excel in all situations where they don't get rekt, and making all smaller ships irrelevant isn't good game balance |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 18:03:00 -
[11] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:
they excel in all situations where they don't get rekt, and making all smaller ships irrelevant isn't good game balance
Damn shame they can't be wiped off the map by a keres, griffon, maulus or kitsune, damn those smaller ship. oh and a sentinel can probably have something to say about those short stubby webs. Damn all those irrelevant smaller ships EDIT: Calling something uncounterable because its counter isn't in your standard ship compliment seems silly, adapt your ship types if you're seeing a lot of Vigilants to include the things that easily counter them. The list is pretty long of ships that fit the bill, at a fraction of its cost.
so no ship is OP because ecm and damps exist, and no ship with modules that use cap is OP because neuts exist |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 18:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:
they excel in all situations where they don't get rekt, and making all smaller ships irrelevant isn't good game balance
Damn shame they can't be wiped off the map by a keres, griffon, maulus or kitsune, damn those smaller ship. oh and a sentinel can probably have something to say about those short stubby webs. Damn all those irrelevant smaller ships EDIT: Calling something uncounterable because its counter isn't in your standard ship compliment seems silly, adapt your ship types if you're seeing a lot of Vigilants to include the things that easily counter them. The list is pretty long of ships that fit the bill, at a fraction of its cost. so no ship is OP because ecm and damps exist, and no ship with modules that use cap is OP because neuts exist Hey nice rollerskates under your argument there, you say it makes smaller shipo irrelevant and I name you 5 smaller ships that aren't irrelevant and you change the direction of the argument to some absurd crap. You can probably do better than that, try sticking to one thread of your argument at a time, you were saying something about making smaller ships irrelevant?
fairly sure I said with the exception of interceptors and long range ewar ships |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 18:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote: If you'll notice I have what you said quoted
I guess I didn't say it to you directly. I'm not really interested in hurf blurfing about goalposts. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
600
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 21:10:00 -
[14] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote:Naomi Anthar wrote:Both heavy and medium drones are getting speed buff at same time. Read Dev Blog about this.
Speaking of EHP of Ogre with 500% bonus ... ain't going down easily. Especially that it will be faster at same time. And on top of that rattle does more damage from missiles than ever. They'll be 20% faster. Whoop-de-doo. That's not really sufficient to get them to move fast enough to get back into my hold before they die. And the EHP will be enough for them to last 50% of the way back into my drone bay instead of 10%...yay...
it is if you're brawling. with drag and drop drones, if you try and shoot the drones on a droneship up close, you're pretty much throwing the fight. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
602
|
Posted - 2014.04.07 21:41:00 -
[15] - Quote
Callisto Helix wrote:CCP Rise wrote:GILA
Gallente Cruiser Bonus: 10% bonus to kinetic and thermal missile damage (was 10% drone damage and hitpoints) More damage type specific missile bonuses make me sad Would it really break the game to give missile ships a straight damage bonus instead of just 1 (most often kinetic)? Isn't choosing your damage type supposed to be one of the few advantages of missiles?
no |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
602
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 11:55:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Ideas:
Change the Vigilant's web strength bonus to a point/scram range bonus. This solves the problem of the Vigilant's web bonus being a poor compliment to the ship's other attributes: the web was useless for kiting fits
serp ships are supposed to be special actually-good blaster brawlers. I think it's dumb that they can kite. also, please get good, 90% web is crazy broken for kiting. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
603
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 12:29:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Morning fellows
I've been reading as fast as I can and I'm almost up to most current post but I'm about to be stuck in meetings for a few hours so I wanted to respond to what I'm seeing so far.
Everyone seems unhappy with the Cynabal - fair enough. The balance oriented folks here are going to have a sit down this afternoon to discuss options to add some more unique flavor to the line. Failing any large changes, I'll at least look at the powegrid and make sure Artillery is viable. Vigilant powergrid seems to be at least a mild concern so I'll look at that again. I'm not sure there will be changes here because if I remember correctly it was trivial to do 1600 + mwd + at least Ions which is probably a bit generous. Will check it out though. Phantasm is mix of excitement and concern about the tension between the bonuses (guns + speed and sig + shields) which is fair, but I think this is part of what makes it interesting and I'm not really worried about it not being strong enough. Part of how I justified the weird bonus set is by looking at how it performs as a simple MWD/shield skrimisher, which it does quite well.
Hopefully back with more in a few hours. Thanks for the response (except you Capqu)
cynabal's problem is that autos are really bad
vigilant holy **** the web bonus please fix, and swap the hybrid bonus for a blaster bonus
phantasm - there's nothing wrong with the shield and sig thing, only massive idiots disagree. I know everything is broken with links and/or snakes, but come on, this thing, with that and deadspace AB? just why |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
604
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 12:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
Julius Foederatus wrote:Please do not nerf the Vigi's PG. There really is no reason to nerf it. It's not like people were complaining about its massive tank or fitting ability. We need those neutrons to be able to apply dps against neuting ships while using the web to keep them at bay. If I have to switch down to Ions, it'll be like shooting spit balls at them. Good luck ever avoiding being neuted again.
ships are supposed to actually have fitting constraints. it's not supposed to be like T3s and maelstroms. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
606
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 14:56:00 -
[19] - Quote
Redjon Gilead Aerten wrote:Regarding the Cynabal, Why all the work on the ship? From I see CCP Rise is saying that
"All three Angel ships are very popular (relative to other pirate faction ships) and generally regarded as 'fun' as far as I know, so risking negative impact with a bigger change didn't seem worthwhile."
Why do we have to give the Cynabal a unique flavor? at the moment it fills the role of a perfect generalized pirate ship. its not spectactular DPS or anything, but its flexible, fast and agile, Why can't THAT be its unique role?
When it comes to designing, in pretty much almost every area the Hippocratic oath is incredibly applicable, First you do no harm.
If it ain't broke, just leave it alone, then no time is wasted anywhere.
The agility nerf seems to be against the entire point of the ship in the first place *shrugs* just the opinion of a newbie here.
because it's just the same as plain minmatar, but less awful |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
606
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 15:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
Mehashi 'Kho wrote:-3 from me I'm afraid. I have enjoyed many of the other changes, but these aren't an overall improvement imho. That gila with fewer drones is FAR too easy to shut down all it's dps by destroying only two drones. The cynabal just became a total waste of space for its money if you cant even fit it like a rupture, it has less PGU and CPU that its tech 1 cheap as shite counterpart. I can't help but think you are taking the pee. As for the vigilant Quote:it was trivial to do 1600 + mwd + at least Ions which is probably a bit generous IT SHOULD BE! You can fit mwd, 1600 and med guns on a t1 cruiser, at 20 times the price you should be able to properly fit a pirate cruiser too. I'm not talking faction mwd, t2 plates and so on, just a basic combat fit. If you expect people to fly 800mm plate cruisers you are balancing to a poor meta. There are already too few reasons to fly a larger ship than a frigate, don't make cruisers rubbish and add to the problem.
going by the exequror navy issue, having to fit electron blasters and 800mm plate is CCP's idea of good balance. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
607
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 17:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:The Serpentis web bonus is extremely strong. We went into this balance pass thinking it was probably too strong and that we may need to tune it down. In the first Pirate Faction thread (the Frigates) I asked specifically for feedback on this bonus and how players felt about it. We also brought it up with the CSM during the summit.
The vast majority of feedback from all angles pointed towards an agreement that in certain environments this bonus was extremely powerful but that it wasn't having a negative effect on the game overall and we should leave it alone. I'm not sure if anyone remembers by now but when I casually mentioned changing this bonus during a Reddit AMA there was an outcry to prevent us from doing that at all costs.
Internally we are a bit divided even though we all agree it's one of the game's most powerful bonuses. I want to try and leave it because unique points of power like this one, as long as they aren't oppressive, are more interesting than moving everything towards a middle ground.
basically reddit and the council of nullsec are all awful. pls fix webs. you should know how people are in this game - JF owners will tell you JFs aren't broken, people who use ASBs will tell you that ASBs are fine. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
610
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 17:55:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mehashi 'Kho wrote: What is wrong with webs?
Almost every pvp ship has one, and outside of this thread I have never heard them referred to as overpowered.
they're too good, and kind of wreck the sig and speed vs tank thing that's supposed to be a big deal in eve. 90% webs allow anything to hit anything. with regular webs, you need to put in a bit more effort and use a few of them, possibly with painters as well. it should be obvious - the reason every ship has one is because they're really really good. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
611
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 18:27:00 -
[23] - Quote
Naomi Anthar wrote:Wow thanks for keeping quiet substantial pwg nerf on vigilant while you save Cyna/Ashimmu !!! Gj Rise. Cynas should stay as good as they are and Ashimmu won't suffer with pwg since it won't fit one more med neut/nos at all.
CCP has this idea that 800mm plates are actually viable, I think. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
613
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 19:10:00 -
[24] - Quote
Mehashi 'Kho wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Mehashi 'Kho wrote: What is wrong with webs?
Almost every pvp ship has one, and outside of this thread I have never heard them referred to as overpowered.
they're too good, and kind of wreck the sig and speed vs tank thing that's supposed to be a big deal in eve. 90% webs allow anything to hit anything. with regular webs, you need to put in a bit more effort and use a few of them, possibly with painters as well. it should be obvious - the reason every ship has one is because they're really really good. I always assumed it was more like damage controls. You dont put a damage control on every ship because they are omg wtf op, you do it because it is the logical thing to do and although not necessarily the best, it's at least the most flexible use youll get out of a low slot. And on any ship that doesn't project damage beyond 20 km or track well under 10km, it is likewise just the sensible thing to do to use a web so you can apply your damage. It is not the best of anything, but the most likely to be useful. I only really do solo and small fleet (<50) stuff myself, but I can't say webs have ever been an issue worth looking at. I fear a 40+km curse neut than can't be kited more than an 18km 90% vigilant web. But I don't think either are unbalanced for the cost to bring them to the battle. Yes some ships and their abilities are strong, but that is the variation that makes it interesting, and especially with the ludicrous cost of pirate cruisers the only reason they are worth the isk over the t1 base ship. Let us not race to the bottom, this is all getting boring enough without losing variation in fittings and flying styles. All this homogenising is removing flavour. If you reduce the web bonused ships, they lose their niche as range dictation which being hybrid boats is the only thing keeping them viable for their cost. Then they are just like any other ship but unable to apply their dps properly, a vigi at 20km+ is an expensive paperweight. And why do we always get dropped on by you guys with sacrileges, t3s, absolutions etc? Surely if they were so OP you should be dropping vindi and vigilant fleets on any passing t1 cruiser gang... maybe webs aren't that op after all?
damage controls probably are too good. I don't really get what they're supposed to be good for, but other than being great on almost everything, one nice thing they do is allow for ballsy gank fits that aren't complete paper. shield tank people could possibly get mad about how damage controls aren't so good for them as they are for armour people. maybe they do get mad about this, I don't know.
you could happily have a +50% web strength bonus on top of ~40% normal webs. there'd still be 'flavour' and range dictation. nerfing powerful modules will bring more flavour, because not everyone will be using them on everything anymore. I'd probably be down for some sort of very steep stacking penalty on webs as well though - it's kind of hard for it to be a reasonable module, and then apply its effect 3x.
stacking up a bunch of regular webs will let you kill any frigate with a couple of cruisers. this is probably why people don't obsess over vigilants in cruiser fleets - normal webs are good enough already with that many. also because they'll die. it's a support ship. you don't need a fleet of them. I guess also because people are getting better at the game and using longer range stuff more.
try engaging a cruiser gang with a gang of brawling frigates. you'll see that webs are 'an issue'. the whole point in being in this small fast ship is your speed keeps you alive, but then you get triple webbed and you die instantly. I don't even bother running AB gangs anymore, all the survivability comes from ewar support, because the ABs don't really do much. the only frigates you see used in proper gangs are the very fast long range kind that never gets webbed. some people use AFs, but those are trash. it's the same with cruisers against battleships - your speed isn't going to help you out against mega pulse lasers, afterburner or no. you're going to get webbed down to nothing, then wrecked. not mentioning destroyers because they're a joke.
I think the reason other people don't notice this stuff is basically because I'm better than them. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
614
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:09:00 -
[25] - Quote
because if you can't make a fleet out of it, it's clearly not OP |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
615
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 13:54:00 -
[26] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:Battleships coming soon I'm not sure exactly when we will be able to get this stuff on Singularity but hopefully it won't be too long.
can they please be less disappointing than the frigates and cruisers |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
615
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 14:13:00 -
[27] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Harvey James wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:Mike Whiite wrote:Giving it a missile bonus instead of kenetic/thermic bones and making the drone bonus more general would make it more complete (even if that requires a to tune down it's current damage potential a little bit.) Yes, I am really disliking these missile specific damage bonuses. It defeats the whole purpose of missiles imo and I am not really sure what the point in it is. Keep the specific missile bonuses to stealth bombers, and leave the rest of the missile ships versatile. Are we going to start giving bonuses to only specific ammo types for the other guns, as that is the next logical step. actually it is quite logical as the gurista missions use kin/Therm missiles .. so its following its races lore damage type.. It doesn't make sense from a gameplay perspective though. One of the advantages of missiles is that you can choose damage type. Cutting down on the users choice and the ways to influence the fight is surely a bad thing. I just wondered what is the reasoning purely from a gameplay perspective for having such bonuses.
actually that's just an advantage that you made up, because you think you should get all-damage type bonuses all the time. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
616
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 14:21:00 -
[28] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote: If you are old enough to remember, then actually that was the status quo for many years. It is only recently that we started getting all these missile damage specific bonuses.
Edit - 2005 player, so you should know this.
that doesn't mean it's the way it should or should not be. when I think missiles, I think of range versatility, capless, FOFs, useful T2 ammo (unlike LR turrets), and less ewar vulnerability. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
617
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 15:15:00 -
[29] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote: Can the Adrestia also get this? Currently its point range bonus means it can point further than it can lock. It is slightly annoying.
nerfing links would also fix your problem |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
618
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 15:29:00 -
[30] - Quote
TinkerHell wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:TinkerHell wrote: Can the Adrestia also get this? Currently its point range bonus means it can point further than it can lock. It is slightly annoying.
nerfing links would also fix your problem Nope :( Adrestia point range before links using a Domination Warp Disrupter = 60km, pre heat. Adrestia lock range = 45km, with skills 56km.
oh. I guess sensor integrity then. I think that the short lock range, like with the serpentis ships, is CCP's failed attempt to get people to use blasters. I think they should try harder. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
618
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 10:11:00 -
[31] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote: (and yes, I assigned the bonuses in a way that racially makes a lot more sense)
no you didn't, and your suggestions are bad |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
618
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 12:02:00 -
[32] - Quote
a frigate can kite and passively shield tank 200dps worth of 8km/s warrior IIs. you don't seriously think that some damage bonused lights on a TQ gila actually do anything, do you? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
618
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 14:15:00 -
[33] - Quote
the incursion crowd is terrible |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
620
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 15:21:00 -
[34] - Quote
Vadeim Rizen wrote: EDIT: It's ok to just leave it alone all together. Nobody would be mad at you. Actually it appears from 95% percent of the posters here we'd rather you just leave it alone to begin with.
but it's awful |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
620
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 15:49:00 -
[35] - Quote
Denrace wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:TinkerHell wrote: Can the Adrestia also get this? Currently its point range bonus means it can point further than it can lock. It is slightly annoying.
nerfing links would also fix your problem I wish someone would nerf your posting dumbass
that's you, you're a dumbass |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
620
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 16:23:00 -
[36] - Quote
LaserzPewPew wrote: Also, a missile bonus on a drone boat has very little place.
why |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 11:15:00 -
[37] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:When are we getting the battleship proposals. I thought they would be out by today at the latest...
you should pretty much already know what they're going to be. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 11:16:00 -
[38] - Quote
Unezka Turigahl wrote:Can the Gila get at least as much cargo space as the Ishtar? Currently Gila has 250 compared to Ishtar's 460. And the Ishtar doesn't have to carry around missiles to make use of all its bonuses. The missile spewing Sacrilege gets a big ole badonkadonk 615 cargo hold. Biggow!
Gila sucks for exploration because of its cargo hold.
CCP just pulls numbers out of its ass for cargoholds. I think my vexor has less than my myrmidon for some reason. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 14:54:00 -
[39] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote: just ship toasting or trolling as usual.
everything I say is correct, but presented in a bitter shitposty way |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 14:56:00 -
[40] - Quote
Endo Saissore wrote:Most of the changes are exciting but I'm seeing a problem with the overall theme. Aren't pirate ships suppose to be more versatile than tech 2 ships? As it stands I know the phantasm will definitely have an afterburner, the Gila will definitely be using medium drones, and the Cynabal will definitely be using autocannons as opposed to artillery fit. The ships haven't even hit SiSi and their fitting options are being squandered :/
that's not the useful kind of versatility, unless you're talking about mobile depots. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 16:58:00 -
[41] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:well they said that about T3's .. they should be versatility enshrined ... but with pirate they said improvement over T1 but with a twist
I think CCP's idea of versatility is stuff with lots of utility slots, dronebays and possibly range versatility. so for example a sacrilege is versatile while a zealot isn't. I don't think it's about how many possible setups there are. I don't think it really provides a way to fix T3s though, and I don't think these pirate ships are about versatility either. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
621
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 17:19:00 -
[42] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:
Apparently the plan is to just going to ignore all the outcry over the Gila and Guristas and push it through in leu of some ridiculous, uncompromising vision on the part of some ******* who doesn't understand the game and is ignorant all the people he is shitting on.
The only people who think these changes to Guristas are interesting or exciting are the people who aren't going to be flying them.
if all goes as planned, they'll listen to your outcry, then decide that it's stupid and disregard it. your complaints are meant to actually be valid if they're to have an effect. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 19:37:00 -
[43] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:
Apparently the plan is to just going to ignore all the outcry over the Gila and Guristas and push it through in leu of some ridiculous, uncompromising vision on the part of some ******* who doesn't understand the game and is ignorant all the people he is shitting on.
The only people who think these changes to Guristas are interesting or exciting are the people who aren't going to be flying them.
if all goes as planned, they'll listen to your outcry, then decide that it's stupid and disregard it. your complaints are meant to actually be valid if they're to have an effect. tell me why i'm wrong instead of just making stupid, baseless statements. you are like a child getting angry because you don't have the mental capacity to form a proper argument. Pathetic.
that's you m8 |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 23:51:00 -
[44] - Quote
Xavier Thorm wrote:Also, can we get a less horrendously ugly model for the Gila already?
get out |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:52:00 -
[45] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:Hasril Pux wrote: No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them.
Don't say no one is complaining about it. The velocity bonus greatly helps to in torpedo fits and shortens the time between target switches for cruise missiles. If these ships need balance, fine. But why unnecessarily take things away from them and gimp so severely(20 drone bandwidth) ? We chose to fly these ships because of their high versatility. The only people who like these changes are people who don't fly Guristas.
damage-bonused cruise will probably outdamage and outrange torpedoes, without all the other horrible problems torpedoes get (constant reloads, ridiculous charge size, and yeah, laughable range). you're only trading versatility here when swapping sentries for mediums. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 19:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Fabulous Rod wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote:Fabulous Rod wrote:Hasril Pux wrote: No one seems to be complaining about the loss of the 50% range bonus on missiles. Neither am I, that has always seemed like an unnecessary bonus on these ships that didn't fit with any of my uses for them.
Don't say no one is complaining about it. The velocity bonus greatly helps to in torpedo fits and shortens the time between target switches for cruise missiles. If these ships need balance, fine. But why unnecessarily take things away from them and gimp so severely(20 drone bandwidth) ? We chose to fly these ships because of their high versatility. The only people who like these changes are people who don't fly Guristas. damage-bonused cruise will probably . try not to talk out of your *******. Thanks.
what do the stars mean |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
622
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 21:30:00 -
[47] - Quote
Nerf Burger wrote:Web a drone. Half the Gilas DPS just went out the window. Not enough room in drone bay for a 2nd set.
I don't know why nobody else gets this. I'd really prefer the usual 5 drones, even though they would have much less HP. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
642
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:49:00 -
[48] - Quote
Mariner6 wrote:Let me start by quoting CCP Fozzie:
"At the frigate level with the Daredevil, the power of 90% webs primarily comes from range control. At the battleship level with the Vindicator it primarily comes from transversal control (especially when used as a force multiplier). At the cruiser level it falls in the middle and ends up being (relatively speaking) less powerful and less oppressive as a result."
That said I find the counters to all three of these boats fairly reasonable and numerous. Which is why you really don't see many of them compared to some of the other choices. Plus committing these boats to a fight is always win..or die. Not like some of the kiting/GTFO options that exist in the other hulls.
I've been glad to see these boats keep their web bonus...but of the three that certainly did not need a power grid nerf, it's the Vigilant. You hardly see them used, and you'll see them less now. There is just simply nothing OP about a boat you can just neut and kill with ease.
rail DD. also, other than being very far away, the only counters are things that counter everything. another reason you don't see vigilants is because they're cruisers, but they don't have the battleship tank you need on a cruiser to not instantly die in gang combat. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
711
|
Posted - 2014.05.25 21:54:00 -
[49] - Quote
Sheimi Madaveda wrote:Poor Cynabal :( It had pretty limited CPU compared to the Vagabond and the only real thing it had was PG to play around with and the EPIC scan resolution. I mean, it also has great agility over the Vagabond which it is keeping, but that seems kinda "meh" compared to what it is losing. Zamyslinski wrote: except mordus ships will be **** when it comes to aplying dmg so 3 assault frigs will **** you up unless you use rapids (and still get dunked due to reload time)
Let's just forget that the Orthrus is faster than every AF in game save for Minmatar ones, and that those AFs have to burn a large distance to come close at which point one of them will be dead and the one that gets tackle will be neuted while the other one will be scrammed before it can close in. Also, each of them would need 13k EHP while being that fast for ONE of them to barely survive the first clip of RLML ammo, and then there's whatever drone DPS is being applied. So yes, if you have 3 nano Jaguars with a nice shield tank, you can watch all of them die as they burn 100km from your gang. Wonderful. Anyways, Scram/Web/Ham is pretty legit if you don't care for the RLML kite, and this isn't the Mordu thread.
it's faster than a wolf, it's only slower than a jag (probably). jags have less dps than most t1 frigates though. just when you thought AFs couldn't get any worse. |
|
|
|