Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Maya Rkell
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.23 23:50:00 -
[31]
Triest, heh. Except I did. 4 weeks, 94 kills. And yes, a RCUII. A MWD, a T2 rep and so on. "Barely" 100km is more than enough except for gate camping.
And you get kills like this: http://bdsm.griefwatch.net/?p=details&kill=662
I'm not on top because I didn't do much damage! (Plenty of other examples too)
The DPS difference between 650 and 720 is minimal.
|
Alan Bell
Gallente Shiva
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 02:11:00 -
[32]
make Minm carrier affect fighter speed maybe? speed seems logical... +5-10% per lvl. http://coldfusion.online-guild.com |
Triest
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 02:35:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Maya Rkell Triest, heh. Except I did. 4 weeks, 94 kills. And yes, a RCUII. A MWD, a T2 rep and so on. "Barely" 100km is more than enough except for gate camping.
And you get kills like this: http://bdsm.griefwatch.net/?p=details&kill=662
I'm not on top because I didn't do much damage! (Plenty of other examples too)
The DPS difference between 650 and 720 is minimal.
I'm still not sure why you would possibly think an MWD is a good module to fit while gatecamping in a sniping cruiser, particularly when you're camping with about 10 friendly battleships as well. You'd be far better served fitting a sensor booster or tracking computer there instead.
As for 650 vs 720, as I stated in my post the 650s don't just lack in DPS, although it is lower than 720s. The larger problems are have significantly worse alphastrike damage, as well as shorter range.
Just because you have top score on killmails, something that artillery users frequently encounter, doesn't mean that a ship is balanced. In particular, a response to the fact that every other long range HAC can either engage at vastly longer range or deal more DPS at equivalent range WHILE MAINTAINING A TANK would be a good way to start.
|
Blind Man
Caldari Angel Deep Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 02:48:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Maya Rkell People need to stop obsessing over the 720mm guns on Munnins. Really.
yep, right click, sell, solves all muninn problems
KilROCK's Forum Assistant
|
Famine Aligher'ri
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 03:08:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
And you get kills like this: http://bdsm.griefwatch.net/?p=details&kill=662
Why are you quoting kills vs ships you couldn't solo with the muninn? There is like 5 other people in that kill mail that pretty much got the DPS over you that pretty much killed the victim in that mail. On top of that, all of your Muninn killmails are not solo. They're grouped and in empire none the less. *boggles on why you're even speaking on the matter*
|
Acerus Malum
Encina Technologies Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 03:17:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Amy Wang
Muninn:
- increase pg by 200 - change 1 high to 1 med
Originally by: Lord Violent Muninn - Grid, Maybee I was under the impression its arty that needs fixing and not the muninn.
Yup, I think it was Tux (?) who said that if you increase a ship's PG to comfortably fit artillery, then it will have absolutely silly PG when it fits autocannons. The dev's would just prefer to tweak artillery requirements and countertweak certain Min ships in response.
|
Maya Rkell
Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 04:16:00 -
[37]
Triest, oh that'd be it then.
I don't camp. Fast moving small group combat is far more my forte.
Famine Aligher'ri, what has solo got to do with it? I used it in small gangs, yes. In an Empire war, yes. Very successfully. And THAT is what counts.
|
Famine Aligher'ri
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 04:32:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Famine Aligher'ri, what has solo got to do with it? I used it in small gangs, yes. In an Empire war, yes. Very successfully. And THAT is what counts.
The point is, in the killmail you quoted and in a number of other killmails you have on that board. You could of been in a noobship and still got the same kills. It doesn't make the noobship a pwnmobile. So I have no clue why you quoted it in your argument. It makes no sense other than the fact you fly in a gang, and add damage support to the main damage deals.
As for empire wars. Umm yeah, ok...
|
FawKa
Gallente Nova Elements The Phantom Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 04:36:00 -
[39]
It sounds like you got a fitting problem with one of your setups - and your solution is to get the pg you need.
Any ship cant fit the best T2 all over all slots.
And the carrier - no. Gallente is the best drone race and the race that goes for pure dmg bonuses.
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=369662&page=1#10 Link to banner |
Maya Rkell
Forsaken Empire
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 04:48:00 -
[40]
Famine Aligher'ri, the point is I'm at the TOP of those mails. The highest damage dealer. This is highly significant even if you don't want to see it.
I *was* the main damage dealer.
|
|
Kyguard
LFC 3rd Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 05:37:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Maya Rkell Famine Aligher'ri, the point is I'm at the TOP of those mails. The highest damage dealer. This is highly significant even if you don't want to see it.
I *was* the main damage dealer.
The damage dealt ladder means nothing if the circumstances aren't known.
For example: http://bdsm.griefwatch.net/?p=details&kill=662
I did more dmg than a raven and zealot, rax is overpowered, nerf. I'm surprised you'd use a killmail as an example for this arguement.. ===
God is on the side with the best artillery. |
TuRtLe HeAd
The Bratwurst Burglars
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 07:59:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Bhoki Tentor I'm prolly one of the few that thinks the minmatar carriers bonus is a bonus that fits with the carrier, unlike the others. However I do think that the duration reduction is the wrong bonus because it also increases cap use of the transfers. A better bonus would be to just directly increase the boost they give(or alternatively give an equal reduction of cap use to keep cap use the same). I see the carriers as support ships keeping others in battle etc. Though the whole concept of supporting modules needs changing first before carrier can fullfill its true role(imo)
But The Problem is that ALL carriers get a Standard Bonus to remote Stuff. its when it come s to the racial bonus that Minmatar get the short Straw. Minmatar Remote repping ? Thats completely out of character for them.
Did some big fat brutor dude suddenly wake up one morning and decide, im gonna design a ship thats never gonna see its enemy ?
Agreed fighting styles of carriers is very diffent due to the fact its fighters can be assigned to other players.
If Amarr, Caldari , Gallente are allowed PvP bonuses, Why aren't Minmatar ? Its bad enough that the ships gimped in other areas also.
Not everyone wants to leave a carrier at a Safespot while the Fighters go out and kill something (Though Most would like to)
Make the Fighters Get a Bonus to tracking per level or something. I dunno. Just Ditch the most pointless Double bonus in game a ships ever had. approximately 2 billion it costs to fly a nidhogghur Thats alot of isk to Sit at a Safe with remote reppers fitting.
|
Shadowsword
Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 08:53:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Amy Wang
Muninn:
- increase pg by 200 - change 1 high to 1 med
Typhoon:
- increase pg by 1000ish - reduce build cost by 10 Mio worth - switch shield and armor hp values
Nidhoggur:
- change remote armor rep duration bonus to 5% fighter damage per lvl (that way there are 2 carriers with tanking bonus and 2 with damage bonus, perfectly balanced)
Maelstrom:
- yes I know its not yet out, but when its out it will take long to fix - intended as shield tanking fleet BS but the planned shield boost bonus is useless in fleet combat - change shield boost bonus to 5% to all shield resists per lvl or 10% shield amount per lvl - make sure it can fit 8 1400 IIs with 0-1 fitting mod
Target Painters:
- the only non defensive ew module and arguable the most useless one
- solution 1: give minmatar ew ships bonuses to one of the other racial ew variants, leave target painters as a module that each race can use equally effective (might even give each ew ship a bonus to a different ew type, minmatar is about variability after all)
- solution 2: add a secondary defensive effect to the target painter module, either a weakened version of the effect of one of the other racial ews or a unique effect like a sig radius reduction for the using ship or a sig resolution increase for the targeted ships weapon systems or sth like that) (think of the painting stream as disrupting the targeted ships sensor systems or whatever)
Cheetah: - increase base CPU by at least 40, better more
CCP don't want to increase the powergrid of the Munnin because it would have the potential to give some ugly AC+1600 plate results.
I agree on most of those changes, but you forgot some things needed to really balance them out:
- Up the powergrid requirements of autocanons, espescially the small variants.
- Reduce the falloff of autocanons by a good 25-30%, OR don't give minmatars a falloff-enhancing T2 ammo. The effective range it gives to Vaggabonds and T2 AC tempests is a joke.
- Increase by 50-100% the magazine space of artilleries.
------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy. |
Gabriel Karade
Office linebackers Blood of the Innocents
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 09:15:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Gabriel Karade on 24/08/2006 09:20:39 Why does the Typhoon need more grid? It can already fit 4 T2 autocannons (Dual 425mm), 4x Siege Launcher II's and a tank (plate + rep).
Compare that to a Dominix, can fit 6x T2 blasters (Electrons) and a tank (plate + rep) only with an RCU II.
Both need AWU to silly level to fit, both are Tier 1 BS's afterall, fitting Tech II weapons.
Cost/HP distribution changes seem fair enough, never understood why the typhoon was 75M, and an armour tanking ship with more shields than armour is silly.
----------
- Office Linebacker -
|
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 09:25:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Shadowsword
- Reduce the falloff of autocanons by a good 25-30%, OR don't give minmatars a falloff-enhancing T2 ammo. The effective range it gives to Vaggabonds and T2 AC tempests is a joke.
I thought the point of autocannons was to outrange blasters? And the range on the Vagabond is a ship bonus, designed to make sure it can stay at range, since it has hardly any tank. Its a fast hit and run ship, and it needs good range to do it. If you nerf the Vagabond, I think you will notice how about 0% of players pick minmatar ships to start with. They already have almost no strengths compared to gallente ffs.
--- Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Celeste Storm
Gallente Elite United Corp Antigo Dominion
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 09:25:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Maya Rkell Famine Aligher'ri, the point is I'm at the TOP of those mails. The highest damage dealer. This is highly significant even if you don't want to see it.
I *was* the main damage dealer.
All I see is that u actually _managed_ it to kill a tempest with 9 of ur corp mates. 9 other ships including 7 BS, a HAC and a ceptor - big deal... big deal.
As Famine already said I fail to see any significance concerning this topic, too. Btw, as far as I understand killmails m8, ur on the top of the list because u laid the final blow.
Cel.
whiners make m3 s!ck | Do you like farmers?
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 10:57:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Amy Wang on 24/08/2006 10:57:37 - added the Cheetah, sry I forgot it in the first place and yes it is ridiculus that it cant even fit a cloak and a probe launcher with skill lvl 4 without cramming the lows full of CoProc. IIs
-regarding Carrier problem:
I dont get it why people have so much problems with the idea of giving the minmatar carrier a useful bonus in form of a damage bonus for fighters. It is a working bonus and by no means overpowered (if it was the gallente carrier should lose the bonus) and if anything having two ships with this bonus applied makes it MORE balanced.
Also it makes sense roleplay and lore wise. Sure gallente is "the" dronerace but fighters arent drones but small manned attack crafts (sounds like minmatar to me). Even if they were drones it still makes sense because minmatar are closely tied with gallente and widely regardes as the secondary drone race anyway.
So instead of thinking about a shiny "unique" bonus for the Nid. and ending up with a useless one that makes the ship as crappy as now, stop waisting time and give it an existing and working bonus.
-regarding the propoesed AC and Arty changes:
Sure Artys could use a magazine boost, no argument there.
But seriously you want to nerf AC falloff? You realize that AC already have the worst tracking, lowest optimal range, lowest dps and highest ammo usage of all short range weapons? You also realise that being forced to fight deep into falloff reduces the damage even more? This is somehow balanced by high falloff, reasonable fitting reqs. and zero cap use.
If anything was unbalanced by introduction of t2 ammo and needs a nerf it is the blasters and not the ac. The range advantage means not much if you have to fight in 20k scramble range anyway. (yea free faction scramblers for all minni pilots could also solve that problem *gg*)
- regarding the Claw & Wolf:
I too see the problem of having only 2 mid slots. Maybe it would be an option to change the missile high point to a mid slot since simply adding another mid could be a bit too much. The missile/utility slot however is a minmatar trade mark, a not very usefull trademark sure, but still a trademark . Maybe this would be a bit overpowered, but then again we have the taranis with room for 2 light drones on top of the normal armament, a feature which no other inty gets. Compared to that it wouldnt be in the least overpowered to simply add another mid to Claw and Wolf.
|
Seramis
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 11:09:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Amy Wang Edited by: Amy Wang on 24/08/2006 10:57:37 - added the Cheetah, sry I forgot it in the first place and yes it is ridiculus that it cant even fit a cloak and a probe launcher with skill lvl 4 without cramming the lows full of CoProc. IIs ...
Also with Covert Ops at Level 5 you can fit a Probe Launcher and have 5 CPU for all other slots to fill (ok, Cloaking device does not need any CPU at this level). So for a half decent fitting I still need 2 Co Proc II to get enough CPU to fill the slots, that sucks :(
|
Testicular Testes
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 11:12:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Acerus Malum
Originally by: Amy Wang
Muninn:
- increase pg by 200 - change 1 high to 1 med
Originally by: Lord Violent Muninn - Grid, Maybee I was under the impression its arty that needs fixing and not the muninn.
Yup, I think it was Tux (?) who said that if you increase a ship's PG to comfortably fit artillery, then it will have absolutely silly PG when it fits autocannons. The dev's would just prefer to tweak artillery requirements and countertweak certain Min ships in response.
But there's nothing wrong with silly grid on a AC Muninn. It's still a Vagabond with one damage bonus less and short one mid. A 1600mm or even dualreps don't make up for that.
|
General Apocalypse
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 11:21:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Amy Wang
Muninn:
- increase pg by 200 - change 1 high to 1 med
Typhoon:
- increase pg by 1000ish - reduce build cost by 10 Mio worth - switch shield and armor hp values
Nidhoggur:
- change remote armor rep duration bonus to 5% fighter damage per lvl (that way there are 2 carriers with tanking bonus and 2 with damage bonus, perfectly balanced)
Maelstrom:
- yes I know its not yet out, but when its out it will take long to fix - intended as shield tanking fleet BS but the planned shield boost bonus is useless in fleet combat - change shield boost bonus to 5% to all shield resists per lvl or 10% shield amount per lvl - make sure it can fit 8 1400 IIs with 0-1 fitting mod
Target Painters:
- the only non defensive ew module and arguable the most useless one
- solution 1: give minmatar ew ships bonuses to one of the other racial ew variants, leave target painters as a module that each race can use equally effective (might even give each ew ship a bonus to a different ew type, minmatar is about variability after all)
- solution 2: add a secondary defensive effect to the target painter module, either a weakened version of the effect of one of the other racial ews or a unique effect like a sig radius reduction for the using ship or a sig resolution increase for the targeted ships weapon systems or sth like that) (think of the painting stream as disrupting the targeted ships sensor systems or whatever)
Cheetah: - increase base CPU by at least 40, better more
Perfectly Balanced . NO FREAKING WAY ! If Amarr don't get any love you will not have your I-Win buttons . Not happy whit Minmatar ship go train up for some others. Counter-signed
|
|
Shadowsword
Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 11:49:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Shadowsword
- Reduce the falloff of autocanons by a good 25-30%, OR don't give minmatars a falloff-enhancing T2 ammo. The effective range it gives to Vaggabonds and T2 AC tempests is a joke.
I thought the point of autocannons was to outrange blasters? And the range on the Vagabond is a ship bonus, designed to make sure it can stay at range, since it has hardly any tank. Its a fast hit and run ship, and it needs good range to do it. If you nerf the Vagabond, I think you will notice how about 0% of players pick minmatar ships to start with. They already have almost no strengths compared to gallente ffs.
That's right, autocanons should outrange blasters, but not by that wide a margin. And IMHO, no ship more agile or faster than a BS or BC should be able to dish out basically untankable DPS without needing to enter web range. Never, ever. Any exception is a serious danger of being outside of what game mechanics can manage (the infamous dual-mwd raven comes to mind).
Back in the day when HAS stats became known, everyone was drooling over the Deimos, the Vaggabond was dismissed in the "crap" category, with minmatars screaming bloody murder because their HAS were lousy, basically because it didn't do Deimos-like DPS, and I was one of the only players to defend it.
But the problem basically boil down to this: What weaknesses does the Vaggabond currently have?
- DPS? He deals enough to break most BS tanks, while staying out of web range.
- Vulnerability to tacklers? Only the Ishtar and Cerberus come close when it comes to killing small targets. (Eagle too, but effective at it only at extreme range, so that's a special case).
- Vulnerability to big ships? Enough speed to evade large guns (even when you try to snipe it 120-150km away), large missiles aren't all that good against them, drones get destroyed so fast it's not even funny, and a dual-extender or extender+Invul field II passive tank is a very respectable protection, when you put that on top of it's resists and fast shield recharge. Small guns will hit, but with insignifiant damage, med guns will have a hard time to hit anything.
- There is no non-capital ship in-game that is better at surviving an hostile encounter than the Vaggabond. Interceptors are faster and more agile, but also get popped much faster. The current cookie-cutter setup is a good-against-anything, survive-against-almost-anything solo pwnmobile. A lot of players say that it takes a Huginn and a Lachesis to counter effectively a Vaggabond. 2 higly specialised ships to counter one general-purpose boat? WTF? Where's the Risk-vs-Reward in that?
------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy. |
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 11:59:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Seramis
Originally by: Amy Wang Edited by: Amy Wang on 24/08/2006 10:57:37 - added the Cheetah, sry I forgot it in the first place and yes it is ridiculus that it cant even fit a cloak and a probe launcher with skill lvl 4 without cramming the lows full of CoProc. IIs ...
Also with Covert Ops at Level 5 you can fit a Probe Launcher and have 5 CPU for all other slots to fill (ok, Cloaking device does not need any CPU at this level). So for a half decent fitting I still need 2 Co Proc II to get enough CPU to fill the slots, that sucks :(
Scan probe launchers need IIRC 225 CPU, so you have 25 cpu left. Also, you forget that the Cheetah has 350 ms base speed while the other cov ops vary between 240 - 285 ms. Doesn't matter if cov ops lvl 4 or 5, the cheetah is with launcher + cloak still faster than any other cov ops at that skill lvl.
|
Spaced Skunk
Oriundus Cineris
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 12:10:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Spaced Skunk on 24/08/2006 12:12:18 Artillery - -Reduce powergrid needs by 20%
Bellicose/Huginn/Rapier - -Increase drone bay to 50m3
Typhoon - -Increase powergrid 1000-2000 -Switch Armor/Shield HP around
Cyclone/Claymore/Sliepnir - -Increase CPU by 50 -Increase agility by 15% (all battlecruisers/command need agility boost)
Hail - -Remove speed penalty..please. I mean void doesnt penalise the main strong point of its race does it.
Hound - - +20 powergrid. All stealth bombers need to be changed.
Claw - -Increase targeting range
Maelstrom - -Change 5% shield bonus to 5% reduction in Armor repairer duration.
|
Shadowsword
Gallente COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 12:20:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Amy Wang But seriously you want to nerf AC falloff? You realize that AC already have the worst tracking,
More than compensated by the non-cap usage
Originally by: Amy Wang
lowest optimal range
When a blaster use antimatter, the blasteship lose something signifiant where effective range is concerned. When a AC use EMP, the ACship lose so little that it's insignifiant.
And when both have -50% optimal ammos fitted (most logical choice for T1 ammos), how big is really the difference between a blaster and an AC? 3km for large guns?
Originally by: Amy Wang
lowest dps
compensated in large part by dual damage or damage and RoF minmatar ship bonuses
Originally by: Amy Wang
and highest ammo usage of all short range weapons?
Majorly inconvenient for NPC hunting and lv4 missions, but not really for pvp. Fights are too fast, with one side generally much bigger than the other->Fights lasts seconds, a few minutes for a fleet fight, but in a fleet, you're either a tackler with very low life expectancy, or using artilleries and not ACs.
Originally by: Amy Wang
You also realise that being forced to fight deep into falloff reduces the damage even more? This is somehow balanced by high falloff,
Damage reduction by falloff already taken into consideration when I speak about Vaggabond DPS.
Originally by: Amy Wang
reasonable fitting reqs.
Medium pulse 2: 12 powergrid Neutron blaster II: 12 powergrid standard launcher II: 9 powergrid 200mm autocanon II: 4 powergrid
Basically the same for CPU.
Reasonable?
Originally by: Amy Wang
and zero cap use.
If anything was unbalanced by introduction of t2 ammo and needs a nerf it is the blasters and not the ac. The range advantage means not much if you have to fight in 20k scramble range anyway. (yea free faction scramblers for all minni pilots could also solve that problem *gg*)
That's a valid argument, but it holds only if you don't have a tackler to work with.
------------------------------------------ Nuhwall: Why are some Amarr ships warping backward? Shadowsword: whatever happen, if they need to flee they can honestly say the faced the enemy. |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 13:07:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Shadowsword
That's right, autocanons should outrange blasters, but not by that wide a margin. And IMHO, no ship more agile or faster than a BS or BC should be able to dish out basically untankable DPS without needing to enter web range. Never, ever. Any exception is a serious danger of being outside of what game mechanics can manage (the infamous dual-mwd raven comes to mind).
I guess you have the right to your opinion, but I dont see any practical reason why there cant be ships relying on speed to survive in Eve. You already have interceptors in the game, capable of taking down battleships. Just like a inty, the Vaga is dead if it gets double webbed. It cant tank worth a damn so it avoids the damage instead. To do that, you need speed and a low sig. Without those things, the ship would be crap. If you would force it to enter web range to deal good damage, it would definently lose its purpose in the game. If you are going to enter web range, why not instead pick a ship that can tank? Because you will take alot of damage sitting there webbed.
Quote:
Back in the day when HAS stats became known, everyone was drooling over the Deimos, the Vaggabond was dismissed in the "crap" category, with minmatars screaming bloody murder because their HAS were lousy, basically because it didn't do Deimos-like DPS, and I was one of the only players to defend it.
Its always like that. New ships gets introduced and caldari and gallente are usually very happy, with minmatar and amarr usually very unhappy. I have a hard time explaining it without blaming Tuxford for poor game balance actually. Its getting old to never get a good ship, but instead have to whine and whine to finally get the ship fixed after months or years of whining. Its very frustrating, and thats why the minnies are sensitive about the few minnie ships that actually ARE good in the game.
Quote:
But the problem basically boil down to this: What weaknesses does the Vaggabond currently have?
- DPS? He deals enough to break most BS tanks, while staying out of web range.
- Vulnerability to tacklers? Only the Ishtar and Cerberus come close when it comes to killing small targets. (Eagle too, but effective at it only at extreme range, so that's a special case).
- Vulnerability to big ships? Enough speed to evade large guns (even when you try to snipe it 120-150km away), large missiles aren't all that good against them, drones get destroyed so fast it's not even funny, and a dual-extender or extender+Invul field II passive tank is a very respectable protection, when you put that on top of it's resists and fast shield recharge. Small guns will hit, but with insignifiant damage, med guns will have a hard time to hit anything.
- There is no non-capital ship in-game that is better at surviving an hostile encounter than the Vaggabond. Interceptors are faster and more agile, but also get popped much faster. The current cookie-cutter setup is a good-against-anything, survive-against-almost-anything solo pwnmobile. A lot of players say that it takes a Huginn and a Lachesis to counter effectively a Vaggabond. 2 higly specialised ships to counter one general-purpose boat? WTF? Where's the Risk-vs-Reward in that?
The ship is designed to be the best at exacly the things you are describing. 1 vs 1 guerilla work, the Vagabond cant be beat. Its weaknesses is basicly in groups. Group vs group, it goes pop faster than you can say cheese. It cant handle focused fire because it doesnt have a tank, and the transversal is only relative and important for the ship it is attacking. The others will have no problems hitting it. Here ships like the Cerberus shines though.. they can tank quite alot of damage before they die. Cerb sucks for solo work though. So yeah, Vaga is filling its purpose in the game as a solo pirate ship. There is nothing wrong with that. The counter is to be in a group, basicly.
--- Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 17:34:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Shadowsword
Originally by: Amy Wang
lowest dps
compensated in large part by dual damage or damage and RoF minmatar ship bonuses
At the cost of a ship bonus. Effectively those ships get one less bonus just to bring them "in large part" up to par. That's a big deal. * * * 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 |
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 17:56:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Tsanse Kinske At the cost of a ship bonus. Effectively those ships get one less bonus just to bring them "in large part" up to par. That's a big deal.
And how exactly is that different to ..mhh.. *all other races ships*?
|
Attiladehun
Gallente Fire Mandrill
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 18:24:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 23/08/2006 15:47:00
Originally by: Benglada
Originally by: xeom Remove the speed penalty on hail.
Yar.
I guess they dont want Vagabonds with hail and no speed penalties...
Can see a point in that, if ammo change would be the same as ammar way the speed issue would be less off an issue. but this T2 ammo nerfs too much of youre speed, if it would be like -20% of the total speed and not per gun. that would be somewhat more reasonable. If the mealstorm has 8 guns, go figure 8 guns with hail -_-
I aggree with most of those remarks, specially the phoon pg, it needs some lovely pg boost
And increase the dmg of minmatar ammo, it doesn't even come in the range of the other races ...
But i still wub minmatar ships
|
Vera Nosfyu
Minmatar Stormriders
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 19:26:00 -
[59]
Can someone explain why the Phoon needs a PG boost? It can fit a full rack of torps and AC's, a cap injector, and a dual rep tank with just one fitting mod.
As for the Nidhoggur, here's my suggestion: 5% bonus to fighter velocity per level. -----------------------------------------------------------
"Violence solves all problems, no man, no problem." --Josef Stalin |
HolographicEntrypoint
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2006.08.24 19:52:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Amy Wang
Target Painters:
- the only non defensive ew module and arguable the most useless one
ehh? whats wrong with it? you want to shred a frig with drones, you paint it. ---
^ Custom Sigs for ISK
My custom Sigs Gallery |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |