These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Kronos] Pirate Faction Battleships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vinyl 41
AdVictis
#521 - 2014-04-15 17:19:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Vinyl 41
chaosgrimm wrote:

Concerning the comments on the mach, I think they might make the decision between mach/vargur more difficult, which is a good thing... but it would do it by making them more similar, which is a bad thing.

IMO mach needs to be more unqiue on the offensive side.
One example might be: vargur gets better dmg at rng, while the mach gets higher paper dps i.e. swapping mach's falloff bonus with a tracking bonus or increasing the vargur's projection

the mach already has the higher paper dps and remowing the falloff bonus would downgrade the ship to fleet pest level and we dont want that Ugh
anyways if we get the turret disproposal fixed as a bonus i think most mach users will be happy - besides those poor guys from incursions
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#522 - 2014-04-15 17:22:39 UTC
Gospadin wrote:
What's the logic behind three 19-slot ships and two 20-slot ships?


actual number of slots on a ship is pretty irrelevant now that everyone has wildly inconsistent gun bonuses. for eample, my ferox basically has 1 less actual slot than a drake, despite having the same number of slots.
Morukk Nuamzzar
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#523 - 2014-04-15 17:35:14 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:

While Rattlesnake loses more things than it gains and gets gimped on top of it all. 5 drones are better than 2.

Just give us an extra mid slot on the Rattlesnake and the current 400m3 drone bay on a BATTLESHIP we trained for and you won't be shitting on your customers.

What, you know that buy order in 4-4 is like 150 million higher than it used to be?
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#524 - 2014-04-15 17:38:29 UTC  |  Edited by: chaosgrimm
Vinyl 41 wrote:
chaosgrimm wrote:

Concerning the comments on the mach, I think they might make the decision between mach/vargur more difficult, which is a good thing... but it would do it by making them more similar, which is a bad thing.

IMO mach needs to be more unqiue on the offensive side.
One example might be: vargur gets better dmg at rng, while the mach gets higher paper dps i.e. swapping mach's falloff bonus with a tracking bonus or increasing the vargur's projection

the mach already has the higher paper dps and remowing the falloff bonus would downgrade the ship to fleet pest level and we dont want that Ugh
anyways if we get the turret disproposal fixed as a bonus i think most mach users will be happy - besides those poor guys from incursions

I am aware the Machs dps is higher, I was referring to Daniel Plains post I quoted, where he suggested reducing the Machs dps. I do not support that.

Tracking in place of f/o would be better IMO. Simply because to take advantage of the dps lead, u gotta be closer than the marauder counterparts, much in the same way as the vindi v kronos. Or to a lesser extent nm and pally. Because the mach would need to be closer, some hull buff might be in order, but at least in this scenario the offensive sides of the vargur and mach are unique
Neu Bastian
FIatline
Shadow Cartel
#525 - 2014-04-15 17:40:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Neu Bastian
I like the changes for the most part with the exception of the Mac. While all other ships either got a buff or remained the same, the Mac was slightly nerfed. I do not consider the Role Bonus to warp speed a buff, as Macs are rarely used solo or in a "pack of Macs," and therefor the bonus would go unnoticed in a large majority of situations IMO.

What if the Mac were to get a separate Role Bonus to damage and tracking for 1200 Artillery Cannons? This weapon system is highly underused as it is overshadowed by 1400s for alpha and range, and by 800s for dps and tracking. Done properly, this could finally give 1200s a reason to be used. As this would just be a role bonus, any current use for Macs using 800s or 1400s would remain the same, however this would give the Mac a unique bonus to supplement its typical role as a kiting, long-range ship without making its alpha OP by just buffing 1400s.

I am also on board with reducing the number of guns to 6 and folding the 7th gun damage into the ship bonus to make it look better Blink

My 2 cents anyway.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#526 - 2014-04-15 17:51:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Gospadin wrote:
What's the logic behind three 19-slot ships and two 20-slot ships?


actual number of slots on a ship is pretty irrelevant now that everyone has wildly inconsistent gun bonuses. for eample, my ferox basically has 1 less actual slot than a drake, despite having the same number of slots.


The ferox got well shafted in that rebalance ,,, drake is still uber..... i mean it still has battleship range HAM's afterall .. ferox even with null struggles too compare to the drakes dps with the short range HAMS... and then ofc the ferox is 1 mid down on the drake..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#527 - 2014-04-15 17:57:12 UTC
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
ok then we will just nerf the megathron.


Seconding this. The Megathron is exceptionally overpowered and should not be used as a baseline for comparison. It's just like comparing the Gila to the Ishtar, with how overpowered that ship is, if you try to make the Gila even better you're going to break the game.
Valterra Craven
#528 - 2014-04-15 17:57:48 UTC
Morukk Nuamzzar wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:

While Rattlesnake loses more things than it gains and gets gimped on top of it all. 5 drones are better than 2.

Just give us an extra mid slot on the Rattlesnake and the current 400m3 drone bay on a BATTLESHIP we trained for and you won't be shitting on your customers.

What, you know that buy order in 4-4 is like 150 million higher than it used to be?


What, you know that buy orders for other better pirate BS ships in 4-4 are almost 30-40% more than the current price of the still garbage RS?
S'No Flake
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#529 - 2014-04-15 18:00:49 UTC
Gospadin wrote:
What's the logic behind three 19-slot ships and two 20-slot ships?


Did you bother reading the thread?
Looks like you didn;t ... but hell, here it is:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4469885#post4469885

CCP Rise wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
why do some have 19 slots and the mach/vindi has 20?


I believe because when the models were updated there wasn't room for the number of effective turrets needed so they were given less slots with larger role bonuses. The Rattlesnake has less because of drones. We talked about adjusting for them all to have the same number but we like where the balance is for them and didn't feel it was worth messing with just for the sake of making the slot count match.
eliminator2
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#530 - 2014-04-15 18:20:16 UTC
i like the way the RS is looking with the new changes stated i can understand that with using less heavies but greater damage you would minimize the drone bay as people wont have to use as many heavy and sentries but given that i will miss the 400m3 drone space atm as it gives wide variety which gives it a clear uper hand on other drone boats in same class but when it is changed to 175m3 would be nice to lower to maybe 250m3 to have them extra spares in there and have a wide variety still (i am half a sleep fyi so if im not paying attention to how many diffrent drones you still can have let me know please :d )

i am looking forward to tryin the RS in PVP as its the only BS iv never used for PVP as everythin in Tier 1 BS did everything better and cheaper

i do agree with someone who asked how the gall bonus is for missiles ince when did gal use missiles? :/

Gallente Battleship Bonus:
10% bonus to kinetic and thermal missile damage (was 10% drone damage and hitpoints)

allso can i ask why the missiles damage bonus is allways for kinetic im kinda new to missiles and it seems there been forced for PVE use only and very out of balance with all other forms of damage bonuses
Tengu Grib
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#531 - 2014-04-15 18:37:38 UTC
Shut up and take my isk! I wants them alllll!!!!

Seriously though, afterburner kitting nightmare sounds super fun. And I'm very fond of the rattlesnake changes, despite the 'odd' gallente missile bonus.

Rabble Rabble Rabble

Praise James, Supreme Protector of High Sec.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#532 - 2014-04-15 18:59:12 UTC
why do we want this layout for the mach .
-Slot layout: 6H, 5M, 7L;6 turrets, 0 launchers +37.5 % to large projectile turret damage

The answer is simple currently at all lvl 5 without implantsa NM spew 100 more dps at 150 KM + with a tracking at 0.008 without any fitting difficulty and get 2 utilities high +3 med to use as he wish .

A mach fitted with 1400 at all lvl 5 without implants spew 100 dps less at 150 km+ with a tracking of 0.03 and need to remove a low to fit a rcu with only 1 high utility .

So be happy this numbers are before CCP give another low to the nightmare , so yes i feel like a child who think he deserves equal love from his parents .

But the whole problem here and why we are so attached to the mach is simply because its the only viable arties plateform outthere ,minnatars has been heavily attacked the last month by CCP on the arties side .There is a time to say stop Evil and the time is now .
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#533 - 2014-04-15 19:15:48 UTC
Myrthiis wrote:
why do we want this layout for the mach .
-Slot layout: 6H, 5M, 7L;6 turrets, 0 launchers +37.5 % to large projectile turret damage

The answer is simple currently at all lvl 5 without implantsa NM spew 100 more dps at 150 KM + with a tracking at 0.008 without any fitting difficulty and get 2 utilities high +3 med to use as he wish .

A mach fitted with 1400 at all lvl 5 without implants spew 100 dps less at 150 km+ with a tracking of 0.03 and need to remove a low to fit a rcu with only 1 high utility .

So be happy this numbers are before CCP give another low to the nightmare , so yes i feel like a child who think he deserves equal love from his parents .

But the whole problem here and why we are so attached to the mach is simply because its the only viable arties plateform outthere ,minnatars has been heavily attacked the last month by CCP on the arties side .There is a time to say stop Evil and the time is now .
Beams are a higher DPS and longer optimal range weapon system than arties so it makes perfect sense that a NM does more damage at long range than a mach.

With arties being alpha weapons why should they have an advantage in both burst and sustained combat?
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#534 - 2014-04-15 19:19:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulous Rod
Morukk Nuamzzar wrote:
Fabulous Rod wrote:

While Rattlesnake loses more things than it gains and gets gimped on top of it all. 5 drones are better than 2.

Just give us an extra mid slot on the Rattlesnake and the current 400m3 drone bay on a BATTLESHIP we trained for and you won't be shitting on your customers.

What, you know that buy order in 4-4 is like 150 million higher than it used to be?


yea, if it gets a few hundred million higher it might come close to a megathrone before the changes to pirate faction ships were announced.Roll

After the "ohh shiney" factor wears off people will realize medium and heavy drones still suck. People trained the rattlesnake for its versatility and now that is being taken away with a bare minimum operational capacity of drone space and removal of missile velocity bonus.
Fabulous Rod
Darkfall Corp
#535 - 2014-04-15 19:39:35 UTC
Frayze Nissai wrote:
Last Wolf wrote:
Frayze Nissai wrote:

You have heard of a module called the Mobile Depot yes? The one that allows you to change modules AND DRONES whilst in space? Or are you arguing that you would use your salvage drones whilst still engaged?

I also fly an RS, i also chose it for its versatility. Do i feel screwed over by these new changes? Hell no, i have never been happier. I can now focus more on what is going on around me than on my 5 little guys HP bars, i can do significantlymore DPS, and with the mobile depot i keep a very high degree of versatility.

'I picked a ship with a large drone bay' - yes, one that at the time had a justifiably large bay as it needed to field 5 sentry drones (read 125 m3 of space) to put down maximum DPS. We now need to field 2 sentries (or 50m3) to do EXACTLY the same. So please, justify how we should keep a 400m3 drone bay???


As much as I agree that the 175 m3 bay is fine, using the Mobile Depot should not be used as a crutch for balancing a ship.

The argument "The ship is fine because you can use Mobile Depot" is a bad one. It takes 60 seconds to activate, or are you seriously going to plop one down for every pocket you warp into, then hope you don't need to move or you don't get bumped away from it?

I completely agree with you, i was attempting to show the stupidity of a post


the stupidity is yours for bringing up mobile depots at all.

I've never had a problem losing sentries. Try to think a little before you post.
Morukk Nuamzzar
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#536 - 2014-04-15 19:41:10 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:

After the "ohh shiney" factor wears off people will realize medium and heavy drones still suck. People trained the rattlesnake for its versatility and now that is being taken away with a bare minimum operational capacity of drone space and removal of missile velocity bonus.

Trust me, they will use it differently. Even if they won't, other people will.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#537 - 2014-04-15 20:12:48 UTC
Quote:
Beams are a higher DPS and longer optimal range weapon system than arties so it makes perfect sense that a NM does more damage at long range than a mach.

With arties being alpha weapons why should they have an advantage in both burst and sustained combat?


It seems u misunderstanding something .Apha isn't something u trade against dps ,it's something u trade against reload time ...In ur case u fire a 3780 volleyr every 6s61 in my case i fire a 7844 volley every 15s11 .
Meaning ur punching 7560 volley every 13 s so who is at advantage in both sustained and burst damage here ....

So yes currently Nightmare is at advantage in every relevant aspects ,equal burst, better sustained dps , easier fitting capability ,better utilities ,easier to train ,cheaper fit and an incoming 6 th lows slot...Oh yeah, alpha only matters in PVP where both ships found there usage in incursions .what's else ?
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
#538 - 2014-04-15 20:19:21 UTC
Myrthiis wrote:
Quote:
Beams are a higher DPS and longer optimal range weapon system than arties so it makes perfect sense that a NM does more damage at long range than a mach.

With arties being alpha weapons why should they have an advantage in both burst and sustained combat?


It seems u misunderstanding something .Apha isn't something u trade against dps ,it's something u trade against reload time ...In ur case u fire a 3780 volleyr every 6s61 in my case i fire a 7844 volley every 15s11 .
Meaning ur punching 7560 volley every 13 s so who is at advantage in both sustained and burst damage here ....

So yes currently Nightmare is at advantage in every relevant aspects ,equal burst, better sustained dps , easier fitting capability ,better utilities ,easier to train ,cheaper fit and an incoming 6 th lows slot...Oh yeah, alpha only matters in PVP where both ships found there usage in incursions .what's else ?



Are you seriously arguing that the mach needs a buff because it nightmare is better than the mach at ONE thing? If the Mach could out dps the nightmare at 150km, then why would you ever not use a Mach?

That awkward moment at the Gentlemen's Club when you see your sister on the stage....and you're not sure where to put the money....
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#539 - 2014-04-15 20:30:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Myrthiis
"Last Wolf " wrote:
Are you seriously arguing that the mach needs a buff because it nightmare is better than the mach at ONE thing? If the Mach could out dps the nightmare at 150km, then why would you ever not use a Mach?

Once again ,u misunderstanding something the change i proposed won't increase overall dps of the Mach .
Atleast not to a point where a mach would out dps a NM ( the whole thing will be less than a 3 % increase ) ,it ll just free mach pilot from the obligation to plug for a full genolution set + a 6 % grid implants just to match the range and the dps of the NM .
And please we are not even talking about tracking ,armor fleets or pvp here as the NM will outshine every ohters BS with the upcoming change and the versality he ll acquire from this 6 th slot
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#540 - 2014-04-15 20:59:20 UTC
Myrthiis wrote:
"Last Wolf " wrote:
Are you seriously arguing that the mach needs a buff because it nightmare is better than the mach at ONE thing? If the Mach could out dps the nightmare at 150km, then why would you ever not use a Mach?

Once again ,u misunderstanding something the change i proposed won't increase overall dps of the Mach .
Atleast not to a point where a mach would out dps a NM ( the whole thing will be less than a 3 % increase ) ,it ll just free mach pilot from the obligation to plug for a full genolution set + a 6 % grid implants just to match the range and the dps of the NM .
And please we are not even talking about tracking ,armor fleets or pvp here as the NM will outshine every ohters BS with the upcoming change and the versality he ll acquire from this 6 th slot



You kind of miss the point of "balance". That's like NM pilots complaining that they can't match A Mach's DPS & tracking up close. (Hint - They can't.) There shouldn't be a "best" ship for everything, nor should all weapon systems have the same specs. The idea is to have ships which are viable for different roles, while still having some flexibility.