These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Doggy Dogwoofwoof
New Eden Corporation 98713347
Brotherhood of Spacers
#2721 - 2014-05-20 02:44:27 UTC
XMaxan wrote:
Wow my Rattlesnake just became invincible in Lvl 4's and has more than double its old DPS. I will miss the lights being 50% better though Sad.

Perhaps we could get 250% to heavy and sentries and 50% to lights? Just a suggestion. (PLEASE!!)

Edit: Just noticed the severe reduction in drone bandwidth, assuming sentries stay at 25 mbit/sec I will have significantly lower dps from sentries Evil

You will have the same DPS from sentrys and heavy drones
Dsparil Mal
SUNDERING
Goonswarm Federation
#2722 - 2014-05-21 06:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Dsparil Mal
I truly would leave the rattlesnake alone. PERIOD. If CCP is really this interested in making these kind of changes, why not release the Guristas Raven ship that we see in missions and give it these boosts. Call it the Gurista Pit Viper or something. The rattlesnake is perfect the way it is, and making these changes is just going to ruin it.


There are faction ships we see in missions that have yet to be released that I know a lot of people would like to see, myself included. I keep looking at those serpentis Brutixes and similar ships and keep thinking man I'd like to have that. Serpentis Dominix, etc or the Gurista Ferox (yes I realize these are battlecruisers, but I'm trying to make a point). Now's a chance for that.

Touching the rattlesnake would cause more harm than good.

Erotica 1 for CSM 9!
Doggy Dogwoofwoof
New Eden Corporation 98713347
Brotherhood of Spacers
#2723 - 2014-05-21 06:33:37 UTC
Dsparil Mal wrote:
I truly would leave the rattlesnake alone. PERIOD. If CCP is really this interested in making these kind of changes, why not release the Guristas Raven ship that we see in missions and give it these boosts. Call it the Gurista Pit Viper or something. The rattlesnake is perfect the way it is, and making these changes is just going to ruin it.


There are faction ships we see in missions that have yet to be released that I know a lot of people would like to see, myself included. I keep looking at those serpentis Brutixes and similar ships and keep thinking man I'd like to have that. Serpentis Dominix, etc or the Gurista Ferox (yes I realize these are battlecruisers, but I'm trying to make a point). Now's a chance for that.

Touching the rattlesnake would cause more harm than good.

Except for the fact that other than light and medium drones the rattlesnake is better off now than before
M Key
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2724 - 2014-05-21 06:55:10 UTC
XMaxan wrote:
Wow my Rattlesnake just became invincible in Lvl 4's and has more than double its old DPS. I will miss the lights being 50% better though Sad.

Perhaps we could get 250% to heavy and sentries and 50% to lights? Just a suggestion. (PLEASE!!)

Edit: Just noticed the severe reduction in drone bandwidth, assuming sentries stay at 25 mbit/sec I will have significantly lower dps from sentries Evil


you get the same 7.5 effective heavy and sentry drones as now. You roughly double your missile DPS with 7.5 effective launchers vs 4 current.
Sean Crees
Sean's Safe Haven
#2725 - 2014-05-21 08:41:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Sean Crees
CCP Rise wrote:
I didn't say serious, I said significant. It wouldn't just be a damage increase. It would be a heavier importance placed on a required skill, changes to fitting balance, changes in ammo consumption, change in fitting cost, potential effects on damage output and/or alpha. It's not unsolvable or something, it's just a lot of things that need to be accounted for and we don't think it's worth it in this case.



What about this?

I've always felt the powergrid requirements for the mach were a lot higher than fittings allowed for. Fitting an MWD, even a core version with lower PG requirements and 7x T2 1400's requires Advanced Weapons Upgrade 5, and a 6% PG skill hardwiring, AND a PG fitting module or rig to work.

Also the Vindi and Mach have more total slots than the other ships. And everyone hates the assymetrical turrts on the mach.

Heres a quick fix for them all:

6 turret slots : 7 total highslots instead of 8
Change Minmitar Battleship bonus from 5% to 10% per level.


With those changes, power grid is not such a huge concern, in fact you could probably even take a little away if you want. Also at level 4 battleship skills the damage is exactly the same a it is at level 4 now. Only at level 5 battleship skill do you get a very slight damage buff over level 5 today. You also bring total slots in line with the rest of the ships, AND now your turrets are symetrical.

It will also reduce ammo consumption, and if you talk to T2 800 pilots, thats not a bad thing. 800's are notorious for chewing through ammo really fast, and this helps with that also since you have 1 less turret shooting ammo per cycle.
stoicfaux
#2726 - 2014-05-21 11:48:35 UTC
Overkilling an enemy means you're not applying that extra DPS to his friends. Which is inefficient...

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Wizbiz Protagonist Eternal
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2727 - 2014-05-21 13:23:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Wizbiz Protagonist Eternal
rattle snack still isnt very good need to boost drone damage more -0
A4443 Suicide Gank
Summer of Mumuit
Remember Mumuit
#2728 - 2014-05-21 14:05:20 UTC
I have a Question:

Why do the guristas ships only get a missile damage bonus to kinetic and thermal, while you give the mordus legion a damage bonus to all kind of damage types? I think, a universal damage bonus would be better than just the limited damage bonus, the same for all caldari missile ships too.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2729 - 2014-05-21 14:07:42 UTC
A4443 Suicide Gank wrote:
I have a Question:

Why do the guristas ships only get a missile damage bonus to kinetic and thermal, while you give the mordus legion a damage bonus to all kind of damage types? I think, a universal damage bonus would be better than just the limited damage bonus, the same for all caldari missile ships too.


Guristas are getting a 10% damage bonus while mordus gets a 5%.
Gustav Mannfred
Summer of Mumuit
Remember Mumuit
#2730 - 2014-05-21 15:34:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
A4443 Suicide Gank wrote:
I have a Question:

Why do the guristas ships only get a missile damage bonus to kinetic and thermal, while you give the mordus legion a damage bonus to all kind of damage types? I think, a universal damage bonus would be better than just the limited damage bonus, the same for all caldari missile ships too.


Guristas are getting a 10% damage bonus while mordus gets a 5%.



that is true for the battleship, not for the fig and the cruiser

i'm REALY miss the old stuff. 

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2731 - 2014-05-21 16:18:48 UTC
A4443 Suicide Gank wrote:
Why do the guristas ships only get a missile damage bonus to kinetic and thermal, while you give the mordus legion a damage bonus to all kind of damage types? I think, a universal damage bonus would be better than just the limited damage bonus, the same for all caldari missile ships too.

Because Rattlesnake owners would have one less thing to gripe about. Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2732 - 2014-05-21 16:21:40 UTC
Gustav Mannfred wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
A4443 Suicide Gank wrote:
I have a Question:

Why do the guristas ships only get a missile damage bonus to kinetic and thermal, while you give the mordus legion a damage bonus to all kind of damage types? I think, a universal damage bonus would be better than just the limited damage bonus, the same for all caldari missile ships too.


Guristas are getting a 10% damage bonus while mordus gets a 5%.



that is true for the battleship, not for the fig and the cruiser


This is the battleship thread, best to take questions on those to their own threads.
KaDa en Bauldry
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2733 - 2014-05-21 17:07:02 UTC
Sean Crees wrote:
Also the Vindi and Mach have more total slots than the other ships. And everyone hates the assymetrical turrts on the mach.

Heres a quick fix for them all:

Had quite a few followers at the start of the thread, even got a DEV reply "we'll look into it" ... and a bit later "nah, rather not".
Something to do with balance, and the beauty of the ship not being that important.

BTW, the extra slot is compared to ships with +100% turret bonus or drone damage bonus.
Now why the Rattlesnake still counts with it's split damage bonus as "versatile droneship" thus requiring one less slot even with the smallest drone bandwidth among it's weight-class is another question, also chewed on a bit (but without significant DEV response I think).

Don't forget about ship insurance before undocking. Don't forget about copy-paste saving before posting.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2734 - 2014-05-21 17:23:23 UTC
If you thought 7 turrets on the Machariel looked horrible, just wait until you see what 5 launchers on the Rattlesnake looks like...
Twisted

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#2735 - 2014-05-21 18:27:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Myrthiis
Sean Crees wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I didn't say serious, I said significant. It wouldn't just be a damage increase. It would be a heavier importance placed on a required skill, changes to fitting balance, changes in ammo consumption, change in fitting cost, potential effects on damage output and/or alpha. It's not unsolvable or something, it's just a lot of things that need to be accounted for and we don't think it's worth it in this case.



What about this?

I've always felt the powergrid requirements for the mach were a lot higher than fittings allowed for. Fitting an MWD, even a core version with lower PG requirements and 7x T2 1400's requires Advanced Weapons Upgrade 5, and a 6% PG skill hardwiring, AND a PG fitting module or rig to work.

Also the Vindi and Mach have more total slots than the other ships. And everyone hates the assymetrical turrts on the mach.

Heres a quick fix for them all:

6 turret slots : 7 total highslots instead of 8
Change Minmitar Battleship bonus from 5% to 10% per level.


With those changes, power grid is not such a huge concern, in fact you could probably even take a little away if you want. Also at level 4 battleship skills the damage is exactly the same a it is at level 4 now. Only at level 5 battleship skill do you get a very slight damage buff over level 5 today. You also bring total slots in line with the rest of the ships, AND now your turrets are symetrical.

It will also reduce ammo consumption, and if you talk to T2 800 pilots, thats not a bad thing. 800's are notorious for chewing through ammo really fast, and this helps with that also since you have 1 less turret shooting ammo per cycle.



I had already adressed the problem ,but so far we didn't receive any favorable answer.
MACHARIEL

Gallente Battleship Bonus:
10% bonus to Large Projectile Turret falloff

Minmatar Battleship Bonus:
7.5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret damage

Role Bonus:
25% bonus to Large Projectile Turret rate of fire
note: This ship has increased warp speed and warp acceleration


Slot layout: 7H, 5M, 6L; 6 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 17950 PWG, 620 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 9320 / 9250 / 8260
Capacitor (amount / recharge / cap per second) : 5800 / 1154000ms(-875) / 5.02
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 161 / .096(+.012) / 94680000 / 12.60(+1.5)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 100 / 125
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km(+13km) / 125(-25) / 7
Sensor strength: 26
Signature radius: 350(+10)


With those stats fitting a full rack of 1400MM t2 ,wouldn't be a problem but it ease a bit too much XLSB use ,for 800 MM version.Maybe CCP should revamp artillery PG and CPU cost in first place.
The assymetry could be dealt with some modification to the model ,adding a deck passerel between the two part of the hull for the utility slot isn't that hard .
KaDa en Bauldry
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2736 - 2014-05-21 19:27:14 UTC  |  Edited by: KaDa en Bauldry
Myrthiis wrote:
I had already adressed the problem ,but so far we didn't receive any favorable answer.

Unlike an unfavorable "unfortunately it isn't going to happen."

7 highslots 7 turrets 7.5% damage bonus assumed to be a typo.

Don't forget about ship insurance before undocking. Don't forget about copy-paste saving before posting.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2737 - 2014-05-21 19:42:22 UTC
KaDa en Bauldry wrote:
Sean Crees wrote:
Also the Vindi and Mach have more total slots than the other ships. And everyone hates the assymetrical turrts on the mach.

Heres a quick fix for them all:

Had quite a few followers at the start of the thread, even got a DEV reply "we'll look into it" ... and a bit later "nah, rather not".
Something to do with balance, and the beauty of the ship not being that important.

BTW, the extra slot is compared to ships with +100% turret bonus or drone damage bonus.
Now why the Rattlesnake still counts with it's split damage bonus as "versatile droneship" thus requiring one less slot even with the smallest drone bandwidth among it's weight-class is another question, also chewed on a bit (but without significant DEV response I think).

CCP Addressed the extra slot/missing slot a few times.

In shot, it was like that when they made them, they see no reason change it. Slol allocations are guidelines, not solid rules..

Case in point, Rise added another slot to the Blood frig whose name eludes me atm.. Didn't move one, just added one. (and took a drone..) Just because it needed that extra low to be viable.

You all want an extra slot, doesn't mean it NEEDS it... so they probably aren't gonna add it.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#2738 - 2014-05-21 19:47:34 UTC
KaDa en Bauldry wrote:
Myrthiis wrote:
I had already adressed the problem ,but so far we didn't receive any favorable answer.

Unlike an unfavorable "unfortunately it isn't going to happen."

7 highslots 7 turrets 7.5% damage bonus assumed to be a typo.


My bad was 6 turrets ,for a increased dps of 2.9 %
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2739 - 2014-05-21 19:56:06 UTC
Myrthiis wrote:
Sean Crees wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I didn't say serious, I said significant. It wouldn't just be a damage increase. It would be a heavier importance placed on a required skill, changes to fitting balance, changes in ammo consumption, change in fitting cost, potential effects on damage output and/or alpha. It's not unsolvable or something, it's just a lot of things that need to be accounted for and we don't think it's worth it in this case.



What about this?

I've always felt the powergrid requirements for the mach were a lot higher than fittings allowed for. Fitting an MWD, even a core version with lower PG requirements and 7x T2 1400's requires Advanced Weapons Upgrade 5, and a 6% PG skill hardwiring, AND a PG fitting module or rig to work.

Also the Vindi and Mach have more total slots than the other ships. And everyone hates the assymetrical turrts on the mach.

Heres a quick fix for them all:

6 turret slots : 7 total highslots instead of 8
Change Minmitar Battleship bonus from 5% to 10% per level.


With those changes, power grid is not such a huge concern, in fact you could probably even take a little away if you want. Also at level 4 battleship skills the damage is exactly the same a it is at level 4 now. Only at level 5 battleship skill do you get a very slight damage buff over level 5 today. You also bring total slots in line with the rest of the ships, AND now your turrets are symetrical.

It will also reduce ammo consumption, and if you talk to T2 800 pilots, thats not a bad thing. 800's are notorious for chewing through ammo really fast, and this helps with that also since you have 1 less turret shooting ammo per cycle.



I had already adressed the problem ,but so far we didn't receive any favorable answer.
MACHARIEL

Gallente Battleship Bonus:
10% bonus to Large Projectile Turret falloff

Minmatar Battleship Bonus:
7.5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret damage

Role Bonus:
25% bonus to Large Projectile Turret rate of fire
note: This ship has increased warp speed and warp acceleration


Slot layout: 7H, 5M, 6L; 6 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 17950 PWG, 620 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 9320 / 9250 / 8260
Capacitor (amount / recharge / cap per second) : 5800 / 1154000ms(-875) / 5.02
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 161 / .096(+.012) / 94680000 / 12.60(+1.5)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 100 / 125
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km(+13km) / 125(-25) / 7
Sensor strength: 26
Signature radius: 350(+10)


With those stats fitting a full rack of 1400MM t2 ,wouldn't be a problem but it ease a bit too much XLSB use ,for 800 MM version.Maybe CCP should revamp artillery PG and CPU cost in first place.
The assymetry could be dealt with some modification to the model ,adding a deck passerel between the two part of the hull for the utility slot isn't that hard .


From Rise in the cruiser thread :

CCP Rise wrote:


On the Vigilant fitting (and similar fitting related comments) - as someone mentioned above, fitting a ship is not meant to be a matter of fitting all the biggest things. There are certainly times when the fitting allocation is too restrictive and we don't want that either, but for ship-fitting gameplay to be good it must include personalization/strategy/tradeoffs. That's what we're trying to accomplish.




Pretty sure that's a valid statement for the mach.
Myrthiis
Boon Odd Ducks Bath Toys
#2740 - 2014-05-21 20:24:53 UTC
And i strongly agree with him but when,personalization/strategy/tradeoffs doesn't even allow a whole category weapons to be fitted anymore ,they could as well remove it from the game and spare us the lost training time for a specific weapons system .
In the current game artillerry as lost most platform outside of some t1 cruiser .
There is barely enought grid on any ship to fit 720mm or 1400mm with an acceptable tradeoffs ,actually to play with them you have to plugs a full genolution+rigs+engineering implants.No other large or long range weapons need that much compromize to be used . And this issue must be adressed.