These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: The Svipul Tactical Destroyer andProjectile Changes

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#121 - 2015-01-20 23:29:59 UTC
Dalilus wrote:
Looks Caldari.......not much Minnie flavor to it.

Give it a coat of rust and it'll look right.
Nahzgul
DUST Expeditionary Team
Good Sax
#122 - 2015-01-20 23:46:21 UTC
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.

I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.

As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#123 - 2015-01-20 23:54:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
holy ****ing ****!



Edit; added extra expletive as i reread the bonuses

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#124 - 2015-01-21 01:20:17 UTC
Kynric wrote:
Whatever way I piece it together it seems to come out confused rather than flexible.


Couldn't agree more.

Defense mode: The only way I can think to fly this mode and take advantage of the bonuses is with a long-point and orbit (assuming it has the agility to get away with this). At that range, unless I'm missing something, small auto-cannons won't have the range to do anything useful and the arty will lack the tracking (I wonder if I could fit it with beams and still be cap stable?). It will be a SUPER-tanky ceptor, but it won't have teeth at all. Speaking of tank, with the double resist bonuses, this could get dangerously tanky. I haven't run the numbers, but the fact that I'm even considering running an armor repper AND and shield repper should be concerning.

Propulsion mode: This mode makes sense, it's going to be fast.

Sniper Mode: This is clearly an arty bonus, since tracking of small auto-cannons will almost never be an issue. in theory you should be able to kite a little better with this and still apply damage, but if you're doing that, why not just super-buff your tank in defense mode and bring your transversal down? As a gank ship, it will have a crazy fast lock, and it will still have a decent tank. I suspect this is where it will make its money. but, as some others have noted, this will fall behind the Thrasher for damage application (33% bonus to tracking vs. 50% for the Thrasher).

So all in all, I see a tanky ceptor and a stupid fast locking gank ship. Good on the extreme ends of the spectrum, unimpressive or worse everywhere else. I was excited about this, but I think I'll just train to a Confessor instead.

Finally, prop mode looks awesome. Vertical modes look terrible. My mind revolts against the obvious center-of-gravity issues that a ship shaped like this would have if it wasn't just made of pixels.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#125 - 2015-01-21 02:44:09 UTC
why would anyone fly this in a fleet over a harpy

a: they wont





plz put some thought into fleet based ships because the meta is pretty stale atm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#126 - 2015-01-21 02:56:02 UTC
i mean i guess its cool for camping gates but who really cares

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#127 - 2015-01-21 03:26:44 UTC
ergherhdfgh wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Arty changes are good. Though i have a question.

If rails are dps orientated and arty about alpha, why does arty also suffer from horrendous fitting? The risk/reward is already in the weapon system. Less tracking and very long RoF. Why are they (small and med arty) also hard as **** to fit?

For example, lets say youre trying to track a frig with medium rails/arty. If rails miss, its only 3-5 seconds till their next shot. If arty misses, its 7-10s (depending on ship/fit). That is a lot of time for a frig to get under your guns and ruin your day. So, you are completely vulnerable in that time frame. Yet, then they take a large amount of grid to fit, so you have less tank and utility for defense/survivability in that encounter.

Also, 650 arty is garbage. We dont need a "dps" orientated arty. Arty is alpha. 650s should have much better alpha than they do now to distance them from rails. 250s are only a few hundred volley away from 650 alpha.

Anyway, off topic there.

I agree, needs an optimal + falloff bonus to make ac and arty fits viable. That would actually let arty extend close to its sniper mode ranges.

The largest beam Lazors are also very hard to fit. Alpha is alpha and it has it's good points but also it's bad. I am most familiar with large turrets so not sure if this scales but here we go:

So 1400mm attys have half the clip size of 1200s and have **** tracking and also as you have pointed out crazy high cycle time. Because of that in most PvE situations the 1200's are a much better option. They have a 10 second reload less often. Have less overkill with the lower alpha and hit much better due to the tracking. So the 1200s are far from useless as a matter of fact I would say the 1400's are more of a niche thing that are good in PvP Alpha fleets and not much else.

I am assuming it is something similar with the medium and small attys.


Not true about 1200's. 1400's are still better in PvE. Because they have such ungodly amounts of alpha, you split your guns. My 1400 mach i used run anom's in could kill 3-4 ships per volley just by splitting the guns. My mach got close to 1k dps with 1400 arty and sentries. So 1400's are just as viable for PvE.

Large arty isn't too bad, mainly medium and now to a lesser extent, smalls. The lower tier arty is worthless except in a few minor niche` fits. Its only use is better tracking. Arty should not be dps orientated, it should be alpha. smaller tier arty should keep the good tracking, gain more damage, and maybe a slightly slower RoF (but not as slow as 280/720/1400). That way you are not shooting for rail damage with arty RoF, alpha is still respectable.

I am very interested in this, and can't wait to test it out on SiSi to see what its capable of. I've flown arty jags a lot, and their pretty fun, just need skill to fly (and kinda expensive due to faction/t2 PG mods/rigs to fit arty). Optimal bonus is useful for artillery, so for those trying to get rid of it, don't be dumb. Both weapon systems should be viable, not just one or the other.

I much prefer arty to have optimal bonus, it already has a large fall-off, no need to shorten the dps cliff anymore than it already is. This is why a 10% bonus to optimal/fall-off would be reasonable. On small artillery, i don't see that being game breaking. Would actually make them semi viable to kill all the f'n garmur's out there. But on small a/c's, it would at least allow them to project semi-decently, and optimal bonus would barely have any effect on a/c's, so that checks itself.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
M'pact
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2015-01-21 04:08:19 UTC
LOVE the looks of the modes.

Bonuses are a bit iffy. Hull bonus to fallofff would be better than current optimal bonus.

When I finally do make an impact on this universe, it will reverberate across the entirety of it, and no one will be able to truthfully claim they don't know me. - -

Until then, I'll just sit quietly over here, minding my own business...
Captain Stern
Arms Of Solitude
#129 - 2015-01-21 06:28:18 UTC
I was all for the clone thing, the ship make overs, and most of the new ships up to this point, but Transformers? Really?





Really?
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#130 - 2015-01-21 07:08:32 UTC
If this were to roll out as is - I'd be interested in trying out a dual prop fit with a rack of 280's. A T2 ACR rig would allow for an active armor tank possibility. Sniper mode for applying damage. Defensive mode if yellow boxed. Propulsion mode if you get your MWD turned off and need the AB. The bonuses are still a mess imho.
Yngvar ayShorn
Einheit X-6
#131 - 2015-01-21 07:25:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Yngvar ayShorn
Chessur wrote:
The Minny T3:

Why are we placing the MWD sig bonus in the defensive mode, and not leaving it intact for speed? So much more useful there- and useless in defense.

Using MWD only on this ship is really a let down. Confessor is so strong because of its ability to fit 10MN abs, to try and make up for the ****** speed / sig ratio that all destroyers (With out innate sig reduction) share. I am not sure the minny version is going to like being shoehorned into MWD only, if it wants to take advantage of all its ship bonuses.

I am concerned with no range increase, or falloff bonuses while in sniper. Also really concerned about no falloff bonus in general. Are we ok with forcing this into arty only alpha thrasher T2?

Doesn't have enough grid. 1mn MWD with a full rack of 280's is already 85.2 PWG. T3 gets 78 base? Are you kidding?


As for the projectile changes.

Arty changes look ok.

Ac changes on the other hand....

They need so much more love than 7.5% base falloff increase. This is not going to fix Medium AC's or small AC's. At the end of they day, they do such little damage up close- and are anemic at range. Please don't try and hit me with 'selectable damage' as a huge pro. Because that is just simply not the case when you are kiting with AC's. These paltry changes (even on falloff boats like the stabber / vaga / cyna) Are still not going to make up for the fact that they have anemic DPS at 24+K and because of that are forced to use barrage. The barrage changes are not helping the matter, if range / dps is staying similar. While a step in the right direction, WAY more needs to be done in order to address Small and medium AC's. The only thing this change will have, is give Large AC's (Tornado and particularly the Mach) A slight boost.



+1 for this post!

Minmatar T3:
+1 for falloff-bonus (so you can fly it with AC's) btw.. Confessor gets optimal bonus, why should Svipul get this!? It is projectile, falloff falloff falloff falloff.. it is NOT Laz0r! Attention
+1 for change mwd-Bonus to speedmodus
+1 for some needful bonus to snipermode
+1 for some little bit more pg

Please rethink some of the suggestions mentioned in this thread.
Svipul needs some love just bevor launching What?

+250.000 Skillpunkte für neue Accounts mit meinem Link!  -->> Klick mich <<-- -- Minmatar FactionWar --
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#132 - 2015-01-21 11:11:00 UTC
Oh look, an another ship which is bonused towards a weapon system it cannot fit without a fitting mod or 3.

Minmatar was relieved from Amarr tyranny so they can make ships which don't suffer form amarr-itis.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#133 - 2015-01-21 11:25:17 UTC
I'm liking the falloff changes, it kinda reverses the TE nerf from a while back (which really hurt projectiles) making them much more competitive.

I'm not so sure on the ship design but texturing can do a lot of good I guess.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#134 - 2015-01-21 13:43:06 UTC
Personally, I'd give those tactical destroyers much more faction flavour, allowing them to dynamically deploy the faction's favoured tactics. Just brainstorming.

Minmatar: Kite, Brawl, GTFO [hit and run]
Caldari: Snipe, Cloak (non-covops), ECM [electronic superiority]
Amarr: Cleanse, Endure, Purge (capwar) [just like in the scriptures]
Gallente: Approach, Pin, Blast (face melting)

You have such a versatile platform to express the personality of the factions, yet you still make it basically four times the same ship.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Luscius Uta
#135 - 2015-01-21 14:02:36 UTC
Like most other people, I would prefer optimal bonus changed to falloff. Optimal bonus could possibly be added to the sharpshooter mode, not to the hull itself.
I also don't like bonuses to both shield and armour resistances, as bonuses to shield boost amount and signature reduction would be more Minmatar-ish (just like I expect the Gallente Tactical Destroyer to have Armour repair bonus in defensive mode).

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#136 - 2015-01-21 14:38:17 UTC
It is vertical/diagonal 2/3 of the time! All praise Big smile I'm so glad to see my topic was useful after all!

The ship looks amazing both in model and stats, can't wait to fly it.

I'm also very happy about those projectile changes.

Tiamat promises amazing Cool
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc.
Rogue Caldari Union
#137 - 2015-01-21 15:15:45 UTC
This ship has an optimal bonus for the same reason the confessor has a turret cap bonus, to prenerf....I mean, to keep them balanced.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#138 - 2015-01-21 16:48:21 UTC
Any reason we can't get an optimal+falloff bonus on this? If the objective is to get it to be flexible, then an optimal and falloff bonus would be more appropriate.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#139 - 2015-01-21 16:56:05 UTC
Nahzgul wrote:
Like so many others I am having a hard time understanding why the mwd sig reduction is where it is. If you're in a situation that calls for you to be in this mode your mwd most likely won't be able to be activated. It would make more sense to place it in the ship bonus and move the optimal range bonus into sharpshooter mode.

I understand the need to avoid the ship from becoming overpowered while putting an over sized AB on it and I'm sure you can come up with something creative to fill the open bonus. Possibly more very close range damage, it is minmatar after all.

As for the projectile changes do artillery really need more alpha? seriously?


As an arty ship it probably shouldn't be in scram range (Keres/Lach/Prot excluded), and the bonuses sort of makes sense if you try burn out of (long point) range while primaried.

Or something.

Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#140 - 2015-01-21 17:31:59 UTC
I think CCP is disregarding Power Creep, T3 destroyers are ludicrous overpowered.

The Tears Must Flow