These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

An explanation for why it's okay to give drone ships fewer slots
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2015-02-04 04:11:37 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
indeed .. i was just wondering the other day perhaps -2 slots would be a stronger drawback and help balance them a little.

ishtar.. - remove turrets and -1 midslot reduce dronebay too 250m3, nerf sentries, change 10% damage bonus to 7.5% and remove HP bonus

gila.. -2 highslots ... switch back to 5 drones with maybe 15% medium drone damage/hp on gal bonus and move 50% missile bonus to role bonus
I'd focus more on removing high slots. They should have at least as many mid/low slots as their gunner counterparts, possibly even +1 mid for the drone midslot upgrades. They don't have much use for high slots given they usually evade and the only drone upgrade for highs is the control range booster.

For the Ishtar I'd leave it with its massive drone bay if you're going to completely remove the turrets. It'll be like a counterpart to the Zealot, extremely strong with only drones, whereas the small amount of ancillary firepower on other drone ships is like the drone bay on gunships. Just take those highslots off and remove a lot of powergrid.

The 4 drones thing works well for Guristas because they end up using 2 drones. It's also nice for the server. They counter the weaker drones with some auxiliary long-range missiles that can reach out as far as the drones even if they don't add much to the overall DPS of the ship. I wouldn't touch their high slots or drones too hard.



Anhenka wrote:
Odd, it's almost like most all of my posts on the subject involve supporting moderate nerfs to Ishtars.

There is a significant difference between moderate nerfs and Mr "One flight of drones, no way to reload drones, no drone HP bonus, and let's also remove slots, and half the fitting, and nerf the bonuses" Reaver here.

Call me crazy, but I'd rather the Ishtar doesn't get the hurricane treatment. nerfing an overpowered ship does not mean it needs to be buried alive an concrete poured on top.

I never actually meant to suggest that the Drone Zealot was a good idea. It was a point of reference I used to illustrate my point. In the case of the Drone Zealot, it wouldn't actually be altogether weak without guns or high slots, but it would be a skirmish drone ship which might be a tricky combo to work with. It also has a tremendous battleship-sized drone bay and no replacements. If I were actually trying to balance the Ishtar, I might do something similar, at least as far as kicking off a ton of powergrid and high slots, but I'd leave the immense drone power fully intact. It makes the ship unique.

Now any drone boat that has a reason to keep its high slots should not have a tremendous oversized drone bay. I'm looking at you two, Vexor and Myrmidon. For those ships, I might nerf the drone bandwidth and leave the high slots and turrets intact. A 50mb/s Vexor is primarily a drone ship but it could fit neuts or railguns so that the ship is harrassing you at the same time as its drones are. Myrmidon could maintain the same 50mb/s and consider that half its power, with the other half in weapons up top. In typical Gallente style, and in order to make up for having a split offense, it will have more total offense--and it'll have strategic applications for splitting up that offense. Or maybe that split style should be left to Amarr drone ships. If Gallente are to have strong drone complements that are the majority of their offense, then their high slot weaponry should be no stronger than a turret ship's drone bay.

Another point I'd make is that a lot of Gallente ships (and some other races) have a lot more drone power than they need, and don't make proper sacrifices to balance it out. For instance, the Thorax is of similar overall power to the Stabber when you don't count drones, but of course their drone power is remarkably different. At least the Stabber can fly 5 drones now, used to only be able to fly one. And that's a concern I have with CCP's design direction: when they notice two ships are out of balance because one has a huge drone bay, they give the other one a bigger drone bay. Why not just call this game of drones and stop pretending there's any sort of ship strategy here? If every ship can do everything at once, what's the point? I think we should have a lot more ships with small or no drone bays, and more drone ships with less non-drone offense. It'll make ship selection a lot more dynamic and strategic.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
MukkBarovian
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#22 - 2015-02-04 08:12:43 UTC
The real Zealot is a terrible awful ship. I speak as one who used to love it. But its garbage now compared to alternatives.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#23 - 2015-02-04 11:48:28 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
indeed .. i was just wondering the other day perhaps -2 slots would be a stronger drawback and help balance them a little.

ishtar.. - remove turrets and -1 midslot reduce dronebay too 250m3, nerf sentries, change 10% damage bonus to 7.5% and remove HP bonus

gila.. -2 highslots ... switch back to 5 drones with maybe 15% medium drone damage/hp on gal bonus and move 50% missile bonus to role bonus
I'd focus more on removing high slots. They should have at least as many mid/low slots as their gunner counterparts, possibly even +1 mid for the drone midslot upgrades. They don't have much use for high slots given they usually evade and the only drone upgrade for highs is the control range booster.

For the Ishtar I'd leave it with its massive drone bay if you're going to completely remove the turrets. It'll be like a counterpart to the Zealot, extremely strong with only drones, whereas the small amount of ancillary firepower on other drone ships is like the drone bay on gunships. Just take those highslots off and remove a lot of powergrid.

The 4 drones thing works well for Guristas because they end up using 2 drones. It's also nice for the server. They counter the weaker drones with some auxiliary long-range missiles that can reach out as far as the drones even if they don't add much to the overall DPS of the ship. I wouldn't touch their high slots or drones too hard.


on the ishtar .. well i doubt people use the turrets really ... more sentry shield kite setup with drone links and maybe neuts.. more a token thing really aswell as a potential dps cap.... but it should not have a battleship dronebay for certain, look at the VNI and myrm/Eos for comparisons, around 200 is the common amount , so 250 shows its the premier cruiser sized hull.

on Gila/gurista .. if they were concerned about the server they would remove drones from more ships, besides gilas aren't common in large fights for it too be an issue.
but 900 dps fits are easy and common for gila's, they need a dps nerf, they end up better than drakes and they have too many replacements in its 2 drone setup along with huge hp drones, i also can't see how they justify 2 instead of 5 drones here, it seems a OP gimmick too me rather than giving them a proper distinction like the other faction's have.

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
Phaade
Know-Nothings
Negative Feedback
#24 - 2015-02-04 15:04:59 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
indeed .. i was just wondering the other day perhaps -2 slots would be a stronger drawback and help balance them a little.

ishtar.. - remove turrets and -1 midslot reduce dronebay too 250m3, nerf sentries, change 10% damage bonus to 7.5% and remove HP bonus

gila.. -2 highslots ... switch back to 5 drones with maybe 15% medium drone damage/hp on gal bonus and move 50% missile bonus to role bonus
I'd focus more on removing high slots. They should have at least as many mid/low slots as their gunner counterparts, possibly even +1 mid for the drone midslot upgrades. They don't have much use for high slots given they usually evade and the only drone upgrade for highs is the control range booster.

For the Ishtar I'd leave it with its massive drone bay if you're going to completely remove the turrets. It'll be like a counterpart to the Zealot, extremely strong with only drones, whereas the small amount of ancillary firepower on other drone ships is like the drone bay on gunships. Just take those highslots off and remove a lot of powergrid.

The 4 drones thing works well for Guristas because they end up using 2 drones. It's also nice for the server. They counter the weaker drones with some auxiliary long-range missiles that can reach out as far as the drones even if they don't add much to the overall DPS of the ship. I wouldn't touch their high slots or drones too hard.



Anhenka wrote:
Odd, it's almost like most all of my posts on the subject involve supporting moderate nerfs to Ishtars.

There is a significant difference between moderate nerfs and Mr "One flight of drones, no way to reload drones, no drone HP bonus, and let's also remove slots, and half the fitting, and nerf the bonuses" Reaver here.

Call me crazy, but I'd rather the Ishtar doesn't get the hurricane treatment. nerfing an overpowered ship does not mean it needs to be buried alive an concrete poured on top.

I never actually meant to suggest that the Drone Zealot was a good idea. It was a point of reference I used to illustrate my point. In the case of the Drone Zealot, it wouldn't actually be altogether weak without guns or high slots, but it would be a skirmish drone ship which might be a tricky combo to work with. It also has a tremendous battleship-sized drone bay and no replacements. If I were actually trying to balance the Ishtar, I might do something similar, at least as far as kicking off a ton of powergrid and high slots, but I'd leave the immense drone power fully intact. It makes the ship unique.

Now any drone boat that has a reason to keep its high slots should not have a tremendous oversized drone bay. I'm looking at you two, Vexor and Myrmidon. For those ships, I might nerf the drone bandwidth and leave the high slots and turrets intact. A 50mb/s Vexor is primarily a drone ship but it could fit neuts or railguns so that the ship is harrassing you at the same time as its drones are. Myrmidon could maintain the same 50mb/s and consider that half its power, with the other half in weapons up top. In typical Gallente style, and in order to make up for having a split offense, it will have more total offense--and it'll have strategic applications for splitting up that offense. Or maybe that split style should be left to Amarr drone ships. If Gallente are to have strong drone complements that are the majority of their offense, then their high slot weaponry should be no stronger than a turret ship's drone bay.

Another point I'd make is that a lot of Gallente ships (and some other races) have a lot more drone power than they need, and don't make proper sacrifices to balance it out. For instance, the Thorax is of similar overall power to the Stabber when you don't count drones, but of course their drone power is remarkably different. At least the Stabber can fly 5 drones now, used to only be able to fly one. And that's a concern I have with CCP's design direction: when they notice two ships are out of balance because one has a huge drone bay, they give the other one a bigger drone bay. Why not just call this game of drones and stop pretending there's any sort of ship strategy here? If every ship can do everything at once, what's the point? I think we should have a lot more ships with small or no drone bays, and more drone ships with less non-drone offense. It'll make ship selection a lot more dynamic and strategic.



Very well said.

As if drones weren't a tackle counter already, perhaps excluding linked long point interceptors, a medium neut or two makes them able to escape damn near any tackle.

Your statement that drone ships should have turret power (and utility in my opinion) equivalent to turret ship drone power is right on the money.
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#25 - 2015-02-04 16:44:04 UTC
As long as turrets can be targeted and destroyed its all good.
Phaade
Know-Nothings
Negative Feedback
#26 - 2015-02-04 17:44:15 UTC
Syn Shi wrote:
As long as turrets can be targeted and destroyed its all good.



That argument has been destroyed several times.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2015-02-04 19:28:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Syn Shi wrote:
As long as turrets can be targeted and destroyed its all good.

As long as drones get falloff penalties when operating at range from the launching ship, or fail to hit a target because its moving too fast relative to the launching ship, and can't be switched out for new types even if you have backups after the first 5 are down.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#28 - 2015-02-04 19:44:34 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
Sentry drones losing damage and range as ship distance increases is the only somewhat feasible idea I can take from this thread. Anhenka has covered the rest well.

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#29 - 2015-02-04 20:43:55 UTC
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
Sentry drones losing damage and range as ship distance increases is the only somewhat feasible idea I can take from this thread. Anhenka has covered the rest well.


so less optimal and more falloff..

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
Syn Shi
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#30 - 2015-02-04 21:17:39 UTC
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
Sentry drones losing damage and range as ship distance increases is the only somewhat feasible idea I can take from this thread. Anhenka has covered the rest well.



As long as links worked the same. And turrets were changed to calculate their optimal/falloff from where they first activated their guns.
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#31 - 2015-02-05 23:25:22 UTC  |  Edited by: McChicken Combo HalfMayo
Syn Shi wrote:
McChicken Combo HalfMayo wrote:
Sentry drones losing damage and range as ship distance increases is the only somewhat feasible idea I can take from this thread. Anhenka has covered the rest well.



As long as links worked the same. And turrets were changed to calculate their optimal/falloff from where they first activated their guns.

lolwut.jpg

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2015-02-06 17:19:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I have an idea: all weapon-based cruisers and HACs that can field more than 3 small drones get 4 guns instead of 5. Then, all drone-based cruisers and HACs start with 4 high slots/3 hardpoints and lose one of each for every 25mb/s bandwidth over 50.

So 4-gun Thorax, and Vexor has 3 highs and 2 turret hardpoints. Change Vexor's turret damage bonus to 10% or swap it out with something else. Boost Thorax' damage bonus from 5% to 7.5% so it has about the same amount of increase from skills. Leave Thorax with a utility high probably. It is a tackler, right?

Give Maller the cap cost reduction instead of damage, take a turret hardpoint off Omen and swap out the cap cost reduction for a drone damage bonus.

Unrelated but seriously give Moa optimal range instead of damage! Remove Caracal's bonuses to light missiles. Still OP with RLMLs.

Cut Rupture's 30mb/s in half, to 15mb/s and give it a 5th turret hardpoint. Cut Stabber's 25mb/s down to the old 5. It's already good enough with its tiny sig and high mobility. If you can't do well with a Stabber you aren't flying it right.

Zealot is fine. Cut off a launcher hardpoint from Sacrilege but increase missile damage bonus to 7.5% to maintain same amount of increase from skill (final DPS at skill 5 is 7.3333 launchers instead of old 8.3333 launchers).

Eagle is excellent. Change Cerberus 5% kinetic bonus to 10% because it's only kinetic, take off RLML rate of fire (it's rolled into the weapon system already), then take of a launcher hardpoint and highslot and give it another mid or low slot.

Reduce Vagabond sig radius from 115m to 105m (Stabber is 100m) and bring its 5 small drones down to 2 or 3. Cut Muninn's drones likewise, but no bonuses for Muninn. If you don't know how to do well with a ship that has such powerful weapons and such a tiny sig radius AND a utility high, then don't fly a Muninn. Also keep Vagabond and Muninn's utility highs.

the moment you've been reading for:

Deimos: EXACTLY like Thorax, except 7.5% damage bonus only for the first, the second stays at 5%. It probably still sucks at this point but I think that's due to hit points or resistances, not the guns/drones.

Ishtar: -3 high slots, -4 turret hardpoints. Give nothing in return. I'll balance the skill bonuses a bit though: heavy and sentry skill bonuses work separate from each other. It should be +7.5% tracking for heavies and sentries, and then 10% heavy max velocity and sentry optimal range--to give it a full 4 skill bonuses with either option instead of just 3.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Previous page12