These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Drake changes from CSM minutes.

Author
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#81 - 2012-01-19 15:09:35 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

There is plenty of reason to fly HACs. BCs can't replace HACs for the majority of roles that HACs are used for. The only HACs that are "replaced" by BCs are the ones that are just bad in their own right; the Eagle and the Sacrilege, and to a much lesser extent now, the Deimos.


The Sacrilege is only considered bad because it's a brawler and tier 2 BCs do this slightly better for less ISK. Similar situation with the Deimos.


Exactly; HACs "should" use their superior speed and agility (and range) to dictate the terms of the engagement. It's not that the Sac and the Deimos are obseleted by the BCs, it's that they fail to obselete BCs. A cruiser shouldn't be a better straight up face-to-face slugger than a battlecruiser.

The Eagle is just dreadful though, and it should be completely reworked from scratch. My personal preference would be to make it the one Caldari ship that can go at a decent speed for its class.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#82 - 2012-01-19 15:10:59 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:
im telling you the nerf is coming, because no cruiser should be able to fit 100mn AB's. the Tengu is a stupidly OP and broken ship, and it's only a matter of time before CCP sees it.

HACs are only viable for AHAC fleets. to narrow it down even more, only the Zealot is viable for AHAC fleets (maybe Deimos now as well). all the other HAC's are useless compared to tier 2 BC's. tier 3's happily took over the sniping role of the other HAC's. the Eagle is a fuckin joke, and Vagas dont exist any more as they've been replaced by the Cynabal faceroll.


Let me tell you about PL's Ishtar fleet

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Vile Coyote
Deep Space Legacy
#83 - 2012-01-19 15:13:37 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

Plus you could put AMLs on them as well if the bonus applied to light missiles too, and boatmurder pretty much any frigate class ships on the battlefield.


Anything but this.

-The Caracal already does the exact same thing,
-This game does not need another frig killer setup, especially not on a hull nearly everybody has in hangar,
-T1 cruisers may finally be getting love, it is not the time to steal the Cal's niche. If some ship ever has to steal it, please make it a destroyer.

Malcanis wrote:
The range bonus would also make the HML Drake an even more effective large fleet ship than it already is.

How ?
Serious question.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#84 - 2012-01-19 15:33:53 UTC
Vile Coyote wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Plus you could put AMLs on them as well if the bonus applied to light missiles too, and boatmurder pretty much any frigate class ships on the battlefield.


Anything but this.

-The Caracal already does the exact same thing,
-This game does not need another frig killer setup, especially not on a hull nearly everybody has in hangar,
-T1 cruisers may finally be getting love, it is not the time to steal the Cal's niche. If some ship ever has to steal it, please make it a destroyer.

Malcanis wrote:
The range bonus would also make the HML Drake an even more effective large fleet ship than it already is.

How ?
Serious question.


It's not really the resist bonus that makes the HML Drake a usefull fleet ship, or at least not only the resist bonus. It's the ability to do reasonable damage at decent range. 350-500 DPS at 5Km is distinctly meh, but 350-500 DPS at 80Km is pretty good. Adding 8-33% to that damage and 50% to that range will make it a very useful ship for large fights. 120Km is right at the "sweet spot" for ranged fighting; you're completely out of range for Pulse abaddons, which are the current hard counter to Drake fleets, but you're not so far away that you can be easily warped to. You're also well out of the "high damage" range for arty ships who will have to switch out to long range ammo. It's also enough range to stay out of the way of T2 ganglink boosted Lachs and Huginns, which is even more important.

To put it another way, the Drake will have the same range as the Tengu, and about the same damage (but with full damage type selectability, which counts for something in these days of standard alliance fittings). It'll have less tank, of course, but it's also about 10% of the price. It would be tempting to consider a Welpfleet style doctrine for the new Drake, where you don't really bother with RR, but just get everyone into a DPS ship, especially since you can stay out of tackle range, still apply max DPS at 110Km, and just warp off if you get yellowboxed. I'd probably want to pack some arty Tornados into the fleet as well to alpha any Lachs foolish enough to try and get too close

Honestly this change would 'obselete' Fleet Tengus more than any other ship. Tengus would still be better than drakes, but only in respect to tanking. As far as fleet fights are concerned, it would mix things up nicely and trigger a lot of fleet doctrine changes. I hope it comes to pass.

As far as PvE is concerned, it would make the Drake better in the sense of being able to kill rats far more effectively, but worse in the sense of being able to be "semi-AFK" and ignore income DPS. You will have to actually pilot the ship a bit and kill off webbing frigates in the same way one has to do with a Tengu, but overall, I think people will adjust quickly. If nothing else, the Drake will still have its drone bay. I think it will be overall a moderate improvement for ratting and missions, but will lose its place as a "tanker" to T2 ships. I am OK with this.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#85 - 2012-01-19 15:44:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
Awesome, exactly what I would've done. I just hope the Hurricane nerf isn't too far off this.

To those whining about their favorite ship being "nerfed": cry more, the Drake will still be a perfectly usable ship, it just won't have utterly ridiculous EHP and will actually be better at lobbing non-kinetic missiles around.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#86 - 2012-01-19 16:39:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:
Awesome, exactly what I would've done. I just hope the Hurricane nerf isn't too far off this.


I still think that it's too good and would like to see tier 2 BCs not being straight up better than a HAC in a brawl.

As far as HAM Drakes go the change is hardly a nerf, it's at best shaking things up at and at worst a buff.
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2012-01-19 16:57:28 UTC
Calistai Huranu wrote:
HAM drakes will be the new standard.


HAM Drakes have kicked ass since I started EVE 4 years ago. I however welcome the ROF bonus in place of the kinetic one.

Taking away the resistance bonus strikes me as somewhat silly though. Wonder if they did it becasue of PVE balancing in a PVP game?
Calistai Huranu
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#88 - 2012-01-19 18:25:06 UTC
Sidus Isaacs wrote:
Calistai Huranu wrote:
HAM drakes will be the new standard.


HAM Drakes have kicked ass since I started EVE 4 years ago. I however welcome the ROF bonus in place of the kinetic one.

Taking away the resistance bonus strikes me as somewhat silly though. Wonder if they did it becasue of PVE balancing in a PVP game?


HAM drakes will kick ass better and at longer range than before :D

Drakes hitter more often and faster than before in HML Draek blobs is going to be something else.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#89 - 2012-01-19 18:26:52 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:
im telling you the nerf is coming, because no cruiser should be able to fit 100mn AB's. the Tengu is a stupidly OP and broken ship, and it's only a matter of time before CCP sees it.

HACs are only viable for AHAC fleets. to narrow it down even more, only the Zealot is viable for AHAC fleets (maybe Deimos now as well). all the other HAC's are useless compared to tier 2 BC's. tier 3's happily took over the sniping role of the other HAC's. the Eagle is a fuckin joke, and Vagas dont exist any more as they've been replaced by the Cynabal faceroll.


I don't see the problem. Cruisers that fit 100mn ABs are extremely cumbersome with gimped fits, hilariously poor agility, and generally overall slower performance than if they'd just MWD nano'd it. The trade off is that they're immune to scrams. I think its a totally legitimate tradeoff to make.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#90 - 2012-01-19 18:29:13 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

There is plenty of reason to fly HACs. BCs can't replace HACs for the majority of roles that HACs are used for. The only HACs that are "replaced" by BCs are the ones that are just bad in their own right; the Eagle and the Sacrilege, and to a much lesser extent now, the Deimos.


The Sacrilege is only considered bad because it's a brawler and tier 2 BCs do this slightly better for less ISK. Similar situation with the Deimos.


Exactly; HACs "should" use their superior speed and agility (and range) to dictate the terms of the engagement. It's not that the Sac and the Deimos are obseleted by the BCs, it's that they fail to obselete BCs. A cruiser shouldn't be a better straight up face-to-face slugger than a battlecruiser.

The Eagle is just dreadful though, and it should be completely reworked from scratch. My personal preference would be to make it the one Caldari ship that can go at a decent speed for its class.


I think you're smoking something really strong if you don't think that the range bonus Drake is going to obsolete the Cerb and quite possibly the Navy Caracal. Its plenty fast enough to nano, has a drone bay, and has just more overall DPS. Furthermore, it doesn't address why people don't like the Nighthawk to begin with.... its ****** power grid.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#91 - 2012-01-19 19:17:41 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
im telling you the nerf is coming, because no cruiser should be able to fit 100mn AB's. the Tengu is a stupidly OP and broken ship, and it's only a matter of time before CCP sees it.

HACs are only viable for AHAC fleets. to narrow it down even more, only the Zealot is viable for AHAC fleets (maybe Deimos now as well). all the other HAC's are useless compared to tier 2 BC's. tier 3's happily took over the sniping role of the other HAC's. the Eagle is a fuckin joke, and Vagas dont exist any more as they've been replaced by the Cynabal faceroll.


I don't see the problem. Cruisers that fit 100mn ABs are extremely cumbersome with gimped fits, hilariously poor agility, and generally overall slower performance than if they'd just MWD nano'd it. The trade off is that they're immune to scrams. I think its a totally legitimate tradeoff to make.

-Liang


the only cruiser causing an issue is the Tengu. it just happens that the 100mn AB Tengu isnt gimped in any way, and has no weaknesses.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#92 - 2012-01-19 19:24:11 UTC
Hungry Eyes wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
im telling you the nerf is coming, because no cruiser should be able to fit 100mn AB's. the Tengu is a stupidly OP and broken ship, and it's only a matter of time before CCP sees it.

HACs are only viable for AHAC fleets. to narrow it down even more, only the Zealot is viable for AHAC fleets (maybe Deimos now as well). all the other HAC's are useless compared to tier 2 BC's. tier 3's happily took over the sniping role of the other HAC's. the Eagle is a fuckin joke, and Vagas dont exist any more as they've been replaced by the Cynabal faceroll.


I don't see the problem. Cruisers that fit 100mn ABs are extremely cumbersome with gimped fits, hilariously poor agility, and generally overall slower performance than if they'd just MWD nano'd it. The trade off is that they're immune to scrams. I think its a totally legitimate tradeoff to make.

-Liang


the only cruiser causing an issue is the Tengu. it just happens that the 100mn AB Tengu isnt gimped in any way, and has no weaknesses.


Sounds like a problem with the Tengu to me - not 100mn ABs on cruisers (which is what you implied). Also - it is gimped.... at least compared to what it could be doing. -_-

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#93 - 2012-01-19 19:57:06 UTC
Who cares about the drake these days? It's all about the talos and tornado.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#94 - 2012-01-19 20:01:47 UTC
so will they nerf matar too?
like -20% resists and -20% close range ammo dmg?
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#95 - 2012-01-19 20:10:29 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
im telling you the nerf is coming, because no cruiser should be able to fit 100mn AB's. the Tengu is a stupidly OP and broken ship, and it's only a matter of time before CCP sees it.

HACs are only viable for AHAC fleets. to narrow it down even more, only the Zealot is viable for AHAC fleets (maybe Deimos now as well). all the other HAC's are useless compared to tier 2 BC's. tier 3's happily took over the sniping role of the other HAC's. the Eagle is a fuckin joke, and Vagas dont exist any more as they've been replaced by the Cynabal faceroll.


Let me tell you about PL's Ishtar fleet

Never mind what happens when you create pure-Zealot AHAC fleets: people just ignore EXP/KIN and promptly thumb their nose at you. Mixing Muninns in fixes that problem, and also gives you some alpha punch to go with the fast-firing lasers on the Zealot. (Hint: Muninns also have these things called 'drones' and 'utility high slots' for getting rid of these things called 'tacklers'.)

Hurricane btw doesn't have the speed/sig combo for flying alongside Zealots, also T1 resists are a bit of a drag to work with (although the Muninn does have to deal with the asymmetry in T2 Minmatar resists, it's nothing a couple of active armor hardeners can't fix.)
mecubed
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2012-01-19 20:35:36 UTC
The Cerb was already bested by the drake, in terms of HACS, caldari ones are the worst.
As for HAms, in order to make them hit with authority, you need a scram and web, which hurts its tank by quite a bit.

With the speed,sig radius and extra utility slots, your just going to be an easier kill for a hurricane after the nerf.
Also with Hams come PG issues.
Noisrevbus
#97 - 2012-01-19 21:31:23 UTC
The funny thing is that with the proposed changes the role of the Drake will just steer over to counter it's presumtive counter, nore does it in any way deal with the issues revolving around the ship. All you will have in the end is continued streamlining and simplification of the game, with CCP's seemingly incessant desire to encourage meaningless, stale and blobby interaction.

What is the focal point of the argument?

Changing the Drake from an 80k ehp, 80km, KN-dependent allround platform into a 50k ehp, 120km, fully selectable platform would create another cheap sniper with a reasonable buffer, fit to deal with the new menace of Tier 3 BC while continuing it's role as a stepping stone or support in allround Alpha doctrine. A lesser buffered Drake would have similar appeal as a Tier 3 BC, get enough of them and their stack- and ratio still allow them to push hostile groups off or project a reliable middle-average damage over a desirable range. The changes will only reinforce it's role as the bottom-line allround support (easy to train, easy to use, essentially free to use and more powerful as sizes scale up).

In fact, prior to the Crucible patch, the main weakness to exploit in common Drake-gangs (beyond those of massive fleets in unstable environments) would be it's moderate reach, moderate damage with KN-dependence and relative immobility. There were concepts based around both rushing Drakes, blitzing their support to uncover their weakness and outranging them while controlling or blitzing support.

While the Drake is a wonderful entry-level support ship, it's also commonly known that Drakes are pretty toothless without their support. That's also why certain gangs the Drakes themselves countered would continue to see some limited use despite the profileration of BC-gangs and Drakes in particular. Once you scale up though, the game's tactical environment narrow out and they become stronger in their simplicity and general application. No matter the scene though, today, they are the beginner's and third-rate option in almost every scale, setting or scene.

What are the greater implications?

To understand the Drake you need to understand the environment it's in. I already brushed onto the topic of it's support-role, how the reliable missile-spam operate under conditions of scale (stacking to make middle-line good enough) and support ("it's not Drakes that kill Vagas, it's webs - and it's not Scimis on Drakes that push nano off, it's Scimis on Recons with a numerical advantage of unappealing, reliable fire-support on the side").

The Drake and the Tengu see major use because they are the only Caldari ships with bonuses that reproduce the intended role for the race (barring specialist ships, best exemplified by ECM). Caldari is based around heavy shield tanking and sniping, that's their traits. The problem is that both those traits are largely disqualified by the game itself. Extreme range sniping, and sniping's tactical role between reach and mobility is already well known, noted in the CSM minutes and spattered all over these forums. The shield-tanking issue revert back to the Caldari-Gallente discussion of how at the ground conceptual level shield is quick, technical and teethy, while armor is tanky and reliable.

The Drake is one of few Caldari ships that is tanky and reliable, living up to it's racial trait while counteracting the core concept. The key lie in the traits and how they play out in bonuses. The Drake and the Tengu have predominant resistance and damage bonuses. Most other Caldari ships (once again, barring the specialist ships) don't see use because they have bonuses that don't amount to any form of logic in today's environment. They overshoot, undershoot or mix-match with their bonuses. This also mean that by diminishing that re-balancing or diminishing the Drake is difficult - because it's going to be difficult selling what other ships their pilots are meant to phase over into. It also mean that diminishing the Drake will likely see those players shift into other races instead.

Another important aspect is that it will have a cascading effect. I've made the point before that Caldari mostly play well with Caldari. The rising trend of Minmatar BS have helped deal with that problem to some extent, making Caldari support more appealing in a larger cross-race doctrine; but looking at recent history, Caldari support would mainly operate with very homogenous Caldari gangs. It relates back to the issue of concept. The Drake has been one of few ships with a functional role as a heavy shieldtanker, acting as the base for a gang that would utilize shield-bonuses and heavier (slower) shield support. Most shield-gangs that have been Minmatar-aligned not only would prefer Minmatar bonuses and Minmatar ships around them (due to mobility), but this would also be so exclusive that they wouldn't even want Caldari support with them.

That may be a bit abstract, but let me clarify it with an example:

Your typical gang centered around a Vagabond is still shield tanking. That speed bonuses is important, and even preferrable is a given, but given the circumstances point-range and signature is often revered over even resistance bonuses. The ships don't tank enough conventional tank to warrant it over the sig-speed relative for mitigation - then you couple that with how ships that offer those bonuses usually have trouble staying aligned with a mobile gang. An oldschool nano-gang may be an extreme example, but the same issues represent themselves across most older shield concepts - wether it's formed around kiting or sniping. Caldari snipers are too slow, caldari boosters are too slow and caldari support is too slow.

Thus adressing the hegemony of the Drake (or Tengu) have greater implications for the race overall.

Out of space, plenty more to say Sad.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#98 - 2012-01-19 21:35:36 UTC
I think its unfair to say that other ships "mix and match bonuses" and imply that its ineffective. Many of the ships could be quite effective given even a tiny shift in the metagame.

But otherwise I think its a reasonable post.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Spineker
#99 - 2012-01-19 21:41:41 UTC
"Make it more offensive like the Caracal and Raven"

LMFAO seriously stupid comment
Boyd Achura
#100 - 2012-01-19 21:42:03 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

There is plenty of reason to fly HACs. BCs can't replace HACs for the majority of roles that HACs are used for. The only HACs that are "replaced" by BCs are the ones that are just bad in their own right; the Eagle and the Sacrilege, and to a much lesser extent now, the Deimos.


The Sacrilege is only considered bad because it's a brawler and tier 2 BCs do this slightly better for less ISK. Similar situation with the Deimos.


Exactly; HACs "should" use their superior speed and agility (and range) to dictate the terms of the engagement. It's not that the Sac and the Deimos are obseleted by the BCs, it's that they fail to obselete BCs. A cruiser shouldn't be a better straight up face-to-face slugger than a battlecruiser.

The Eagle is just dreadful though, and it should be completely reworked from scratch. My personal preference would be to make it the one Caldari ship that can go at a decent speed for its class.


I think you're smoking something really strong if you don't think that the range bonus Drake is going to obsolete the Cerb and quite possibly the Navy Caracal. Its plenty fast enough to nano, has a drone bay, and has just more overall DPS. Furthermore, it doesn't address why people don't like the Nighthawk to begin with.... its ****** power grid.

-Liang


Malcanis has been pretty much on the money here. The nacal, cerb, and NH are already obsolete and need their own workups. I have no idea what you're on about.