These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

New loki stats on test server, mostly good, but something very bad.

Author
Kisar
Doomheim
#1 - 2017-06-25 15:52:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kisar
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners
Already Replaced.
#2 - 2017-06-25 15:59:39 UTC
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


It's a trade off and that's what CCP wants us to do, make choices.
Kisar
Doomheim
#3 - 2017-06-25 16:02:26 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


It's a trade off and that's what CCP wants us to do, make choices.


Trade off? It makes armor loki simply better.
Beast of Constipation
Doomheim
#4 - 2017-06-25 16:12:12 UTC
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


you can fix it by going back on sisi and actually checking all the subs and seeing where you were wrong ... Shocked

Kisar
Doomheim
#5 - 2017-06-25 16:19:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Kisar
Beast of Constipation wrote:
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


you can fix it by going back on sisi and actually checking all the subs and seeing where you were wrong ... Shocked



Yes, I realise there are other core subs that add mid slots. However, I prefer to use the Nuclear reactor for its +20% powergrid, 5% energy warfare resistance, and 5% cap recharge reduction. This is simply one of the best pvp options. Sadly it gives +3 lo slots and +1 mid slot so combined with the better propusion mod you end up with only 3 mid slots.

If you want to run a shield tank loki, you need to pick the worst subs, being pigeonholed into roles you don't want to play. I want to shield tank but i don't want +75% sensor strength, scan res bonus, or to be forced into using the web range bonus sub because all of the other bonuses on that sub make it crap. Shield loki simply won't be worth playing.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2017-06-25 17:06:26 UTC
Well, that's indeed a shame.

Guess another one of my ships bites the dust again.

Sad



DMC
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#7 - 2017-06-25 17:10:18 UTC
Kisar wrote:
Beast of Constipation wrote:
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


you can fix it by going back on sisi and actually checking all the subs and seeing where you were wrong ... Shocked



Yes, I realise there are other core subs that add mid slots. However, I prefer to use the Nuclear reactor for its +20% powergrid, 5% energy warfare resistance, and 5% cap recharge reduction. This is simply one of the best pvp options. Sadly it gives +3 lo slots and +1 mid slot so combined with the better propusion mod you end up with only 3 mid slots.

If you want to run a shield tank loki, you need to pick the worst subs, being pigeonholed into roles you don't want to play. I want to shield tank but i don't want +75% sensor strength, scan res bonus, or web range bonus. Shield loki simply won't be worth playing.


Once again, CCP screws non-null sec, non- PvP players for the benefit of the minority.
It is just sad that a company can employ so many ideologues, doing so much damage to the corporate bottom line, for so long.

And you null sec cartel mouthpieces, don't even try to defend CCP. The ongoing death spiral in paying accounts is a direct response to CCP catering to the cartels. And a one-year spike in profits does make up to what profits CCP could have had had they hired some intelligent people in senior positions.
Kisar
Doomheim
#8 - 2017-06-25 18:00:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Kisar
Just look at this comparison:

Loki Core - Augmented Nuclear Reactor

Minmatar Core Systems bonuses per skill level:
5% bonus to capacitor recharge time
5% bonus to energy warfare resistance

Role Bonuses:
20% bonus to ship power output

Additional Stats:
+1M, +3L
+50 capacitor capacity

vs

Loki Core - Immobility Drivers

Minmatar Core Systems bonuses per skill level:
25% bonus to stasis webifier range
10% bonus to the benefits of overheating stasis webifiers
5% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by all modules
Additional Stats:
+3M, +1L

So if you want to shield tank, you've got to take the 2nd option. If you want to armor tank, you've got to take the first option. You are forced to take the 2nd option if you shield tank because you really need those +3 mid slots. The 25% bonus to web range is useful for certain pvp setups but the rest the bonus here isn't very good. 10% bonus to benefits of overheating webs, only useful to special setups under certain circumstances. 5% reduction in heat damage absorbed - you know what, rather give me 20% powergrid role bonus, 25% cap recharge and 25% nos/neut resistance - oh wait, that set up is forced to armor tank due to the low number of mid slots it offers.

Why not just let people choose if they want 1 mid 3 los or 3 mids 1 low with each particular piece?
Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#9 - 2017-06-26 05:53:31 UTC
Beast of Constipation wrote:

you can fix it by going back on sisi and actually checking all the subs and seeing where you were wrong ... Shocked


Cool name bro.
Gleb Koskov
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2017-06-26 13:36:20 UTC
You can do a shield tank with 3 mids, just like the muninn, its got very narrow choices though.
Kisar
Doomheim
#11 - 2017-06-27 11:13:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Kisar
Gleb Koskov wrote:
You can do a shield tank with 3 mids, just like the muninn, its got very narrow choices though.


Not for any sort of pvp you can't. Web, scramble, propulsion module. Doesn't even leave slots for a single shield module. And you'd be doing a tight bad tank even if you had 2 spare slots for shield modules, which you don't.
Famine Aligher'ri
KINAKKA.
#12 - 2017-06-27 13:36:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Famine Aligher'ri
Please forgive me, I have been out of the loop for awhile. I just came back into the game, but I have played since 2004 or something.

Your main gripe here is that you can't fit the ship a certain way. Unfortunately, you are not the main dictator here unless the best fits are all not viable in real gameplay. Other than that, the ship itself dictates how you should play it for the most part. That means, if a ship has 5 mid slots and 2 low slots, then I guess you're either going to EW the hell out of it or likely shield tank it.

You cannot go to CCP and say, "Hey, you gave my Heron 2 low slots. I want to armor tank this amazing beast!" Just because you like to armor tank over shield tanking. You just got to deal with it, make a shield tank and be happy.

The question you need to be asking is whether or not these two options are viable in-game. Armor tanking is pretty viable, so is shield tanking. They both have their pros and cons. They both can do ratting, PvP, exploration, whatever.

I will say though, logically speaking, lows are for speed. Outside of one or two mid slots used for speed, all your speed bonuses will come from your low slots and or rigs. It's just most people want to fill their lows with damage and tank or damage and speed or all tank and no speed or damage. Being a lot of people like the idea of buffer tanks, ANC tanking and whatnot. Mids with speed became a real thing. Therefore, it's only natural to think high mid loadouts are deserving of the speed because that's what the people made with the options given to them.

Thus, it does seem odd that it's overkill for a ship with lots of lows to have the better speed bonuses as it has the lows to make up the difference versus a ship with less low slots and more mid slots that maybe has a speed bonus because they lack the lows to make up the difference. (balanced)

Famine Aligher'ri - Original Solo Pirate

Former The Pirate Syndicate Member

Former D.e.V.i.a.n.c.e member

Former Burn Eden member

Former BioMass Cartel member

Merias Tylar al-Akhwa
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2017-06-27 14:19:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Merias Tylar al-Akhwa
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
... Once again, CCP screws non-null sec, non- PvP players for the benefit of the minority. ...


Pfft. You honestly think non-PVP players are the majority here?

There might be more non-PVP 'characters' if you count the legions of mining alts out there but I'm willing to bet my house there are more individual players that partake in PVP in this PVP game with its open world persistent PVP and PVP-centric marketing. EVE Online has been built and billed as a PVP first place from the beginning- Why would you expect anything else to take priority for balance changes?
Beast of Constipation
Doomheim
#14 - 2017-06-27 16:06:32 UTC
[Loki, sisi Loki]

Damage Control II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II

50MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive
Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
EM Ward Amplifier II
Warp Disruptor II
Fleeting Compact Stasis Webifier
Fleeting Compact Stasis Webifier

720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
720mm Howitzer Artillery II
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher
Arbalest Compact Light Missile Launcher

Medium Processor Overclocking Unit II
Medium Low Friction Nozzle Joints I
Medium Low Friction Nozzle Joints I

Loki Core - Immobility Drivers
Loki Defensive - Adaptive Defense Node
Loki Offensive - Projectile Scoping Array
Loki Propulsion - Wake Limiter

Acolyte II x5

could do with more cpu , loses a bit of unheated web range , considering the rigs are now removable ..
more high slots , MORE mid slots , more drones , more damage ..
i'm sure someone will still find something to complain about but it looks decent so far ..

TigerXtrm
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2017-06-27 16:18:00 UTC
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


Holy sh*t, you mean you can't have the best of everything at once? Holy sh*t CCP how dare you.

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#16 - 2017-06-28 22:24:15 UTC
TigerXtrm wrote:
Kisar wrote:
Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


Holy sh*t, you mean you can't have the best of everything at once? Holy sh*t CCP how dare you.


Holy S#itposting fatman! And coming from the center of the largest alliance in the F*ck eve over for anyone but us category.

Seriously, BOB was better than goon ever will be, at least they just ignored the small groups instead of purposefully antagonizing/attacking them.
Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#17 - 2017-06-28 23:26:58 UTC
Sooooo... Buy a cancer tengu aaand problem solved?

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?

Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#18 - 2017-06-29 00:34:35 UTC
Someone told me that on SiSi they're all jumbled up visually, but no one, from CCP or otherwise, has stated whether their aesthetics are set in stone or simply a product of the changes to existing subs but will be fixed once it hits TQ. One guy said the Tengu's Fuel Catalyst now looks like the Nullifier, and that the reverse is true for new Nullifier. I know the visual aesthetic isn't as critical as there stats, but I have a bad feeling I'm gonna sell my Tengu. Shame, too, was looking forward to having an extra launcher, a utility high WITHOUT wasting said launcher, and some more energy warfare resists. I can't even image what the other T3C's will look like afterwards, most of the Loki subs already look like crap to be bluntly honest.

Bottom line, I hate it because I've grown pretty attached to my current Tengu's looks and I know it won't look anything like it next month. Back to my Stratios for combat exploration I go, I suppose.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Salvos Rhoska
#19 - 2017-06-29 06:39:17 UTC
The armor/shield split is a crap design feature for minmatar overall.

Good and interesting in theory, but becomes impractical in terms of slot layouts, and especially against minmatars other design feature of speed/sig tanking.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2017-06-29 13:39:43 UTC
Kisar wrote:
Gleb Koskov wrote:
You can do a shield tank with 3 mids, just like the muninn, its got very narrow choices though.


Not for any sort of pvp you can't. Web, scramble, propulsion module. Doesn't even leave slots for a single shield module. And you'd be doing a tight bad tank even if you had 2 spare slots for shield modules, which you don't.


You could do non-solo PvP where you are not providing tackle.
12Next page