These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Winter] EW Cruisers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#301 - 2012-09-17 19:04:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Nikuno
Out of interest, why does the arbitrator do so much better than the others when it comes to combat? In terms of slots and drones;

Arbitrator - 4 weapon slots, 5x50% bonused medium drones (7.5 equivalent drones)
Bellicose - 4x25% bonused weapon slots, 4 medium drones (5 equivalent weapon slots)
Blackbird - 4 weapon slots, 1 medium drone
Celestis - 3 weapon slots, 5 medium drones

I can see the tp bonus on the bellicose evening this out with the arbitrator; the blackbird will benefit more from the weapon slots than it would drones given that it's comfort zone is staying at range, but it looks a little pale dps-wise - still it has arguably the strongest ewar in it's ecm as a balancing act for the ship; the celestis looks the clear loser here - it's natural instincts will be to hold range making the drones purely defensive and leaving it with a positively anaemic prognosis compared to the others.

Top this off with under-performing damps and this ship still looks destined for the unused pile of scrap in my station hangar.

Please note I'm using medium drones as an example of the damage achievable by these ships and realise that light drones of some sort or other may also be used.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#302 - 2012-09-17 19:07:57 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Out of interest, why does the arbitrator do so much better than the others when it comes to combat? In terms of slots and drones;

Arbitrator - 4 weapon slots, 5x50% bonused medium drones (7.5 equivalent drones)
Bellicose - 4 weapon slots, 4 medium drones
Blackbird - 4 weapon slots, 1 medium drone
Celestis - 3 weapon slots, 5 medium drones

I can see the tp bonus on the bellicose evening this out with the arbitrator; the blackbird will benefit more from the weapon slots than it would drones given that it's comfort zone is staying at range, but it looks a little pale dps-wise - still it has arguably the strongest ewar in it's ecm as a balancing act for the ship; the celestis looks the clear loser here - it's natural instincts will be to hold range making the drones purely defensive and leaving it with a positively anaemic prognosis compared to the others.

Top this off with under-performing damps and this ship still looks destined for the unused pile of scrap in my station hangar.

Please note I'm using medium drones as an example of the damage achievable by these ships and realise that light drones of some sort or other may also be used.


Why are you talking about effective drones without talking about effective slots?

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#303 - 2012-09-17 19:10:32 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:
Out of interest, why does the arbitrator do so much better than the others when it comes to combat? In terms of slots and drones;

Arbitrator - 4 weapon slots, 5x50% bonused medium drones (7.5 equivalent drones)
Bellicose - 4 weapon slots, 4 medium drones
Blackbird - 4 weapon slots, 1 medium drone
Celestis - 3 weapon slots, 5 medium drones

I can see the tp bonus on the bellicose evening this out with the arbitrator; the blackbird will benefit more from the weapon slots than it would drones given that it's comfort zone is staying at range, but it looks a little pale dps-wise - still it has arguably the strongest ewar in it's ecm as a balancing act for the ship; the celestis looks the clear loser here - it's natural instincts will be to hold range making the drones purely defensive and leaving it with a positively anaemic prognosis compared to the others.

Top this off with under-performing damps and this ship still looks destined for the unused pile of scrap in my station hangar.

Please note I'm using medium drones as an example of the damage achievable by these ships and realise that light drones of some sort or other may also be used.


Why are you talking about effective drones without talking about effective slots?

-Liang


I never mentioned effective drones- i mentioned equivalent. Without any weapon slot bonuses the equivalency of the slots remains as stated.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#304 - 2012-09-17 19:18:06 UTC
Nikuno wrote:

I never mentioned effective drones- i mentioned equivalent. Without any weapon slot bonuses the equivalency of the slots remains as stated.


The Bellicose and the Arbitrator are both "combat" centric ships, similar to combat recons. They both get weapon bonuses (you only display the bonuses for one of them in your chart). The Celestis and Blackbird are both "disruption" centric ships and aren't meant to be solo PVP powerhouses. This was mentioned in the OP.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#305 - 2012-09-17 19:28:24 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

I never mentioned effective drones- i mentioned equivalent. Without any weapon slot bonuses the equivalency of the slots remains as stated.


The Bellicose and the Arbitrator are both "combat" centric ships, similar to combat recons. They both get weapon bonuses (you only display the bonuses for one of them in your chart). The Celestis and Blackbird are both "disruption" centric ships and aren't meant to be solo PVP powerhouses. This was mentioned in the OP.

-Liang


I don't recall stating anything about solo combat, just their respective damage potential which, as you say, fits with an initial design decision. I clearly make reference to the the bellicose and arbitrator standing on a roughly even footing for this. I then also stated that the blackbird gains it's balance for the intended role from the strength of it's ewar whilst drawing attention again to the relative ineffectiveness of damps. I have adjusted the bellicose in the original post to reflect the 25% weapon bonus which I had overlooked.

I maintain that the celestis is clearly the poorest of this particular bunch of ships both from it's underwhelming damage potential and from the shoddy state of damps. I've seen nothing yet to convince me otherwise.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#306 - 2012-09-17 19:33:52 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

I never mentioned effective drones- i mentioned equivalent. Without any weapon slot bonuses the equivalency of the slots remains as stated.


The Bellicose and the Arbitrator are both "combat" centric ships, similar to combat recons. They both get weapon bonuses (you only display the bonuses for one of them in your chart). The Celestis and Blackbird are both "disruption" centric ships and aren't meant to be solo PVP powerhouses. This was mentioned in the OP.

-Liang


I don't recall stating anything about solo combat, just their respective damage potential which, as you say, fits with an initial design decision. I clearly make reference to the the bellicose and arbitrator standing on a roughly even footing for this. I then also stated that the blackbird gains it's balance for the intended role from the strength of it's ewar whilst drawing attention again to the relative ineffectiveness of damps. I have adjusted the bellicose in the original post to reflect the 25% weapon bonus which I had overlooked.

I maintain that the celestis is clearly the poorest of this particular bunch of ships both from it's underwhelming damage potential and from the shoddy state of damps. I've seen nothing yet to convince me otherwise.


So the Bellicose has a 25% ROF bonus, which is roughly equivalent to a 33% damage bonus. Furthermore, it gets a double damage bonus by virtue of the painter bonus, which acts something like a tracking bonus (sortof).

With regards to the Celestis specifically: I still remember the Old School damps, and I haven't really flown a damp ship since they nerfed the hell out of them. I'm willing to do some play testing at 7.5% and raise hell if they aren't good enough. I somehow suspect they'll be alright but not fantastic. Furthermore, you haven't noticed that they're changing ECM's mechanic (sometime). CCP Fozzie said that he'd rather see the Blackbird's ewar effectiveness become more like the Celestis than the other way around.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#307 - 2012-09-17 19:39:10 UTC
Someone else has said this and I stand by it also EWAR should be your number of Ewar Points vs Ships sensor streingth * max locked targets. So if you can do 50 points of EWAR and the ship you are jamming has a 10 sensor * 6 max target the jammed ship can only target one ship.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#308 - 2012-09-17 19:42:31 UTC
MIrple wrote:
Someone else has said this and I stand by it also EWAR should be your number of Ewar Points vs Ships sensor streingth * max locked targets. So if you can do 50 points of EWAR and the ship you are jamming has a 10 sensor * 6 max target the jammed ship can only target one ship.


How does this scale for multiple people or drones jamming the same target? How does this work with damps or TDs? Don't get me wrong: I'd be massively happy for sensor strength to represent some kind of ewar resistance (go go grail set), but... ?

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#309 - 2012-09-17 19:42:59 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

I never mentioned effective drones- i mentioned equivalent. Without any weapon slot bonuses the equivalency of the slots remains as stated.


The Bellicose and the Arbitrator are both "combat" centric ships, similar to combat recons. They both get weapon bonuses (you only display the bonuses for one of them in your chart). The Celestis and Blackbird are both "disruption" centric ships and aren't meant to be solo PVP powerhouses. This was mentioned in the OP.

-Liang


I don't recall stating anything about solo combat, just their respective damage potential which, as you say, fits with an initial design decision. I clearly make reference to the the bellicose and arbitrator standing on a roughly even footing for this. I then also stated that the blackbird gains it's balance for the intended role from the strength of it's ewar whilst drawing attention again to the relative ineffectiveness of damps. I have adjusted the bellicose in the original post to reflect the 25% weapon bonus which I had overlooked.

I maintain that the celestis is clearly the poorest of this particular bunch of ships both from it's underwhelming damage potential and from the shoddy state of damps. I've seen nothing yet to convince me otherwise.


So the Bellicose has a 25% ROF bonus, which is roughly equivalent to a 33% damage bonus. Furthermore, it gets a double damage bonus by virtue of the painter bonus, which acts something like a tracking bonus (sortof).

With regards to the Celestis specifically: I still remember the Old School damps, and I haven't really flown a damp ship since they nerfed the hell out of them. I'm willing to do some play testing at 7.5% and raise hell if they aren't good enough. I somehow suspect they'll be alright but not fantastic. Furthermore, you haven't noticed that they're changing ECM's mechanic (sometime). CCP Fozzie said that he'd rather see the Blackbird's ewar effectiveness become more like the Celestis than the other way around.

-Liang


Sadly this doesn't fill me with confidence. I used the celestis a lot before the damp nerf and have revisited damps at intervals since then with both the lachesis and arazu, always to walk away from their flimsy performance. If ecm was to be dragged down to that level it would simply throw 2 of these ships onto my scrapheap rather than the 1, which cannot be considered an improvement or balancing act in any way. I do rest in the anti-ecm camp, but I would rather see it modified to break locks rather than jamming them as a way of achieving balance with possible tweaks as suggested in the many ecm threads over the years. Nerfing ecm to the point of becoming as ineffectual as damps does not represent balance.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#310 - 2012-09-17 19:45:41 UTC
Nikuno wrote:

Sadly this doesn't fill me with confidence. I used the celestis a lot before the damp nerf and have revisited damps at intervals since then with both the lachesis and arazu, always to walk away from their flimsy performance. If ecm was to be dragged down to that level it would simply throw 2 of these ships onto my scrapheap rather than the 1, which cannot be considered an improvement or balancing act in any way. I do rest in the anti-ecm camp, but I would rather see it modified to break locks rather than jamming them as a way of achieving balance with possible tweaks as suggested in the many ecm threads over the years. Nerfing ecm to the point of becoming as ineffectual as damps does not represent balance.


You did notice that they're boosting the damp bonus on the Celestis right? I think you should try it out before universally declaring doom and gloom just because you tried it with the old 5% damp bonus.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#311 - 2012-09-17 19:48:32 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Someone else has said this and I stand by it also EWAR should be your number of Ewar Points vs Ships sensor streingth * max locked targets. So if you can do 50 points of EWAR and the ship you are jamming has a 10 sensor * 6 max target the jammed ship can only target one ship.


How does this scale for multiple people or drones jamming the same target? How does this work with damps or TDs? Don't get me wrong: I'd be massively happy for sensor strength to represent some kind of ewar resistance (go go grail set), but... ?

-Liang


Damps and TD would still work the same way. If multiple people are jamming someone it would be cumulative so if I have 50 points of jam on someone and you have 50 points of jam on the same person that is 100 points total. I feel this is simpler then the system we have now.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#312 - 2012-09-17 19:49:44 UTC
MIrple wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Someone else has said this and I stand by it also EWAR should be your number of Ewar Points vs Ships sensor streingth * max locked targets. So if you can do 50 points of EWAR and the ship you are jamming has a 10 sensor * 6 max target the jammed ship can only target one ship.


How does this scale for multiple people or drones jamming the same target? How does this work with damps or TDs? Don't get me wrong: I'd be massively happy for sensor strength to represent some kind of ewar resistance (go go grail set), but... ?

-Liang


Damps and TD would still work the same way. If multiple people are jamming someone it would be cumulative so if I have 50 points of jam on someone and you have 50 points of jam on the same person that is 100 points total. I feel this is simpler then the system we have now.


I guess that makes it a really complicated version of the way ECM used to work. I think that'd be a massive step back in balance.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#313 - 2012-09-17 19:50:47 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Arbitrator - 4 weapon slots


You have never fit an Arbitrator.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#314 - 2012-09-17 19:53:26 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

Sadly this doesn't fill me with confidence. I used the celestis a lot before the damp nerf and have revisited damps at intervals since then with both the lachesis and arazu, always to walk away from their flimsy performance. If ecm was to be dragged down to that level it would simply throw 2 of these ships onto my scrapheap rather than the 1, which cannot be considered an improvement or balancing act in any way. I do rest in the anti-ecm camp, but I would rather see it modified to break locks rather than jamming them as a way of achieving balance with possible tweaks as suggested in the many ecm threads over the years. Nerfing ecm to the point of becoming as ineffectual as damps does not represent balance.


You did notice that they're boosting the damp bonus on the Celestis right? I think you should try it out before universally declaring doom and gloom just because you tried it with the old 5% damp bonus.

-Liang


Joining in the discussion about the relative pros and cons or the suggested changes hardly warrants a declaration of doom and gloom, and yes I had seen the 7.5% bonus and that is factored into what I have said so far. I will be trying out all of these ships when they hit the test server, but my opinion rests as stated thus far.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#315 - 2012-09-17 19:54:31 UTC
Kuehnelt wrote:
Nikuno wrote:
Arbitrator - 4 weapon slots


You have never fit an Arbitrator.


The discussion is about the potential of the ships as they stand with the suggested changes, and yes I have flown an arbitrator often.
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#316 - 2012-09-17 20:04:09 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Kuehnelt wrote:
Nikuno wrote:
Arbitrator - 4 weapon slots


You have never fit an Arbitrator.


The discussion is about the potential of the ships as they stand with the suggested changes, and yes I have flown an arbitrator often.


The potential changes? The hardpoints are the same as...

oh. That's new. Carry on.
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#317 - 2012-09-17 20:11:17 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
- Added a launcher hardpoint to the Arbitrator and Celestis


Thanks, I think. You may want to consider bumping the CPU on the Arbitrator if you expect us to make use of that.

-Liang


nah I like when ships can trade defense for offense with a CPU mod. IF you don't fit the CPU mod you can fit something to take advantage of it's higher than normal powergrid. These kinda of ships are cool and fun to fit. As long as they are brought up in slots, I'm ok with them not having good fitting options. It's kinda cool, I won't complain that my ship is getting 2-3 extra spots to equip gear even if that means I need a few fitting rigs.

It means newer players won't be able to fit them out 100%, they will fly with empty slots by design, that's awesome, the ship gets stronger as you as a pilot do. I hope they actually push this design to make it more obvious and useful. Maybe a few Power grid bonuses per level as the ship line skills? Attack ships get powergrid, other ship lines get cpu, or rig space, i don't know. Just to allow the skill to in a way add slots to your ship you couldn't fit before.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#318 - 2012-09-17 20:12:36 UTC  |  Edited by: MotherMoon
Nikuno wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Nikuno wrote:

Sadly this doesn't fill me with confidence. I used the celestis a lot before the damp nerf and have revisited damps at intervals since then with both the lachesis and arazu, always to walk away from their flimsy performance. If ecm was to be dragged down to that level it would simply throw 2 of these ships onto my scrapheap rather than the 1, which cannot be considered an improvement or balancing act in any way. I do rest in the anti-ecm camp, but I would rather see it modified to break locks rather than jamming them as a way of achieving balance with possible tweaks as suggested in the many ecm threads over the years. Nerfing ecm to the point of becoming as ineffectual as damps does not represent balance.


You did notice that they're boosting the damp bonus on the Celestis right? I think you should try it out before universally declaring doom and gloom just because you tried it with the old 5% damp bonus.

-Liang


Joining in the discussion about the relative pros and cons or the suggested changes hardly warrants a declaration of doom and gloom, and yes I had seen the 7.5% bonus and that is factored into what I have said so far. I will be trying out all of these ships when they hit the test server, but my opinion rests as stated thus far.


I think it needs to be a 10% bonus....

or at least 12.5% per level on the Tech 2 ship so it can outclass the tech 3 cruiser. PLEASE. if your serious about making tech 2 "better" than tech 3, don't nerf tech 3 ships, they should be stronger than tech 2 ships.

Give tech 2 ships real bonuses that make them stand out at a single task better than any ship in the game. Wether it be speed, EW, target painting, web range, Sentry drones only bonuses. Please CCP? I beg you?


Edit:
And for the record some ships allready work this way. The loki gets a web range bonus, butit's not as great as the tech 2 web range ship. This design needs to be carried over in a big way. Some a tech 2 ammar cruiser with more cap than tech 3, but less recharge so it's a ship that can run high cap sucking weapons for a long time but will run out after some time. Right? how cool would that be?

For instance boost the tanky tech 2 crusiers, so they can tank even better than the tech 3 cruisers best fit. But then, make sure the tech 2 ship can't match the overall dps and tank the tech 3 cruiser can get at the same time. BAM BALANCE.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#319 - 2012-09-17 20:25:11 UTC
MM, can you remind me which Proteus subsystem gives a damp bonus? AFAIK, the Friction Extension only gives a scram range bonus, so any ship with a damp bonus has a better bonus than the T3. As to 12.5% damps: you are aware that each damp would be providing > 80% lock range reduction - totally neglecting rigs and links?

I think people should be careful about what they wish for.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#320 - 2012-09-17 20:39:08 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
MIrple wrote:
Someone else has said this and I stand by it also EWAR should be your number of Ewar Points vs Ships sensor streingth * max locked targets. So if you can do 50 points of EWAR and the ship you are jamming has a 10 sensor * 6 max target the jammed ship can only target one ship.


How does this scale for multiple people or drones jamming the same target? How does this work with damps or TDs? Don't get me wrong: I'd be massively happy for sensor strength to represent some kind of ewar resistance (go go grail set), but... ?

-Liang


Damps and TD would still work the same way. If multiple people are jamming someone it would be cumulative so if I have 50 points of jam on someone and you have 50 points of jam on the same person that is 100 points total. I feel this is simpler then the system we have now.


I guess that makes it a really complicated version of the way ECM used to work. I think that'd be a massive step back in balance.

-Liang


I see what you are getting at but when you add in your max locked targets into the factor of your sensor strength it give you a different look at ECM. It also make some rarely used mode more viable as they would now have extra benefits. Until we see what CCP has up there sleeve for this we can only put ideas out for discussion. I do wish that these ships would also get a bonuses to the counter EWAR as well as that would make these ship unique and make them even more useful in fleets and not make them OP solo.