These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#481 - 2012-09-25 22:06:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Liang Nuren wrote:


Your primary assertion is that a 10 low slot ship would be battleship+ sized. I don't think that's a reasonable assertion given the conversation in question. I know for damn sure that I'd be shield tanking a cruiser with 4 mids and 10 lows. Doing anything else is just stupid.

-Liang


Yes, given the topic in question, that's an illogical assertion, however, given CCP's typical allocation of slots, the only class (sub capital) that would exceed a maximum of 12 mids and lows would be a battleship class ship.

Of course, this is all purely hypothetical and it is unlikely they will ever bother enhancing the engine so as to allow more than 8 slots of a given variety, or at least not in the foreseeable future.

Edit: fixed some issues in my post.
Eckyy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#482 - 2012-09-25 22:07:36 UTC
I think the problem with shield tanking is as much that midslot utility mods have been nerfed. How often do you find yourself saying "well I could fit that second extender or a sensor damp... can't decide" ?

ECM is useless on unbonused ships.
Sensor damps are useless in general.
Painters are situationally useful at best, their saving grace is that they're easy to fit and thus are often used to fill slots you can't fit anything else in.
Tracking computers are only ever fit on long-range ships.
Webs only have 1/4 the strength now that they once had.
Tracking disruptors do see some use on unbonused ships, but they are still typically dropped in favor of a tanking mod.
ECCM is not often used anymore because ECM uncommon in most combat situations.
Damps are nonexistent so sensor boosters see less use as a counter for them.

Objectively, warp disruptors and scrams are still essential mods and you see dual-prop occasionally, but ewar is a secondary consideration at best.

I think shield tanking would lose a little of its prevalence if ewar were boosted.
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#483 - 2012-09-25 22:14:28 UTC
Eckyy wrote:
I think the problem with shield tanking is as much that midslot utility mods have been nerfed. How often do you find yourself saying "well I could fit that second extender or a sensor damp... can't decide" ?

ECM is useless on unbonused ships.
Sensor damps are useless in general.
Painters are situationally useful at best, their saving grace is that they're easy to fit and thus are often used to fill slots you can't fit anything else in.
Tracking computers are only ever fit on long-range ships.
Webs only have 1/4 the strength now that they once had.
Tracking disruptors do see some use on unbonused ships, but they are still typically dropped in favor of a tanking mod.
ECCM is not often used anymore because ECM uncommon in most combat situations.
Damps are nonexistent so sensor boosters see less use as a counter for them.

Objectively, warp disruptors and scrams are still essential mods and you see dual-prop occasionally, but ewar is a secondary consideration at best.

I think shield tanking would lose a little of its prevalence if ewar were boosted.

Not for long. Once those missile changes hit live, it'll be the one mod to rule them all. Only drones will be safe (lol).

Otherwise, yeah. Mids on ships that have plentiful numbers of them are not usually used for utility beyond webs, cap boosters, props and point.
Eckyy
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#484 - 2012-09-25 22:33:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Eckyy
LtCol Laurentius wrote:
3. Why do you retain the dual weapon system layout on the Stabber? Wouldnt a 5/1 configuration work even better without competing with the Vagabond? Especially since you choose to keep the anemic 1 light drone on this hull.



I bet it's because they're planning to buff the effectiveness of missiles and make them a viable secondary weapon system.

On a slightly less sarcastic note, does the Stabber have the grid to fit 2 HAMs without gimping the rest of its fit?
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#485 - 2012-09-25 23:00:50 UTC
Eckyy wrote:
LtCol Laurentius wrote:
3. Why do you retain the dual weapon system layout on the Stabber? Wouldnt a 5/1 configuration work even better without competing with the Vagabond? Especially since you choose to keep the anemic 1 light drone on this hull.



I bet it's because they're planning to buff the effectiveness of missiles and make them a viable secondary weapon system.

On a slightly less sarcastic note, does the Stabber have the grid to fit 2 HAMs without gimping the rest of its fit?



Fit Rapid Assault Launchers. They're getting a damage buff Lol
Doddy
Excidium.
#486 - 2012-09-25 23:34:23 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
Sigras wrote:

this brings me to another issue, shield tanking is unbalanced against armor tanking.

even the hurricane which has 4 mids and 6 lows is still usually a shield tanking ship, if it were 5/5 it would be no contest. This says to me that shield tanks are just more desirable and low slot modules are more valuable.

Even if I had a ship with 6 mids and like 10 lows, I would still probably shield tank the thing and use 3 tracking enhancers 3 damage mods, 2 nanofibers, an overdrive injector and a DCU, you cant do the same thing to armor tanking.


I can't even begin to fathom why you'd want to do that. A ship with 10 lows (not that the engine can do that) would have to be battleship+ sized, meaning speed doesn't matter. I'd do a 4 plate, 2 EANM +2 damage, 2 tracking mod fit, then put a booster (if using hybrids/lasers), prop, web, point, and 2/3 TD's in the mids. You'd be like a turret, sure, but in plates and trimarks alone, you'd have 30k armor HP, and 60/70+ resist all, giving you a huge tank. Maybe even drop a plate for a DCU. Then the TD's would guarantee that you outrange them. Brick-sniper with ultimate utility man, think outside the box.


Edited to snip quotes.


Your primary assertion is that a 10 low slot ship would be battleship+ sized. I don't think that's a reasonable assertion given the conversation in question. I know for damn sure that I'd be shield tanking a cruiser with 4 mids and 10 lows. Doing anything else is just stupid.

-Liang


What sort ofr egen could you get with 10 sprs? sounds great.
Sigras
Conglomo
#487 - 2012-09-26 03:28:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
Goldensaver wrote:
Sigras wrote:
yeah i guess i was thinking a cruiser or battlecruiser sized ship. yeah, of course it would be totally OP, but the point was any ship in which speed would be important you should basically never armor tank no matter how many low slots it has.

minus reductio ad absurdum of course


True enough. In smaller ships, speed is life. I can see the issues with armor tanking, but I can't think of a way to fix it without breaking things in larger ships. It would have to reach a careful balance, which is definitely a tough thing to do, and I'm glad I'm not the one who has to do it. I just wouldn't be able, and I don't envy CCP their job in this situation.

This may not be popular, but it is my opinion.

Armor tanking should be a nerf to agility not a nerf to speed, so the plates and the rigs would both affect your inertia modifier.

This would mean that you could make the Gallente ships just as fast if not a bit faster than the matari ships, but just give the matari really good agility

This would mean that the matari pilots couldnt just set "keep at range" and fire the guns, to kite they'd instead have to dodge and weave and use the low inertia against the armor tankers.

This wouldnt change much in the large fleet battles except maybe make armor fleets a little slower, but it would change small gang warfare a lot.

This is better because keeping range would then become skill based into second guessing or out thinking your enemy rather than shield is way faster than armor therefore shield gets to dictate range
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#488 - 2012-09-26 07:16:11 UTC
Hagika wrote:
ergherhdfgh wrote:
For T1 ships the basic minmatar up and downs are as follows:

fastest ship in class

least dps of other turrets

Artty's have most alpha and ACs have most falloff

weakest tank of any ship in it's class.

damage bonus only applies to part of weapon systems due to split high slots.


The way this plays out is as a minmatar pilot you either are able to manage range and win or can't manage range and loose. There should be no close fights here. A 1 v 1 with a Minmatar ship and any other race should not even be a fight it's sexual assault and the only thing to be determined is who's on top. As the matar pilot if you get webbed you in theory should wind up raped and minus a ship and if you stay out of web range you have a kill mail.

That's the theory anyway. So if things work out that way people should not get pissed but if for some reason the Matar ships win in a one on one situation regardless of what happens then there needs to be balance measures taken.

It seems to me that many people are getting pissed that the matar ships do exactly what they are supposed to do. Did you guys change the ship description to get rid of "lots of guns approach"?


Fastest ships, no cap use on guns, most of the ships have the option of dual or single use.
Easiest ships to fit by far. Some of the best tracking in game. Ridiculous fall off. Still great dps.
Arties are huge alpha and they enjoy far smaller sig rad on their ships, which adds to tanking.
Their BS have BC sig rad, just not Maelstrom. Which gets awesome dps and a huge tank.. Its called Winmatar for a reason.


It's quite obvious that since day 1 minmatar ships have been intended to be the solo PvP race. They suck for PvE. If you are a new character coming up every other race is better for PvE than minmatar. Caldari may be the PvE kings but both Gallente and Amarr have good level 4 ships. Unless you have the isk to get into a T2 Marauder or faction ship like the machariel running level 4's in a minmatar ship is just painfully slow. Even BC's for level 3's or null sec belt ratting I'd take the: Drake, Myrmidon, or Harbinger all over the Hurricane. I am saying this as a total carebear that never PvP's and was pissed that my first toon was minmatar and it took me several months to figure out I was in the wrong race and most of my training was wasted.

That being said I just cross trained to Caldari and then later Gallente and Amarr. I did not come on the forums and cry about how much minmatar suck for PvE I just cross trained to a race that could do what I wanted to do and fit my style.

what I see in this forum thread repeatedly is everyone crying about how the races are different and do different things better. If you make every race the same with the same fighting style the only difference will be in the color of the ships which I think is a dumbing down of this game. No longer will new toons have to learn the benefits of each race and have to cross train if they want to do everything well. They will be able to pick a race strictly on looks and never cross train.

What I see with these proposed changes are a homogenization of the ships. They are going to create roles for the ships and have each ship fill that role identically.

If you played world of warcraft during burning crusade and onward you will know how much that dumbs a game down and takes away variety and complexity which is exactly what they are trying to do with this game. Eve has too steep of a learning curve for the masses so if you want 12 million subscribers like WoW had then you need to dumb the game down to a level that a 10 year old can play it. That is exactly what CCP is doing here and the direction they are headed in.

In the very early days of WoW it was a very adult game. As the game progressed down the path of homogenization and dumbing down I watched the player base get younger and younger until it got to the point where most players were teenagers and it was hard to find mature players anymore and frankly the game was just to easymode and not challenging enough.

I came to eve and it was very much and old man's game. I've only been here 3.5 years but I am noticing a lot more younger players as I am noticing subscriptions go up. I am reading this forum thread and can see that CCP has chosen a different demographic in the interests of profit and at the expense of the complexity of the game.

I guess the real answer as that just like I am telling you to stop crying about how great the minmatar ships are and just cross train maybe I should take my advice and stop crying about how the game is being dumbed down and go look for a different game to play. One that has yet to become a victim of it's own success and be ready to leave that game when everyone else realizes how good it is and they start dumbing that game down for mass consumption.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#489 - 2012-09-26 07:20:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ergherhdfgh
Eckyy wrote:
I think the problem with shield tanking is as much that midslot utility mods have been nerfed. How often do you find yourself saying "well I could fit that second extender or a sensor damp... can't decide" ?

ECM is useless on unbonused ships.
Sensor damps are useless in general.
Painters are situationally useful at best, their saving grace is that they're easy to fit and thus are often used to fill slots you can't fit anything else in.
Tracking computers are only ever fit on long-range ships.
Webs only have 1/4 the strength now that they once had.
Tracking disruptors do see some use on unbonused ships, but they are still typically dropped in favor of a tanking mod.
ECCM is not often used anymore because ECM uncommon in most combat situations.
Damps are nonexistent so sensor boosters see less use as a counter for them.

Objectively, warp disruptors and scrams are still essential mods and you see dual-prop occasionally, but ewar is a secondary consideration at best.

I think shield tanking would lose a little of its prevalence if ewar were boosted.


While I don't agree with exactly everything you say here I think you get at a very valid point. It seems there has been a tendency towards DPS and EHP being the only two things that matter. If ECM and damps are not very effective then of course a ship like the hurricane with weak electronics but the ability to apply dps well is going to stand out. I would also like to see more options instead of less. From what I've read of these changes they just want to homogenize the ships with regards to speed, EHP, DPS etc... so they don't have to listen to crying instead of giving players more options.

It seems only one fighting style is being put forth here. That is where players engage as a blog at close range, turn on scrams and webs and guns and see who lasts longer or who has more friends. I'd rather see more variation and more different tactics and fighting styles.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
Cardano Firesnake
Fire Bullet Inc
#490 - 2012-09-26 07:41:30 UTC
Only one small drone for the Stabber... It is so ridiculous.
Give it a 30m3 drone bay and a bandwith of 10... It would give us the opportunity to launch a medium drone or two small...

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#491 - 2012-09-26 10:12:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sinigr Shadowsong
Deerin wrote:

If you are planning to use blasters your effective range will be very low. This means you'll go into brawling range. In that case you could use scram instead of long point. also if you are planningto go for a brawl you might want to check viabiltiy of XL-ASB with electrons here.

If you are planning to dictate range by staying beyond 15k range, you should check the rails.



I put T2 long point to show that it has a room for it. I agree that in most cases scram will perform better on blaster boat.


Exterminatus Illexis wrote:

Go take a look at some of the passive drake loss mails, some of them have taken more damage than capital ships. Drakes can get absurd levels of tank for a battle-cruiser, my PVE drake gets 90k EHP in just the shields.
Edit: I should probably say that thing is buffer fit. And no I wasn't talking about EHP recharge, that nears 1k if you get the resists right but you have to sacrifice a bit of resists in order to get a point on there.

There are NO passive buffer fit that regenerate 500 shield HP per seconds. It's not possible in Eve online unless you are talking about some absurd 5b worth fit with Titan bonus, Shield links, +5 implants etc.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#492 - 2012-09-26 13:49:01 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Deerin wrote:

If you are planning to use blasters your effective range will be very low. This means you'll go into brawling range. In that case you could use scram instead of long point. also if you are planningto go for a brawl you might want to check viabiltiy of XL-ASB with electrons here.

If you are planning to dictate range by staying beyond 15k range, you should check the rails.



I put T2 long point to show that it has a room for it. I agree that in most cases scram will perform better on blaster boat.


Exterminatus Illexis wrote:

Go take a look at some of the passive drake loss mails, some of them have taken more damage than capital ships. Drakes can get absurd levels of tank for a battle-cruiser, my PVE drake gets 90k EHP in just the shields.
Edit: I should probably say that thing is buffer fit. And no I wasn't talking about EHP recharge, that nears 1k if you get the resists right but you have to sacrifice a bit of resists in order to get a point on there.

There are NO passive buffer fit that regenerate 500 shield HP per seconds. It's not possible in Eve online unless you are talking about some absurd 5b worth fit with Titan bonus, Shield links, +5 implants etc.


This is a brick fit. It can tank 855 DPS a second. Yes I know its not the pure recharge rate but I think this is what people are talking about. Yes I know it does poor damage also.

[Drake, Brick]

Damage Control II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II
Shield Power Relay II

Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
EM Ward Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
Heavy Missile Launcher II
[Empty High slot]

Medium Core Defense Field Purger I
Medium Core Defense Field Purger I
Medium Core Defense Field Purger I
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#493 - 2012-09-26 14:53:45 UTC
Yun Kuai wrote:
For the people who are saying the Thorax will melt the Caracal, you have to remember the thorax is only 10m/s faster than the caracal, and if I fit an 800mm rolled tungsten + triple trimarks (or better yet, a 1600mm plate and triple trimarks), your caracal is going to be faster than my thorax by a lot. The caracal can start applying its dps at 25km and hit my thorax for effective damage, while I have to OH and play cat and mouse games to catch you and start applying my dps. So yes, the caracal does less dps on paper, but on paper, every Gallente hull does the best dps in game, but we can clearly see that's not the case unless you have perfect conditions.

And for the for people who say well if I fit neutrons on the thorax, it gets 600dps. If you're fitting neutrons, you're doing it wrong. There has been no buff to PG on the thorax, so if you only want a DCU II for tank then that's what you'll get. The thorax is not a shield tanked hull, or rather that is what CCP intends from the logic of them removing over 300 shield HP on the thorax hull. Even if I only fit an 800mm rolled tungsten, I still have to fit some type of fitting mod to fit a full rack of ions. If I fit just an 800mm plate and a full rack of 200mm rails, I need an ACR and +3% implant. The tracking bonus is awesome, the extra mid slot to fit a cap booster to help against everyone fitting neuts is good, but the PG on Gallente hulls makes them either all gank or all tank.

Directed at Fozzie: When the hybrid weapons platform was given their small buff, CCP acknowledged that the buff was too small and was only a start. There needs to be nerf, specifically to medium hybrids, to the hybrid weapons PG fitting requirements. Or there needs to be a buff to Gallente hull base PG. My question to you: you're doing both for the amarr, why not do the same for the Gallente?



Fozzie, I've not heard back from you on this thread or rather any thread that you've started, not sure if you went vacation, but we usually leave an autoreply when we're out of the office :P

Anyways, as I was stating earlier here is that to fit a 200mm rail thorax, you do not have enough PG with a sole ACR, but you are forced to plug in PG implant. Notice, I am only fitting a t2 800mm plate, which was actually made worthwhile now.
EX] 200mm Rail Thorax
[High Slots]
5x 200mm railgun II

[Mid Slots]
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Small Cap Booster II

[Low Slots]
DCU II
Adaptive Nano Membrane II
EANM II
800mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

[Rigs]
2x Medium Trimark
1x ACR

Still requires fitting a +1% PG Implant. So it means I have to fit meta 800 plate lowering my over all hp that much more if I want to use pirate implants to make my slower gallente hull faster.....
All it needs is like 15 more PG after skills and it would be viable, althought I disagree with being forced to fit an ACR just to fit 200mm rails and t2 800mm plate. I mean come on, it's not like I'm trying to throw on neutrons or 250mm rails.

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
Kaikka Carel
Ziea
#494 - 2012-09-26 18:20:02 UTC
I like the fact that you're finally adressing the issues with the lasers. Their PG requirements were somewhat too high. But the other major issue is the 10% cap usage "fake bonus". Lasers don't have superrior dps anymore - they merely apply it better at ranges. It is a feature, not an advantage.

How about giving a racial 50% cap bonus to all Amarrian hulls and replacing the old one with something more relevant? Say like a 7.5% tracking bonus to compensate for lasers' lower tracking speed.
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#495 - 2012-09-26 19:26:53 UTC
So when are you taking a look at the HACs and the faction cruisers? For example the new Caracal has 225m/s base speed while the Cerberus has 175m/s and the new Thorax is faster than the Vigilant. Personally i think the Cerberus base speed should be increased to 245m/s and its PG by 1-2%.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#496 - 2012-09-27 06:50:17 UTC
Yun Kuai wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
For the people who are saying the Thorax will melt the Caracal, you have to remember the thorax is only 10m/s faster than the caracal, and if I fit an 800mm rolled tungsten + triple trimarks (or better yet, a 1600mm plate and triple trimarks), your caracal is going to be faster than my thorax by a lot. The caracal can start applying its dps at 25km and hit my thorax for effective damage, while I have to OH and play cat and mouse games to catch you and start applying my dps. So yes, the caracal does less dps on paper, but on paper, every Gallente hull does the best dps in game, but we can clearly see that's not the case unless you have perfect conditions.

And for the for people who say well if I fit neutrons on the thorax, it gets 600dps. If you're fitting neutrons, you're doing it wrong. There has been no buff to PG on the thorax, so if you only want a DCU II for tank then that's what you'll get. The thorax is not a shield tanked hull, or rather that is what CCP intends from the logic of them removing over 300 shield HP on the thorax hull. Even if I only fit an 800mm rolled tungsten, I still have to fit some type of fitting mod to fit a full rack of ions. If I fit just an 800mm plate and a full rack of 200mm rails, I need an ACR and +3% implant. The tracking bonus is awesome, the extra mid slot to fit a cap booster to help against everyone fitting neuts is good, but the PG on Gallente hulls makes them either all gank or all tank.

Directed at Fozzie: When the hybrid weapons platform was given their small buff, CCP acknowledged that the buff was too small and was only a start. There needs to be nerf, specifically to medium hybrids, to the hybrid weapons PG fitting requirements. Or there needs to be a buff to Gallente hull base PG. My question to you: you're doing both for the amarr, why not do the same for the Gallente?



Fozzie, I've not heard back from you on this thread or rather any thread that you've started, not sure if you went vacation, but we usually leave an autoreply when we're out of the office :P

Anyways, as I was stating earlier here is that to fit a 200mm rail thorax, you do not have enough PG with a sole ACR, but you are forced to plug in PG implant. Notice, I am only fitting a t2 800mm plate, which was actually made worthwhile now.
EX] 200mm Rail Thorax
[High Slots]
5x 200mm railgun II

[Mid Slots]
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Small Cap Booster II

[Low Slots]
DCU II
Adaptive Nano Membrane II
EANM II
800mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

[Rigs]
2x Medium Trimark
1x ACR

Still requires fitting a +1% PG Implant. So it means I have to fit meta 800 plate lowering my over all hp that much more if I want to use pirate implants to make my slower gallente hull faster.....
All it needs is like 15 more PG after skills and it would be viable, althought I disagree with being forced to fit an ACR just to fit 200mm rails and t2 800mm plate. I mean come on, it's not like I'm trying to throw on neutrons or 250mm rails.


Why not shield tank it?

It's simply better in every aspect. Armor buffer works when you got logi or fly a cloaky Proteus, in other cases it's always the worst choice. The minor HP advantage is completely negated by you lower speed and damage, creating a double disadvantage.




.
Martin0
Brave Empire Inc.
Brave United
#497 - 2012-09-27 07:08:51 UTC
Roime wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
For the people who are saying the Thorax will melt the Caracal, you have to remember the thorax is only 10m/s faster than the caracal, and if I fit an 800mm rolled tungsten + triple trimarks (or better yet, a 1600mm plate and triple trimarks), your caracal is going to be faster than my thorax by a lot. The caracal can start applying its dps at 25km and hit my thorax for effective damage, while I have to OH and play cat and mouse games to catch you and start applying my dps. So yes, the caracal does less dps on paper, but on paper, every Gallente hull does the best dps in game, but we can clearly see that's not the case unless you have perfect conditions.

And for the for people who say well if I fit neutrons on the thorax, it gets 600dps. If you're fitting neutrons, you're doing it wrong. There has been no buff to PG on the thorax, so if you only want a DCU II for tank then that's what you'll get. The thorax is not a shield tanked hull, or rather that is what CCP intends from the logic of them removing over 300 shield HP on the thorax hull. Even if I only fit an 800mm rolled tungsten, I still have to fit some type of fitting mod to fit a full rack of ions. If I fit just an 800mm plate and a full rack of 200mm rails, I need an ACR and +3% implant. The tracking bonus is awesome, the extra mid slot to fit a cap booster to help against everyone fitting neuts is good, but the PG on Gallente hulls makes them either all gank or all tank.

Directed at Fozzie: When the hybrid weapons platform was given their small buff, CCP acknowledged that the buff was too small and was only a start. There needs to be nerf, specifically to medium hybrids, to the hybrid weapons PG fitting requirements. Or there needs to be a buff to Gallente hull base PG. My question to you: you're doing both for the amarr, why not do the same for the Gallente?



Fozzie, I've not heard back from you on this thread or rather any thread that you've started, not sure if you went vacation, but we usually leave an autoreply when we're out of the office :P

Anyways, as I was stating earlier here is that to fit a 200mm rail thorax, you do not have enough PG with a sole ACR, but you are forced to plug in PG implant. Notice, I am only fitting a t2 800mm plate, which was actually made worthwhile now.
EX] 200mm Rail Thorax
[High Slots]
5x 200mm railgun II

[Mid Slots]
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Small Cap Booster II

[Low Slots]
DCU II
Adaptive Nano Membrane II
EANM II
800mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

[Rigs]
2x Medium Trimark
1x ACR

Still requires fitting a +1% PG Implant. So it means I have to fit meta 800 plate lowering my over all hp that much more if I want to use pirate implants to make my slower gallente hull faster.....
All it needs is like 15 more PG after skills and it would be viable, althought I disagree with being forced to fit an ACR just to fit 200mm rails and t2 800mm plate. I mean come on, it's not like I'm trying to throw on neutrons or 250mm rails.


Why not shield tank it?

It's simply better in every aspect. Armor buffer works when you got logi or fly a cloaky Proteus, in other cases it's always the worst choice. The minor HP advantage is completely negated by you lower speed and damage, creating a double disadvantage.






Because gallente are supposed to armor tank and SHOULD WORK WHEN ARMOR TANKED?
I hope CCP give armor some love FAST, i'm tired of Kiting Shield Online.
This game should give you different ways to do things. It is advertised as THE game that gives you a lot of options.
I would like to have the option to fit armor tank and not being automatically subpar with a shield tank.
There are lots of ideas proposed by players that would give a boost to armor tanking without making it OP.
Someone earlier in the tread who had the idea to change the penalty for astronautic rigs from armor to hull, why not doing that?
And since EVERYBODY agree that the speed penalty on armor rigs is too much, why don't simply cut it down to half?

Give us chices CCP, not just "shield tank everything".
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#498 - 2012-09-27 07:40:41 UTC
With 50m/s boost in speed, the Thorax will be able to catch quite a few ships while still being armor tanked.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#499 - 2012-09-27 07:56:45 UTC
Martin0 wrote:

Because gallente are supposed to armor tank and SHOULD WORK WHEN ARMOR TANKED?
I hope CCP give armor some love FAST, i'm tired of Kiting Shield Online.
This game should give you different ways to do things. It is advertised as THE game that gives you a lot of options.
I would like to have the option to fit armor tank and not being automatically subpar with a shield tank.
There are lots of ideas proposed by players that would give a boost to armor tanking without making it OP.
Someone earlier in the tread who had the idea to change the penalty for astronautic rigs from armor to hull, why not doing that?
And since EVERYBODY agree that the speed penalty on armor rigs is too much, why don't simply cut it down to half?

Give us chices CCP, not just "shield tank everything".


Decisions based on having to think outside the box (like shield tanked armor ships) is one of a things that make eve great game. Please leave your "if it's called Priest it have to be a heal-bot" behavior at WoW forums.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#500 - 2012-09-27 08:07:57 UTC
Martin0 wrote:
Roime wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
Yun Kuai wrote:
For the people who are saying the Thorax will melt the Caracal, you have to remember the thorax is only 10m/s faster than the caracal, and if I fit an 800mm rolled tungsten + triple trimarks (or better yet, a 1600mm plate and triple trimarks), your caracal is going to be faster than my thorax by a lot. The caracal can start applying its dps at 25km and hit my thorax for effective damage, while I have to OH and play cat and mouse games to catch you and start applying my dps. So yes, the caracal does less dps on paper, but on paper, every Gallente hull does the best dps in game, but we can clearly see that's not the case unless you have perfect conditions.

And for the for people who say well if I fit neutrons on the thorax, it gets 600dps. If you're fitting neutrons, you're doing it wrong. There has been no buff to PG on the thorax, so if you only want a DCU II for tank then that's what you'll get. The thorax is not a shield tanked hull, or rather that is what CCP intends from the logic of them removing over 300 shield HP on the thorax hull. Even if I only fit an 800mm rolled tungsten, I still have to fit some type of fitting mod to fit a full rack of ions. If I fit just an 800mm plate and a full rack of 200mm rails, I need an ACR and +3% implant. The tracking bonus is awesome, the extra mid slot to fit a cap booster to help against everyone fitting neuts is good, but the PG on Gallente hulls makes them either all gank or all tank.

Directed at Fozzie: When the hybrid weapons platform was given their small buff, CCP acknowledged that the buff was too small and was only a start. There needs to be nerf, specifically to medium hybrids, to the hybrid weapons PG fitting requirements. Or there needs to be a buff to Gallente hull base PG. My question to you: you're doing both for the amarr, why not do the same for the Gallente?



Fozzie, I've not heard back from you on this thread or rather any thread that you've started, not sure if you went vacation, but we usually leave an autoreply when we're out of the office :P

Anyways, as I was stating earlier here is that to fit a 200mm rail thorax, you do not have enough PG with a sole ACR, but you are forced to plug in PG implant. Notice, I am only fitting a t2 800mm plate, which was actually made worthwhile now.
EX] 200mm Rail Thorax
[High Slots]
5x 200mm railgun II

[Mid Slots]
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Small Cap Booster II

[Low Slots]
DCU II
Adaptive Nano Membrane II
EANM II
800mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

[Rigs]
2x Medium Trimark
1x ACR

Still requires fitting a +1% PG Implant. So it means I have to fit meta 800 plate lowering my over all hp that much more if I want to use pirate implants to make my slower gallente hull faster.....
All it needs is like 15 more PG after skills and it would be viable, althought I disagree with being forced to fit an ACR just to fit 200mm rails and t2 800mm plate. I mean come on, it's not like I'm trying to throw on neutrons or 250mm rails.


Why not shield tank it?

It's simply better in every aspect. Armor buffer works when you got logi or fly a cloaky Proteus, in other cases it's always the worst choice. The minor HP advantage is completely negated by you lower speed and damage, creating a double disadvantage.






Because gallente are supposed to armor tank and SHOULD WORK WHEN ARMOR TANKED?
I hope CCP give armor some love FAST, i'm tired of Kiting Shield Online.
This game should give you different ways to do things. It is advertised as THE game that gives you a lot of options.
I would like to have the option to fit armor tank and not being automatically subpar with a shield tank.
There are lots of ideas proposed by players that would give a boost to armor tanking without making it OP.
Someone earlier in the tread who had the idea to change the penalty for astronautic rigs from armor to hull, why not doing that?
And since EVERYBODY agree that the speed penalty on armor rigs is too much, why don't simply cut it down to half?

Give us chices CCP, not just "shield tank everything".


This, people asking me why i don't shieldtank a bloody thorax make me Maaaaaad >_<

BYDI recruitment closed-ish