These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Give the harbinger a 3rd bonus.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lady Katherine Devonshire
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
#121 - 2013-03-06 15:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Katherine Devonshire
sabre906 wrote:
Lol, really? What do you call Scorch?


An overpriced T2 module with a painfully high minimum skill requirement that ultimate defeats the entire purpose of lasers not requiring ammunition.

Does one need a minimum skill of level 5 and a specialization skill to load a blaster with navy faction ammunition? Because that is what you need for every turret size to use scorch. Please take the time to compare skill training times between being able to fly a blaster fit battlecruiser and a scorch equipped frigate.

Scorch should not even be part of these discussions.


Meanwhile... let us drop the capacitor bonus entirely and give it something more useful. It already possess a damage bonus, so perhaps something else? The Prophecy has an armor bonus and the Oracle simply has larger overall weapons (thus, more range and DPS).

Perhaps it is time something more radical... yes... I propose that the Harbinger be completely redesigned to become the first Amarrian shield tank ship! Yes, I am serious. Replace the capacitor bonus with a shield resistance bonus, and exchange the low and middle power slots to become four low and six middle instead.

This is not that far fetched or lore-breaking, I might add. Our alliance with the Caldari has already shown in several of our ships being redesigned more towards missile combat. Why not shields next?

After all, has EvE ever seen a ship actually meant to have an effective shield tank & laser combination before? Now is their chance to do something truly original, then.

The sound of the Amarrian heart
Drake Doe
88Th Tax Haven
#122 - 2013-03-06 15:27:38 UTC
Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:
sabre906 wrote:
Lol, really? What do you call Scorch?


An overpriced T2 module with a painfully high minimum skill requirement that ultimate defeats the entire purpose of lasers not requiring ammunition.

Does one need a minimum skill of level 5 and a specialization skill to load a blaster with navy faction ammunition? Because that is what you need for every turret size to use scorch. Please take the time to compare skill training times between being able to fly a blaster fit battlecruiser and a scorch equipped frigate.

Scorch should not even be part of these discussions.

It's called void and null

"The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! pops more corn" ---Evernub--
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#123 - 2013-03-06 16:32:23 UTC
Drake Doe wrote:
Lady Katherine Devonshire wrote:
sabre906 wrote:
Lol, really? What do you call Scorch?


An overpriced T2 module with a painfully high minimum skill requirement that ultimate defeats the entire purpose of lasers not requiring ammunition.

Does one need a minimum skill of level 5 and a specialization skill to load a blaster with navy faction ammunition? Because that is what you need for every turret size to use scorch. Please take the time to compare skill training times between being able to fly a blaster fit battlecruiser and a scorch equipped frigate.

Scorch should not even be part of these discussions.

It's called void and null

Blasters are... serviceable without T2 ammunition. Almost everyone will advise you not to undock with lasers without T2 guns so you can use Scorch. With blasters and AC's the go to ammo is faction in almost all situations. With lasers Scorch is necessary beside INMF.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#124 - 2013-03-06 17:59:21 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
Blasters are... serviceable without T2 ammunition. Almost everyone will advise you not to undock with lasers without T2 guns so you can use Scorch. With blasters and AC's the go to ammo is faction in almost all situations. With lasers Scorch is necessary beside INMF.

Scorch is insanely powerful, but even without it, lasers still are superior to any other weapon, even T2, for a wide range, except maybe missiles. The problem you may have is capacitor (with supposedly low skills, even more so) because of the time it will take to kill the ennemy without scorch dps.

And blasters have the same problem : without null, *any* ship will be able to kite you.

But that's more a problem of skill difference than balance.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#125 - 2013-03-08 15:35:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
Blasters are... serviceable without T2 ammunition. Almost everyone will advise you not to undock with lasers without T2 guns so you can use Scorch. With blasters and AC's the go to ammo is faction in almost all situations. With lasers Scorch is necessary beside INMF.

Scorch is insanely powerful, but even without it, lasers still are superior to any other weapon, even T2, for a wide range, except maybe missiles. The problem you may have is capacitor (with supposedly low skills, even more so) because of the time it will take to kill the ennemy without scorch dps.

And blasters have the same problem : without null, *any* ship will be able to kite you.

But that's more a problem of skill difference than balance.


Can your cruiser do 700 dps with lasers? Can your lasers run when I put a medium neut on your maller? Can an omen actually kite without capping itself out? Can a harbinger actually win a brawl against an equally skilled opponent? Can a harbinger actually kite something without it warping away? Can an amarr battleship actually do anything without needing a cap booster? Do you actually see non lolfit laser myrms,prophecies, or anything else without a high slot weapons bonus?

Lasers do **** dps and their massive range projection is unnecessary on what is a close range weapons system.

Also without t2 guns can multifreq compete with antimatter or emp?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#126 - 2013-03-08 15:47:46 UTC
Arronicus wrote:



No, no they don't. Amarr ships have BETTER capacitor than minmatar ships mostly, when you consider running weapons, propulsion mods, tackle, some sort of tank. This is not only through a capacitor bonus, but also dramatically larger base cap amounts and faster regen. Not only are many minmatar ships short on capacitor (Vagabond, Cynabal, Sleipnir) for sustained engagements where their amarrian counterparts aren't, but Amarrian ships have many advantages to their weapons, that projectiles do not, including higher tracking, DRAMATICALLY better damage projection, longer range, higher dps, super fast reloading/crystal swapping.

So no, I strongly disagree. The capacitor bonus IS a very good bonus.


Try shooting your guns.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#127 - 2013-03-08 15:59:35 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
A capacitor use bonus should not count as a "bonus" when minmatar ships get that for free. I am not sure why CCP has to make it so that a ship can only have two bonuses, it seems rather silly. Maybe something simple like a tracking bonus or maybe even a really weird bonus like to a type of ewar?


The drake gets a bonus to resistances and a dps bonus, but do its guns use less cap than a harbinger? Yea, good bonus. It's not like lasers give a really big advantage to counter using all that cap.

Why is it an arbitrary rule that a t1 ship can only have two bonuses? Especially when not all bonuses are created equal.

Lasers natural range doesn't really help much if ever. Every role that you can put a harbinger in other ships do better. The harbinger can't do anything but tank and shoot meh dps guns at 20km while it's max speed is meh.

I don't think removing the cap bonus is a good idea because that will mean the ultimate counter to a harbinger is a medium neut or two. Without the cap reduction bonus the harbingers guns would use more cap than a 10mn micro warp drive. I do not think lasers should have their cap use reduced either because it makes them interesting.




Imagine for a second if the brutix had it's bonuses replaced with the harbingers and its fitting changed to accommodate lasers and got to keep its repair bonus. Would the brutix be OP? No. This is because it would be nearly the same ship, but with less dps, being less cap stable, and having longer range.




let me explain you something that was already explained hundreds of times.

Lasers are intrinsically STRONGER than ANY other weapon of same class. When you combine range and damage of pulses they are superior to all weapons in raw value. Ammar are just the ones that get the bonus to allow them to use those weapons.


Want simple proof. Check your damm numbers. The harbinger has MORE damage than a hurricane with similar fit. That while using only 1 bonus and the hurricane using 2 bonuses for DAMAGE ALONE!

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#128 - 2013-04-09 02:08:03 UTC
Well CCP is removing the cap bonus for amarr battleships https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=223607

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
DataRunner Attor
Doomheim
#129 - 2013-04-09 03:23:23 UTC
I think in this case, as with what they say with the drake tank opedness. We need to look at the mods, not the ship. Maybe weapons need a re-balance, not the ship. Just saying.

“Point out to me a person who has been harmed by an AFK cloaker and I will point out a person who has no business playing this game.”
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#130 - 2013-04-09 04:12:33 UTC
DataRunner Attor wrote:
I think in this case, as with what they say with the drake tank opedness. We need to look at the mods, not the ship. Maybe weapons need a re-balance, not the ship. Just saying.

only way to balance them is to make them all the same.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#131 - 2013-04-09 08:55:42 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
DataRunner Attor wrote:
I think in this case, as with what they say with the drake tank opedness. We need to look at the mods, not the ship. Maybe weapons need a re-balance, not the ship. Just saying.

only way to balance them is to make them all the same.

If that's how you feel, you may as well unsub now.

And as for the cap use bonus removal for the BS line, the first comment in that thread complains about it. And there are more complaints on the first page. Certainly more than there are approvals.

I think the loss of that bonus is going to make the Apoc hard to use for extended periods.

Friends
Whisperen
Resilience.
The Initiative.
#132 - 2013-04-09 11:50:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Whisperen
Maybe change cap use reduction bonus to a fitting bonus for Capacitor batteries or cap amount of cap batteries or nuet / nos reflection chance of cap batteries. Shoehorn a large one in and get more cap and a chance of neut reflection.

Just throwing it out there.
Mole Guy
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#133 - 2013-04-09 19:24:44 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
I agree with the OP, having a bonus to cap on amarr ships sucks when all that bonus does is to allow those weapons to function normally, thus it is not a bonus.

How about reducing cap requirements on all lasers, I've never understood how beam lasers should even require cap in the first place as (if I remember my optical physics correctly) all a beam laser needs is a continuous source of power (this is represented in the PG requirements as posted in the weapon description). Pulse lasers are a little different in that they rapidly fire multiple times per shot and as such need short bursts of power which is where a capacitor is needed.

So I would say, no cap on all beam lasers at the very least and reduced cap requirements for the more damaging, but shorter range pulse lasers.



you dont remember your physics correctly.

a laser uses power to be turned on, correct, but when the light waves are emmited, it draws hella power.
beams are nothing more than 4 smaller charging capacitors on a smaller, faster slewing laser. rapid discharge means the "pulse" effect, where as normal "beam" weapons have 1 massive cap to charge up.
one of the RADAR systems i worked on in the navy used a little power to turn on all the lights and run diagnostics, but once it was fully functional and transmitting, it drew megawatts. several of them.

simply put, lasers across the board need a cap adjustment. tachyons needs a pg/cpu adjustment for sure on top of the cap adjustment. if they drop lasers down some, then the new changes would rawk!.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#134 - 2013-04-09 21:34:22 UTC
Mole Guy wrote:



you dont remember your physics correctly.


What he means is, I can plug as many things as I want into my house, but how many can I turn on at once?

How come I can't just use the powergrid I don't use to boost my cap or vice versa?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.