These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Gallente

First post
Author
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#781 - 2013-04-09 16:25:33 UTC
Havegun Willtravel wrote:
Morning Rise,

Thanks for keeping up with the feedback. Hopefully your revisions will be innovative.

"As I said in the OP, we are in a tough spot with the active armor bonuses. We don't want to throw them out, they are fun to play when they work, and we have hopes that we will continue to bring them into viability with other changes. That said, in the mean time we don't want to overcorrect for their current position in the meta."

A couple of things I would really like to get across.

'' When they work '' - they don't really. That's why the hype is mostly unused and will continue to be. Also why the proph is X times more popular than the Myrm.

"That said, in the mean time we don't want to overcorrect for their current position in the meta." This I really want an explanation to please.

Dragoon -> Proph -> Geddon. When looking for ways to innovate new game play styles and freshen up the mix with variety there doesn't seem to be an issue with Amar. However, if you play Galente you're effectively being told that an old legacy bonus that's never really worked well, still doesn't work very well. but maybe will get better is being hung around your neck Do or Die.

Ten years ago someone decided that Amar were armor tankers and gave them the two best bonus's you could ever ask for. Resists and Armor Hitpoints. Galente were also supposed to be armor tankers but someone seemed to think that DPS tanking with Blasters would make up for squishy tank. It hasn't in the least.

Add to this the fact that Galente across the board have lower pg and cap with the worst optimal and fall off and it's not hard to figure out why they've failed to have an impact or gain the popular following that other races have.

This is our chance to finally even things out but you're failing dismally to break the mold or forge a new direction. Instead we're being told that we're stuck with bad old legacy mechanics while other people move forward in new directions. This just isn't acceptable.

Armor Hitpoints would differentiate us as a tank philosophy. It would probably still make us second place to resists But, we could fit fewer plates and at least be fast enough to apply our myopic dps in more situations.

I don't want to be handcuffed to an old failed legacy anymore. I want innovation. I want to see solutions in action not promises that stuff that doesn't work might not be so bad later maybe.

Tiericide was supposed to open the door to new things. Lets see them please.

Have my babies please.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#782 - 2013-04-09 16:29:06 UTC
I think the solution with the Domi lies in one of two ways.

What's the current Dominixs problem?
Just out classed by the new Geddon, and lumped with a bunch of bonuses that don't quite work together...

Low number of high slots means is less likely to synergise it's drone specialism with drone control range augmentation.
Not that sniper sentry drones work well with most fleets, can't be easily countered by smart//bombs or that the dominix has any new values to compensate for the rather stationary nature of it's deployment (ie, higher than average hp) or vunriblity of it's new focused dps source (increased drone bay)

We all feel these things, some of us on a gut level, hence the dissatisfaction.

But compared to the Hyperion and Megathron, it's an easy enough solution to attempt to solve.

Make the Dominix have the standard number of slots most battleships enjoy with either...

7/5/7 Slot layout increasing the number of drone control augmentation units it can potentially carry (with a modest CPU boost)

Or 6/6/7 Slot layout restoring utility lost by the DPS switch whilst indirecting improving (armour and/or shield) tanking ability or drone performance into a more synergistic unit.

I've seen New dual neut, heavy torp/drone geddons pushing over 1k dps - as things stand that will almost certainly be by go to drone dps machine.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#783 - 2013-04-09 16:29:36 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi again Gallente friends!

We've just had a meeting with the balance team to weigh all your feedback and go over our options for this ship line. We have come up with some new solutions which I think you will be happy about.

Look for an update with the new versions in the next day or two, we are going to spend some time tuning them so that we are less likely to have to make even more changes afterwards.

Thanks again for the input!



We'll see.

Hopefully Gallente ships won't still regarded as the bastard stepchild of EVE.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB

Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#784 - 2013-04-09 16:30:51 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
Can someone point to the Gal ship that's useful in fleets?

With these changes there's even less chance of megas been welcomed alongside abaddons. A mega without 2 maga stabs is useless. To do that now you have to use 1 plate, which seems to give it an even worse tank then it currently has.


5% rof bonus + 1 mag stab = 5% dmg bonus + 2 mag stab

Now u have 1 more mid slot for or web or the track comp, which means that 5% rof + 1 mag stab dps better applied than the old fit. And on top of that u get the same tank, better cap, speed and agility. Stop whining.

Incorrect, and if you'd paid a bit more attention to the thread, rather than insulting everyone (including people who have 7 years more experience than you... ) then you'd know this is incorrect:

7*1.25*1.47 = 12.9 turrets (current, with two mag stabs)
7/0.75*1.23 = 11.5 turrets (proposed, with RoF bonus and one mag stab)

On top of this it loses a heavy drone, with Ogre II's thats another -63 DPS.


The solution, is simple; increase ROF bonus to 7.5% assuming it's still losing a heavy drone. You could of course keep it the same by removing a low slot and giving it a 10% damage bonus without changing the drone bandwidth:

7*1.5*1.23 = 12.9

Looking forward to what these new discussions (that Rise eluded to earlier) lead to.

Didn't it also lose all it's missile hardpoints? Blink

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

IrJosy
Club 1621
#785 - 2013-04-09 16:31:38 UTC
Havegun Willtravel wrote:
Morning Rise,

Thanks for keeping up with the feedback. Hopefully your revisions will be innovative.

"As I said in the OP, we are in a tough spot with the active armor bonuses. We don't want to throw them out, they are fun to play when they work, and we have hopes that we will continue to bring them into viability with other changes. That said, in the mean time we don't want to overcorrect for their current position in the meta."

A couple of things I would really like to get across.

'' When they work '' - they don't really. That's why the hype is mostly unused and will continue to be. Also why the proph is X times more popular than the Myrm.

"That said, in the mean time we don't want to overcorrect for their current position in the meta." This I really want an explanation to please.

Dragoon -> Proph -> Geddon. When looking for ways to innovate new game play styles and freshen up the mix with variety there doesn't seem to be an issue with Amar. However, if you play Galente you're effectively being told that an old legacy bonus that's never really worked well, still doesn't work very well. but maybe will get better is being hung around your neck Do or Die.

Ten years ago someone decided that Amar were armor tankers and gave them the two best bonus's you could ever ask for. Resists and Armor Hitpoints. Galente were also supposed to be armor tankers but someone seemed to think that DPS tanking with Blasters would make up for squishy tank. It hasn't in the least.

Add to this the fact that Galente across the board have lower pg and cap with the worst optimal and fall off and it's not hard to figure out why they've failed to have an impact or gain the popular following that other races have.

This is our chance to finally even things out but you're failing dismally to break the mold or forge a new direction. Instead we're being told that we're stuck with bad old legacy mechanics while other people move forward in new directions. This just isn't acceptable.

Armor Hitpoints would differentiate us as a tank philosophy. It would probably still make us second place to resists But, we could fit fewer plates and at least be fast enough to apply our myopic dps in more situations.

I don't want to be handcuffed to an old failed legacy anymore. I want innovation. I want to see solutions in action not promises that stuff that doesn't work might not be so bad later maybe.

Tiericide was supposed to open the door to new things. Lets see them please.


That is an interesting new idea!
Berial Inglebard
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#786 - 2013-04-09 16:31:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Berial Inglebard
Edit: turned into reply to Rise
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#787 - 2013-04-09 16:34:45 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Didn't it also lose all it's missile hardpoints? Blink

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed this.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Berial Inglebard
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#788 - 2013-04-09 16:34:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Berial Inglebard
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi again Gallente friends!

We've just had a meeting with the balance team to weigh all your feedback and go over our options for this ship line. We have come up with some new solutions which I think you will be happy about.

Look for an update with the new versions in the next day or two, we are going to spend some time tuning them so that we are less likely to have to make even more changes afterwards.

Thanks again for the input!


CCP Rise: It seems that most people want the Hyperion to have a place in large fleet doctrine like all the other Teir 3 battleships do. The mael has massive alpha, the abaddon massive buffer, and the rokh a solid mix of buffer and optimal. So where can the Hyperion fit in? Make the 7.5% repair bonus effective for both local AND RECEIVED remote armor reps. How does this balance out? The new Hyperion would be thinner than the abaddon and rokh (no resistance bonus to compliment EHP buffer, armor tank lows shared with damage mods, 6 lows vs abaddons 7), thus making it easier to alpha off the field. However, when remote armor reps start landing, the thing is a beast, turning 3 logistic pilots into 4 effectively (at Gal BS5) and becoming the most difficult Teir 3 battleship to beat while being repaired. This is the niche the Hyperion can and should fill. Thin, but incredibly resilient with the assistance of logistics.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#789 - 2013-04-09 16:35:00 UTC
Marxzo Andoun wrote:
Vivien Sureflight wrote:
I really dislike what you're proposing for the Dominix. Its strength is in its versatility, and part of that versatility comes from being able to use blasters for more than just the laughs. As is, the Dominix occupies some of the highest potential DPS in the game, while also maintaining the ability to be fit in a variety of ways. I would much rather it stay the same than be turned into a tougher, slower, uglier Ishtar.



Something people need to be clear on from CCP Rise's post earlier in this thread:

"It won't be capable of the highest damage numbers of any battleship now, but it can still fit blasters across the top and run mag stabs along with drone damage amps and heavy drones."

This is a clearcut nerf to Domi's dps. I'd be ok with a nerf provided the proposed alternative was appealing. People who are saying this is a boost to the Domi did not read this thread fully.

I don't understand why people find it exciting that Domi will have the tracking to zap smaller ships now. It was always fine at hitting ships it's own size and could deploy smaller drones (at a dps loss) to chase around really annoying smaller ships.

Do people really get excited about killboards that show a BS taking out a frig?

I also don't understand why people would want to use a bigger, tankier ship solely as a sniper when tier 3 BCs will fill this role just as well but with more mobility.

I may be missing something here so I am open to hearing more.


But this is CCP we're talking about here.

Gallente ships are generally the worst ships in game. So what do we do with the best Drone boat in class? Nerf it and make the Amarr drone boat better.

That's great logic right there.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB

Collin Dow
Glorious Revolution
#790 - 2013-04-09 16:38:07 UTC
Please don't **** my megathron. It has only been good again for a little while, and you guys are already trying to kill it again. :smith:

The Glorious Revolution is a great (awful) corp, and you should (not) join today, comrade!

Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#791 - 2013-04-09 16:38:39 UTC
I don't see the obsession with keeping a uniform number of absolute slots, either. As long as ships do not vary massively in power and utility, it doesn't matter if they have a few more or few less slots.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#792 - 2013-04-09 16:38:53 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
Can someone point to the Gal ship that's useful in fleets?

With these changes there's even less chance of megas been welcomed alongside abaddons. A mega without 2 maga stabs is useless. To do that now you have to use 1 plate, which seems to give it an even worse tank then it currently has.


5% rof bonus + 1 mag stab = 5% dmg bonus + 2 mag stab

Now u have 1 more mid slot for or web or the track comp, which means that 5% rof + 1 mag stab dps better applied than the old fit. And on top of that u get the same tank, better cap, speed and agility. Stop whining.

Incorrect, and if you'd paid a bit more attention to the thread, rather than insulting everyone (including people who have 7 years more experience than you... ) then you'd know this is incorrect:

7*1.25*1.47 = 12.9 turrets (current, with two mag stabs)
7/0.75*1.23 = 11.5 turrets (proposed, with RoF bonus and one mag stab)

On top of this it loses a heavy drone, with Ogre II's thats another -63 DPS.


The solution, is simple; increase ROF bonus to 7.5% assuming it's still losing a heavy drone. You could of course keep it the same by removing a low slot and giving it a 10% damage bonus without changing the drone bandwidth:

7*1.5*1.23 = 12.9

Looking forward to what these new discussions (that Rise eluded to earlier) lead to.

Didn't it also lose all it's missile hardpoints? Blink
Indeed, which, even though I personally have never used them on a blaster fit (have stuck a cruise launcher on a rail fit before) its still not cool - I was kind of hoping that when Battleship missiles get looked at there'd be some incentive and genuine choice for utility high slot fitting.

Though I am a bit more positive about the whole situation now the OP has been changed... Cool

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Collin Dow
Glorious Revolution
#793 - 2013-04-09 16:40:07 UTC
Berial Inglebard wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi again Gallente friends!

We've just had a meeting with the balance team to weigh all your feedback and go over our options for this ship line. We have come up with some new solutions which I think you will be happy about.

Look for an update with the new versions in the next day or two, we are going to spend some time tuning them so that we are less likely to have to make even more changes afterwards.

Thanks again for the input!


CCP Rise: It seems that most people want the Hyperion to have a place in large fleet doctrine like all the other Teir 3 battleships do. The mael has massive alpha, the abaddon massive buffer, and the rokh a solid mix of buffer and optimal. So where can the Hyperion fit in? Make the 7.5% repair bonus effective for both local AND RECEIVED remote armor reps. How does this balance out? The new Hyperion would be thinner than the abaddon and rokh (no resistance bonus to compliment EHP buffer, armor tank lows shared with damage mods), thus making it easier to alpha off the field. However, when remote armor reps start landing, the thing is a beast, turning 3 logistic pilots into 4 effectively (at Gal BS5) and becoming the most difficult Teir 3 battleship to beat while being repaired. This is the niche the Hyperion can and should fill. Thin, but incredibly resilient with the assistance of logistics.


This. This would be good for the hyp.

The Glorious Revolution is a great (awful) corp, and you should (not) join today, comrade!

IrJosy
Club 1621
#794 - 2013-04-09 16:44:02 UTC
Rep received is a bad idea. It is effectively only half of the resist bonus.
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#795 - 2013-04-09 16:47:10 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:


The Navy Domi is still there, and it's hard to argue with the Vindicator and Bhaalorn. Besides, there's a ton of rage and I'm sure that CCP will come to the table ready to play ball tomorrow. :)

-Liang


Pattern Clarc wrote:

I'm certain this is part of CCP's bargining ploy and they'll be bringing out the REAL gallente changes tomorrow... And because these have all been so terrible, we'll be thanking our lucky stars when we've been brought to parity with Amitar.


CCP Rise wrote:
Hi again Gallente friends!

We've just had a meeting with the balance team to weigh all your feedback and go over our options for this ship line. We have come up with some new solutions which I think you will be happy about.

Look for an update with the new versions in the next day or two, we are going to spend some time tuning them so that we are less likely to have to make even more changes afterwards.

Thanks again for the input!


Nerf crystal balls tbh… Cool

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

luredivino
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#796 - 2013-04-09 16:49:09 UTC
They removed the changes to the megathron and the hyperion, but left the changes for the Dominix that the people who use it for missions were complaining about.....
The Bazzalisk
One Risky Click
Snuffed Out
#797 - 2013-04-09 16:50:38 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The Bazzalisk wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Think about how a ship with 50% bonus to rate of fire would shoot twice as often, doing double damage. That would be the same as a 100% turret damage bonus). The result is that more of your damage can capitalize on the tracking bonus, at a small penalty to cap need.
I hate to break it to you but a 50% rate of fire bonus does not mean you are shooting twice as fast, you will be shooting 1.5x as fast.

So you saying that a rate of fire bonus is superior to a damage bonus is incorrect because rate of fire bonus will suck more cap.

If your rate of fire is 10 and you reduce that by 50% what does that become??
A rate of fire of 5
Oh yes, the math is correct but it is also poorly named. A duration decrease of 50% is the same as a 100% damage increase.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#798 - 2013-04-09 16:55:34 UTC
Berial Inglebard wrote:

CCP Rise: It seems that most people want the Hyperion to have a place in large fleet doctrine like all the other Teir 3 battleships do.
I think most people want a good rail ship for fleets, a good blaster brawler, and a good drone boat. How they partition these roles is up to CCP, but it seems to me that the bonuses for the Megathron fit better for fleets than the bonus for the Hyperion. Could be wrong if they decide to give the Hyperion a remote repping bonus (which would be great, but it seems this sort of bonus has been a non-starter forever).
Veli ANDAC
Archangels Inferno
#799 - 2013-04-09 16:58:15 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
The Mega & Dominix looks fine to me, but the Hyperion looks like garbage.
It can't dual rep anymore because you need to drop a web or propulsion, both of which are non-options since it doesn't have a range or tracking bonus.

My recommendation would be to drop a high slot, increase the damage bonus to compensate, and give it back its 5th mid.


I agree. First of all Hyperion needs second cap booster to stay cap stable in active armor tanking. Plus, any large turret battle ship without any tracking bonus needs a web on mid slot for apply dps on targets. In the end I can say if you move 5. mid slot, you will corrupt active armor tanking doctrine on Hyperion. And this will be a fail modification.
IrJosy
Club 1621
#800 - 2013-04-09 17:00:38 UTC
luredivino wrote:
They removed the changes to the megathron and the hyperion, but left the changes for the Dominix that the people who use it for missions were complaining about.....


Once you get out of the newbie tutorial zone those domi changes help amazingly in null sec!