These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#481 - 2013-04-09 19:37:56 UTC
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
I'll leave this right here:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/73530

By CCP Ytterbium
Armageddon: this ship is performing well at the time being, and thus we have little reason to alter it.
Apocalypse: is behaving well at the moment, so there is little point in changing it.
Abbadon: a nice ship with fine purpose in fleets and large gangs.

See, this is what gets me, i remember this dev blog and being relieved that Amarr ships were considered "fine".

and now we see these MASSIVE changes to 1 ship, and annoying as hell changes to the other 2, and going on 25 pages with no reply or communication from CCP's end. kinda a **** move on their part, they said Amarr ships look fine, so they should leave them alone, if we NEED a drone/neut hull for whatever freak reason, then GIVE US A NEW SHIP, dont ruin one of the iconic ships people have loved to fly for years.

i can only hope that the navy geddon doesnt receive this same treatment (though i know it will, because why not)
Rhnra Pahineh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#482 - 2013-04-09 19:39:07 UTC
Okay, so people had the time to phrase their point of view. And a lot of my fellow capsulers have the same feeling as I do.

However, I'd really appreciate if one guy from CCP could come in and participate in the discussion.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#483 - 2013-04-09 19:42:29 UTC
A very easy and lazy fix to the cap problem would be to just give all (or most) Amarrian ships a role bonus like -20% cap use for laser weapons.
Sure, a race specific role bonus would be something new and unprecedented in EVE, but if CCP intends to keep racial flavors by making lazors effective only on Amarrian ships, it would make sense without much room for abuse (like a much higher cap in general that could be used for neuts or multiple reps).

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#484 - 2013-04-09 19:50:12 UTC
Rhnra Pahineh wrote:
Okay, so people had the time to phrase their point of view. And a lot of my fellow capsulers have the same feeling as I do.

However, I'd really appreciate if one guy from CCP could come in and participate in the discussion.

Indeed, a number of us through out this thread have tried getting some sort of response from CCP Rise, including going over to the Gallente thread and specificly pointing him back to this one, the most he has done is, once, responded that he'd give all the threads a quick eye ball but that he didn't see any reason to post on them if he hadn't already. Personally, this makes me feel as if he's basically telling us all we can go ____ ourselves, especially as most of the time we've specifically asked him for a response in this thread, it was to specific comments, ideas, or questions that not only deserved a reply, but only a Dev could have honestly and informatively responded to.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#485 - 2013-04-09 19:51:13 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
A very easy and lazy fix to the cap problem would be to just give all (or most) Amarrian ships a role bonus like -20% cap use for laser weapons.
Sure, a race specific role bonus would be something new and unprecedented in EVE, but if CCP intends to keep racial flavors by making lazors effective only on Amarrian ships, it would make sense without much room for abuse (like a much higher cap in general that could be used for neuts or multiple reps).

I like this idea, but I'd go a little further with it, and have it vary by hull between 15% to 25%.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#486 - 2013-04-09 19:55:31 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Rhnra Pahineh wrote:
Okay, so people had the time to phrase their point of view. And a lot of my fellow capsulers have the same feeling as I do.

However, I'd really appreciate if one guy from CCP could come in and participate in the discussion.

Indeed, a number of us through out this thread have tried getting some sort of response from CCP Rise, including going over to the Gallente thread and specificly pointing him back to this one, the most he has done is, once, responded that he'd give all the threads a quick eye ball but that he didn't see any reason to post on them if he hadn't already. Personally, this makes me feel as if he's basically telling us all we can go ____ ourselves, especially as most of the time we've specifically asked him for a response in this thread, it was to specific comments, ideas, or questions that not only deserved a reply, but only a Dev could have honestly and informatively responded to.

I blame Fozzie, he has spoiled us. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#487 - 2013-04-09 19:56:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Pelea Ming wrote:
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
A very easy and lazy fix to the cap problem would be to just give all (or most) Amarrian ships a role bonus like -20% cap use for laser weapons.
Sure, a race specific role bonus would be something new and unprecedented in EVE, but if CCP intends to keep racial flavors by making lazors effective only on Amarrian ships, it would make sense without much room for abuse (like a much higher cap in general that could be used for neuts or multiple reps).

I like this idea, but I'd go a little further with it, and have it vary by hull between 15% to 25%.


Sure.
Cap instability should remain the major drawback of the Baddon for example, it's how we are used to fly it and adds very much to it's special flavor.
The 20% were just a random number I pulled out of my backside to trick you into believing that I had done some kind of math and was giving a well informed and elaborate contribution to this thread.
Straight

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#488 - 2013-04-09 19:58:50 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Since part of this discussion has to do with NOS/Neut effectiveness, and a NOS buff has been hinted at, I want to take a moment and inject this here.

For the NOS buff could you please consider basing them on the actual amount of cap POINTS their enemy has (relative to their own) as opposed to the PERCENTAGE difference?

This would make them primarily effective for smaller ships vs larger ships, while neuts remain most effective being used by large ships against smaller ships.

In other words, currently if a frigate is at 10% cap and his BS target is at 10% he gets nothing from his NOS.

But if it was based on the raw amount of capacitor points left in the capacitor (say in this case to use purely fictional numbers with both ships at 10% cap left the frigate has 100 cap points left and the BS has 1000 cap points left) the ship with the smaller raw amount of cap will find the NOS highly effective.

In essence it becomes a great tool for smaller ships to run their equipment using a larger ships capacitor, but makes the NOS virtually useles for larger ships to use on smaller ones... thus Nuets retain their full functionality... remaining the weapon of choice for peeling off pesky tacklers.

This might also open up the door for somewhat harsher penalties for trying to use Neuts against ships with Cap Batteries, while a NOS using boat would love to drain that extra cap for their own purposes.

Perhaps some sort of percentage system based on both ships comparative cap, in other words?

I was thinking more a straight up comparison of raw cap points left in the capacitor of each ship. Comparing the percentage of cap left is what has made NOS so marginally effective at all levels.

This is what would allow a frigate to almost always be able to draw cap from a BS, unless that BS was almost completely capped out, no matter how much cap the frigate had left.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Lillith Sakata
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#489 - 2013-04-09 19:59:16 UTC
Loki Vice wrote:
also on a side note, he says he wants the new armageddon to be like the dragoon... the dragoon is argueably the worst of all the new destroyers, I haven't seen one flown since they first came out, while the other see lots of use.

If people want a strong drone boat with the option for neuts, people default to the dominix... why should the amarr have a ship does also does the same thing?


And why would we build one around Gallente crap? Amarrian ships might have drone bays, sometimes big ones. but we still are flying bricks with big f'n lasers coming out our freakin heads.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#490 - 2013-04-09 20:01:36 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
Rhnra Pahineh wrote:
Okay, so people had the time to phrase their point of view. And a lot of my fellow capsulers have the same feeling as I do.

However, I'd really appreciate if one guy from CCP could come in and participate in the discussion.

Indeed, a number of us through out this thread have tried getting some sort of response from CCP Rise, including going over to the Gallente thread and specificly pointing him back to this one, the most he has done is, once, responded that he'd give all the threads a quick eye ball but that he didn't see any reason to post on them if he hadn't already. Personally, this makes me feel as if he's basically telling us all we can go ____ ourselves, especially as most of the time we've specifically asked him for a response in this thread, it was to specific comments, ideas, or questions that not only deserved a reply, but only a Dev could have honestly and informatively responded to.

I blame Fozzie, he has spoiled us. Smile



But you have to admit that Fozzie had it a lot easier than Kil2.
Fozzie was buffing crappy ships that nobody ever used, so he effectively gave us new ships and everyone was cheering.
CCP Rise has to work on ships that are in use and somewhat iconic to EVE, and he can't get away with just buffing everything.
People tend to react very emotional if you screw around with their favorite toys...

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Mr Hyde113
#491 - 2013-04-09 20:06:00 UTC
I would agree that we deserve some sort of response or somment from CCP Rise.

25 pages of Posts (minus the 10pages the ISDs removed for rage) should warrant ATLEAST 1 reply.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#492 - 2013-04-09 20:07:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Lillith Sakata wrote:
Loki Vice wrote:
also on a side note, he says he wants the new armageddon to be like the dragoon... the dragoon is argueably the worst of all the new destroyers, I haven't seen one flown since they first came out, while the other see lots of use.

If people want a strong drone boat with the option for neuts, people default to the dominix... why should the amarr have a ship does also does the same thing?


And why would we build one around Gallente crap? Amarrian ships might have drone bays, sometimes big ones. but we still are flying bricks with big f'n lasers coming out our freakin heads.

This point came up earlier in the thread (concerning the similarity to a Dragoon, and it's current lack of popularity).

The Nuet/Drone combo is a bit problematic for the Dragoon as both need time to actually be effective, and time is something a Destroyer hull rarely has plenty of due to it's fragility.

It needs to either do it's damage from a long distance (which the Algos can easily do even while using drones) or do it's damage overwhelmingly fast. The Dragoon needs to stay relatively close (even with the range bonus to it's small neuts), is not fast enough to kite, and is too fragile to hang in there to get full effect from it's NOS/drone combo before it dies.

The proposed Armageddon hull would have considerable room to play with for it's large range boosted NOS, and would be robust enough to hang in there long enough to be effective.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#493 - 2013-04-09 20:08:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jezza McWaffle
Why cant we keep dem lasers for Amarr and just reduce their cap consumption. T1 BS doing a Curses and Bhalls work seems wrong to me.

My suggestion:

Geddon - DPS boat via drones and lasers (like before)

Baddon - Highest tanking

Apoc - Highest range

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
Lillith Sakata
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#494 - 2013-04-09 20:12:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Lillith Sakata
Pelea Ming wrote:
Rhnra Pahineh wrote:
Okay, so people had the time to phrase their point of view. And a lot of my fellow capsulers have the same feeling as I do.

However, I'd really appreciate if one guy from CCP could come in and participate in the discussion.

Indeed, a number of us through out this thread have tried getting some sort of response from CCP Rise, including going over to the Gallente thread and specifically pointing him back to this one, the most he has done is, once, responded that he'd give all the threads a quick eye ball but that he didn't see any reason to post on them if he hadn't already. Personally, this makes me feel as if he's basically telling us all we can go ____ ourselves, especially as most of the time we've specifically asked him for a response in this thread, it was to specific comments, ideas, or questions that not only deserved a reply, but only a Dev could have honestly and informatively responded to.


Agreed. We need the devs to at least discuss things with the people that play the game (and fund them). I'm starting to think they've been taken over by Americans. The government does whatever and the people get **** on and they don't do anything about it.

At least in this case, I can express my dislike for the homogenization by doing what I've done with two other games now. Left them and taken my money elsewhere. (Sadly, no other counrty really likes Americans so I can't really move, and I still have to pay taxes or I end up with public housing ((aka prison)) )

My motto for eve has been "When someone rage quits and goes to play WOW, the IQ in both rises"... if they keep up with this crap it won't be the case. Personally I'm getting tired of people ignoring the past, or in this case the backstory that MADE EvE what it is (but is slowly diverging from in the name of the lazy 'lets balance things by making them all the same')

The playstyles that we players enjoy is slowly but surely being merged into one field of goon/testicle flair: Bloblobloblob.
No more role playing, 'cause well nothing left to rp about. No niche play, cause everything will be the same. It'll be about who can throw the most poo at the other guy.

So yeah TLDR; devs... read, and input, learn what your customers want, or discuss why you think this helps the game/story/etc, so you don't drive everyone away.
Lillith Sakata
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#495 - 2013-04-09 20:14:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Lillith Sakata
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
Why cant we keep dem lasers for Amarr and just reduce their cap consumption. T1 BS doing a Curses and Bhalls work seems wrong to me.

My suggestion:

Geddon - DPS boat via drones and lasers (like before)

Baddon - Highest tanking

Apoc - Highest range



That is what it is. Problem is they don't seem to understand that the boats DO have roles, they seem to think it's all the same because I'm guessing whoever came up with this Odyssey crap hasn't played Amarr (or played them properly)

Course it doesn't help that Amarr have been kinda crapped on for a few years, so everyone flys the ships that still work decently. Most people go with other ships because the nerfbat and hydrogen pushing (homogenization, or 'lets make it all the same') around here has left Amarrian ships with only a few ways you can play them effectively.

I recall days when the Apoc was the king of the snipers. I hated them 'cause I wasn't IN one. The Geddon was a DPS whore but slightly squishy (for a BS), and the Baddon was the guy that took a beating and asked for more.
Now all the fleets I see are nGeddons and a few Abbadons here and there. The Apoc/Napoc has fallen from grace. You don't see them much because lasers... I love lasers -- and the probing changes have make sniping fleets tactically useless unless you want to play blob-warping games, which the snipers will eventually lose.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#496 - 2013-04-09 20:21:01 UTC
Mr Hyde113 wrote:
I would agree that we deserve some sort of response or somment from CCP Rise.

25 pages of Posts (minus the 10pages the ISDs removed for rage) should warrant ATLEAST 1 reply.



I think they are busy dealing with the gal blaster boats atm :D the gal thread is 10x worse than this one.
Lillith Sakata
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#497 - 2013-04-09 20:30:22 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Mr Hyde113 wrote:
I would agree that we deserve some sort of response or somment from CCP Rise.

25 pages of Posts (minus the 10pages the ISDs removed for rage) should warrant ATLEAST 1 reply.



I think they are busy dealing with the gal blaster boats atm :D the gal thread is 10x worse than this one.



I'd participate in those threads, but last time I flew Gallente was 8 years ago and they're so different I can't really say much with them.

However I play solely Amarr thus far (likely to change now, though), and I'm in the Apocalypse daily, the Geddon occasionally (not much cause the nGeddon owns the standard and I'm not bleeding ISK out my ears), and sold my Abaddon cause... yeah, cap sucks.

Granted I'm still using T1 guns on them, but the Apoc still doesn't get called for with T2, cause lasers went from overpowered to plain getting s**t on, so the Rohk completely overshadows it.
Doctor Ape MD
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#498 - 2013-04-09 20:34:07 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Mr Hyde113 wrote:
I would agree that we deserve some sort of response or somment from CCP Rise.

25 pages of Posts (minus the 10pages the ISDs removed for rage) should warrant ATLEAST 1 reply.



I think they are busy dealing with the gal blaster boats atm :D the gal thread is 10x worse than this one.


I think they are posting as much about the new Geddon over there as anybody in this thread.
Kerdrak
Querry Moon
#499 - 2013-04-09 20:34:08 UTC
Jezza McWaffle wrote:
Why cant we keep dem lasers for Amarr and just reduce their cap consumption. T1 BS doing a Curses and Bhalls work seems wrong to me.

My suggestion:

Geddon - DPS boat via drones and lasers (like before)

Baddon - Highest tanking

Apoc - Highest range


What you propose is boring.

We need variability in this game, not three laser platforms because you have trained lasers. You can fit an Abaddon to be high DPS, high range or high tank, why have to have a single role? that's so narrow minded.

I want to be able to choose between a good range of bonus and capabilities, and if I have to train missiles or drones to do it efficiently, more reasons to encourage training.

Why most players are always against changes?
AyayaPanda
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#500 - 2013-04-09 20:36:24 UTC
Old apoca was very friendly to new player.
If you took away the build-in 7500 total cap, and the laser cap usage. New mission runner will be hurt.
At least keep the 7500 cap? This ship doesn't have a dmg bonus, and not likely to fit tachyon.



Old geddon is a cheap, but nice dps ship
8 low means at least 2 1600 plates
only have three mid slots, but don't really need a large cap booster (unlike abbadon)
scorch up to 50~60k, good enough for many case
rof bonus = much more dps than apoca
nice drone bay, sets of medium drones

I would welcome the coming of a new neut bs, but it's sad to say good-bye to the old geddon.