These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
silent uk
Sacred Templars
Fraternity.
#501 - 2013-04-09 20:40:52 UTC
To me the Apoc has always been the long range sniper, the Abaddon, the tanky, will eat you at close range, and the Geddy, the ship thats between them, and able to brawl much better than both the Apoc and Abaddon.

With the changes to the Geddy, im honestly, really really sad, your taking a ship which was fairly ballanced, could of done with a bit more HP, maybe a bit of fitting love, but asside from that pretty ballanced, and turning it into a jack of all trades ship with nothing really going for it.

Yes amarr use drones, yep, we use neuts, but lasers and missiles on a ship, its tbh a mess, it will become the new typhoon, where very few fly it because it can do everything, but is the master of nothing.
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#502 - 2013-04-09 20:47:21 UTC
Kerdrak wrote:
Why most players are always against changes?


Why are some players instantly willing to accept everything that given to them?

We argue these changes because we fear what EVE will become. We argue these changes to prevent genericness spilling into every race - We want EVE to be hard. We want EVE to be the game that makes us swear and curse at the other guy, until we get the sweet satisfaction of watching their ship explode.

We also don't want it to go too far - these changes will make the Armageddon massively over-powered - able to drown anyone in a drone death ball, as well as performing the same devastating abilities as the Bhaalgorn for 1/10th of the price: that is a dangerous prospect indeed when you can cap-kill a capital ship in a matter of moments with 10 of them, and still come out cost wise less.


By all means, allow yourself to wander towards EVECraft. I'm going to be manning the walls and stopping it as best I can.

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57
Tamiya Sarossa
Resistance is Character Forming
#503 - 2013-04-09 20:55:52 UTC
Dat Geddon. Might need to be nerfed a bit, but please keep the nuet range bonus.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#504 - 2013-04-09 21:00:14 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
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

lol, silly goose.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#505 - 2013-04-09 21:01:10 UTC
its hard to comment on the apox untill i know your plans for boosting beams...

though the geddon is going to be king ****!

no i mean holly hell!
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#506 - 2013-04-09 21:02:20 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
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.

Yes, but a comparison of a frigate cap vs a BS cap as a percentage would still work without being as marginal in the extremis, and also make the nos likely to be ineffecitive if the frig is high enough and the BS low enough still.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#507 - 2013-04-09 21:04:58 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
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.

To me, this points to the Dragoon needing some help, maybe a role bonus to be able to effectively fit medium nos/nuets?
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#508 - 2013-04-09 21:06:48 UTC
Kerdrak wrote:
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?

Its not being against changes, its taking a ship that players identify with a certain role, and making it do something so drastically different that you couldnt use it anywhere close to its old role if you tried.

we already HAVE neut and drone boats, all making the geddon yet ANOTHER one does, is REDUCE the need to train anything because, "why bother training another race when every race has a ship for everything".

and the three GOOD FUN LASER BOATS the amarrian's had for battleships all HAD UNIQUE ROLES, they were all fitted vastly different for a wide range of engagement types, and as far as i saw, were all heavily used except the apoc (sometime in the last year i believe it fell out fo style).

The rage coming from people in this thread is of 3 flavors:
1) mad that they are changing the geddon to something that steps on the heels of ships that were considered niche-roles and now have vastly cheaper alternative
2) mad that CCP are making this a "all races have something for everyone, screw-crosstraining" kinda deal

and most importantly THREE: as linked earlier, the dev blog first talking about battleship rebalancing had said amarrian ships were FINE and did not need changes. i do believe there was also a thread where one of the devs posted saying that if they were going to introduce a vastly different role to the amarrian lineup, it would most likely be through a new hull, since the current hulls were considered FINE.

i have always flown the geddon, i liked it, it was cheap and did its job efectively, now if i want to fly a good amarrian battleship, i have the abaddon, nothing else, and the abaddon is ****** to try and fit.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#509 - 2013-04-09 21:09:54 UTC
Kerdrak wrote:
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?

Easy response to this is... time invested. They feel that anything that hurts what they've already invested training time into building for shouldn't get screwed over just because of some high ideals involving role rebalancing, and to a certain extent, this is perfectly understandable, and since in one form or another we all pay real money for this game, should be taken into account.

The flip side of this, of course, is that since CCP is trying to set things up so that lower skilled players can compete effectively versus high skilled players by focusing on specific roles, the customers should also keep this in mind and start looking at this as a time to start figuring out where they want to fit in amongst those various roles.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#510 - 2013-04-09 21:14:02 UTC
silent uk wrote:
To me the Apoc has always been the long range sniper, the Abaddon, the tanky, will eat you at close range, and the Geddy, the ship thats between them, and able to brawl much better than both the Apoc and Abaddon.

With the changes to the Geddy, im honestly, really really sad, your taking a ship which was fairly ballanced, could of done with a bit more HP, maybe a bit of fitting love, but asside from that pretty ballanced, and turning it into a jack of all trades ship with nothing really going for it.

Yes amarr use drones, yep, we use neuts, but lasers and missiles on a ship, its tbh a mess, it will become the new typhoon, where very few fly it because it can do everything, but is the master of nothing.

You know, as I first looked over these specific comments, I was about to just go on to the next post for taking them as the usual "Oh no, not my favorite toy!" rage (no offense mate, but I'm sure you can understand we are seeing loads of that here), but then what he said sunk in on a new thought level...

Specifically, the old 'geddon a better brawler then the old 'baddon? And yet they want to nerf the baddon's tank to make is assume a 'better' brawling role? Fine, fine, the resist bonus is too much at max skills... but then you need to pay some very real attention to the main weakness of the 'baddon, it's very poor cap issues, and do something about them so it can do something about it's now somewhat weaker tank.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#511 - 2013-04-09 21:17:19 UTC
Arline Kley wrote:
Kerdrak wrote:
Why most players are always against changes?


Why are some players instantly willing to accept everything that given to them?

We argue these changes because we fear what EVE will become. We argue these changes to prevent genericness spilling into every race - We want EVE to be hard. We want EVE to be the game that makes us swear and curse at the other guy, until we get the sweet satisfaction of watching their ship explode.

We also don't want it to go too far - these changes will make the Armageddon massively over-powered - able to drown anyone in a drone death ball, as well as performing the same devastating abilities as the Bhaalgorn for 1/10th of the price: that is a dangerous prospect indeed when you can cap-kill a capital ship in a matter of moments with 10 of them, and still come out cost wise less.


By all means, allow yourself to wander towards EVECraft. I'm going to be manning the walls and stopping it as best I can.

First up, fear is the mind killer, the little death that can bring about your own downfall.
Second off, the 'geddon isn't going to be able to effectively fit a full rack of nuets and enough tank to dance with cap ships if I read the numbers correctly, and what carrier is ever scared of drone balls?
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#512 - 2013-04-09 21:19:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Pelea Ming wrote:

To me, this points to the Dragoon needing some help, maybe a role bonus to be able to effectively fit medium nos/nuets?


A little off topic, but I think everything the Dragoon needs would be to double (or even triple) the neut range bonus.
Small neuts are only effective against frigates, and the slow-ass Dragoon will have to rely on a frigate willing to come into range to engage it, because this ship is slower than most cruisers.
And now guess what...every single frig that engaged my Dragoon so far had either projectile weapons or rockets. The Dragoon is the only ship I have flown where I haven't scored a single friggin kill.
With a neut range of 20 or even 30 km you could actually support your gang and not only try to defend yourself against frigates that chose to engage you because they know that they are neut- resistant.

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
#513 - 2013-04-09 21:21:36 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Kerdrak wrote:
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?

Its not being against changes, its taking a ship that players identify with a certain role, and making it do something so drastically different that you couldnt use it anywhere close to its old role if you tried.

we already HAVE neut and drone boats, all making the geddon yet ANOTHER one does, is REDUCE the need to train anything because, "why bother training another race when every race has a ship for everything".

and the three GOOD FUN LASER BOATS the amarrian's had for battleships all HAD UNIQUE ROLES, they were all fitted vastly different for a wide range of engagement types, and as far as i saw, were all heavily used except the apoc (sometime in the last year i believe it fell out fo style).

The rage coming from people in this thread is of 3 flavors:
1) mad that they are changing the geddon to something that steps on the heels of ships that were considered niche-roles and now have vastly cheaper alternative
2) mad that CCP are making this a "all races have something for everyone, screw-crosstraining" kinda deal

and most importantly THREE: as linked earlier, the dev blog first talking about battleship rebalancing had said amarrian ships were FINE and did not need changes. i do believe there was also a thread where one of the devs posted saying that if they were going to introduce a vastly different role to the amarrian lineup, it would most likely be through a new hull, since the current hulls were considered FINE.

i have always flown the geddon, i liked it, it was cheap and did its job efectively, now if i want to fly a good amarrian battleship, i have the abaddon, nothing else, and the abaddon is ****** to try and fit.

Naa, the abbadon once you at least get your skills to 4s isn't too bad to fit, though you do need to invest in a few implants to balance out not having those skills at 5s. Last time I fit a Baddon out for L4 grinding, I actually had quite abit of PG and CPU left over, and, yes, I'd fitted a plate to it.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#514 - 2013-04-09 21:23:22 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:

To me, this points to the Dragoon needing some help, maybe a role bonus to be able to effectively fit medium nos/nuets?


A little off topic, but I think everything the Dragoon needs would be to double (or even triple) the neut range bonus.
Small neuts are only effective against frigates, and the slow-ass Dragoon will have to rely on a frigate willing to come into range to engage it, because this ship is slower than most cruisers.
And now guess what...every single frig that engaged my Dragoon so far had either projectile weapons or rockets. The Dragoon is the only ship I have flown where I haven't scored a single friggin kill.
With a neut range of 20 or even 30 km you could actually support your gang and not only try to defend yourself against frigates that chose to engage you because they know that they are neut- resistant.

Hmm.. have you tried instead of going with a full rack of small nuets, fitting 2 or 3 med nuets to it? it'd give you quite abit more range hopefully without giving up too much cap killing, and this would slow down those proj/missile boats since it'd turn off their prop mods and make your drones able to chew them up more effectively.
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#515 - 2013-04-09 21:25:51 UTC
CCP - the Abaddon is not so widely used because its resistance bonus makes it significantly better than other battleships.

It's used because other battleships' bonuses make them significantly worse than the Abaddon.

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.
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#516 - 2013-04-09 21:35:07 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Kerdrak wrote:
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?

Easy response to this is... time invested. They feel that anything that hurts what they've already invested training time into building for shouldn't get screwed over just because of some high ideals involving role rebalancing, and to a certain extent, this is perfectly understandable, and since in one form or another we all pay real money for this game, should be taken into account.

The flip side of this, of course, is that since CCP is trying to set things up so that lower skilled players can compete effectively versus high skilled players by focusing on specific roles, the customers should also keep this in mind and start looking at this as a time to start figuring out where they want to fit in amongst those various roles.


Funny... Actually I have skills invested in alot of places and I own alot of ships. I dont mind the Geddon not being a laser ship because we do already have 3. But I dont think it should become a jack of all trades ship because then it will just become the new Phoon. And we know how many of those are around...

Maybe if the Geddon because a specific EWAR missile boat for armor tankers it would make things more interesting.

On a personal note I actaually hate missiles

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#517 - 2013-04-09 21:38:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Pelea Ming wrote:
[quote=Zimmy Zeta]
Hmm.. have you tried instead of going with a full rack of small nuets, fitting 2 or 3 med nuets to it? it'd give you quite abit more range hopefully without giving up too much cap killing, and this would slow down those proj/missile boats since it'd turn off their prop mods and make your drones able to chew them up more effectively.

Dragoon has 72,5 PG
A single medium Neut requires 175 PG.
I wanted to love that ship when it came out, mini-curse just sounded too sweet. Just a single one of the initial batch is still alive in my hangar waiting for deployment..I called it the "Desperation fit":
3x drone Damage Amplifier II
1x Co Processor II
1x MWD
1xOmnidirectional Tracking link
- Everything else left empty.

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.
Kor'el Izia
#518 - 2013-04-09 21:40:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Kor'el Izia
CCP Rise wrote:

...awesomesauce...

Armageddon:
...
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second) : 6200(+887.5) / 1087s / 5.7
...

The Armageddon recieved a buff to cap/s, please highlight it more Smile

Pre: (6200 - 887.5) / 1087 = 4.887 cap/s
Post: 6200 / 1087 = 5.7 cap/s

Difference: +0.813 cap/s
Just Lilly
#519 - 2013-04-09 21:42:21 UTC
Geddon looks awsome

But I'd rather see 6 turrets and 6 launchers on it though, other then that, very interesting.


Baddon and Apoc still looking good aswell

I like it alot
Powered by Nvidia GTX 690
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#520 - 2013-04-09 21:57:14 UTC