These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#1641 - 2013-04-11 20:33:25 UTC
Julius Foederatus wrote:

This tracks the way low sec megas usually get fit these days. But the new problem we have with the current iteration is that we get the same amount of tank we had before, but we have to have that third mag stab just to get to the dps levels of the current mega because of the drone bay nerf, all the while sacrificing that extra high slot for a neut or whatever else you want to throw in there. So really we aren't getting anything new, we're just losing that utility that made the mega actually sometimes worth choosing over a baddon or rokh or whatever other brawling BS you want to use.


That's the thing - you can now supertank it in a brawl if you want to, fit it for a larger damage envelope in gangs, give it a real resist profile, or even build it competitively for fleets.

It gained so much, and lost so little. The fact it can still do the one dimensional blaster brawler fit while opening up all these new paths is a huge boost, and there is still a blaster brawler with a utility high - which can either fit a real buffer tank or even go triple rep active.

Gallente gained far, far more options than they ever had before.
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
#1642 - 2013-04-11 20:34:36 UTC
Julius Foederatus wrote:


This tracks the way low sec megas usually get fit these days. But the new problem we have with the current iteration is that we get the same amount of tank we had before, but we have to have that third mag stab just to get to the dps levels of the current mega because of the drone bay nerf, all the while sacrificing that extra high slot for a neut or whatever else you want to throw in there. So really we aren't getting anything new, we're just losing that utility that made the mega actually sometimes worth choosing over a baddon or rokh or whatever other brawling BS you want to use.


That's the point. If the megas work right now they wouldn't be needed to rebalance them. And the issue is that, right now, they don't work. We need speed bonus and change the philosophy to adapt to it.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp
Capn Jack
Shadow Vanguard.
#1643 - 2013-04-11 20:42:02 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

I think if at all possible, we'd like to keep the armor rep bonus on the Hyperion. Its just too late in the ship line to toss out Gallente's signature tank bonus, despite the fact that many of you might want us to.

We are willing to consider many of the suggestions so far. Rolling another bonus into the rep bonus (like rep cap use) could be possible, changing the slot allocation, and adjusting fittings to give it more room are all on the table.

Thanks for the feedback, it won't be ignored.


Try this on for size... let us use the AAR's More like Shield tankers use ASB's maybe then we can actually fit a decent Active Tank to the ship Gallente ships... EG no cap use, and fit more than one module to the ship... add to this a increase of the ammount of Nanite repair pastes created by doubling the ammount from 10 to 20 could perhaps put the active armor tanked ships more in line...
Capn Jack
Shadow Vanguard.
#1644 - 2013-04-11 20:57:50 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Ah yes, the Armageddon vs Dominix.

Personally, I think the strength of the neut bonus is being overestimated somewhat. Its a very cool bonus, but I think the impact of the domi's added tracking and optimal will be similar in power level - we'll have to wait and see. Please keep in mind that you will lose damage on fits that used hybrids before, but the fit will still be available.

I do want to look at the dominix power grid and see if it we can't find a better balance with the Armageddon, by adjusting one or the other.

I think the drone bay thing is kind of odd. Up the ship line you have Amarr with more bay, less bandwidth and Gallente vice versa, but at the BS scale you really can't give a drone ship less than max bandwidth, and you don't gain much from having more bay than the dominix already does. I didn't want to lower the dominix bay, so we just set the armageddon equal.

One last thing to mention: Personally, I really think sentry drones should move some, even if its only to return to bay. We need to talk some more about this internally and look at ways it can actually be implemented, but a change to this effect could have a very positive impact on the Dominix and I don't think its a very unrealistic goal.


Since the damage application of Drones is no where near as capable as that of a turreted ship (MWD fly time of drones back and forth/vs being stuck standing still with Sentries, and still having to pull them in, every now and then) topped off with the need to field Drone Link Interfaces for sentries to be able to fire out far enough...
How about looking at letting the Dominix have the ability to field an additional drone as a role bonus? and upping the Armageddons Drone bay to 400 or 425 if you want the same progression of both the ships...

Or Perhaps adding a Role Bonus to Drone Control Range to these dedicated drone boats?
Wolfe Malar
Lone Wolves of Malar
#1645 - 2013-04-11 21:10:03 UTC
Gallente:

Hyperion
- In the combat turret line as expected.
- Would like it if high slot layout is kept consistent with the other combat turret line.
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.
- Would like a 100 bandwidth b/c it’s not a drone boat but is Gallente.

Megathron
- In the attack turret line as expected.
- Currently the attack turret line is all over the place on high slot layout. Not bad per say, but if so each needs to have something special. Would prefer if the number of turret and utility slots across the line were consistent.
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.
- Would like a 100 bandwidth b/c it’s not a drone boat but is Gallente.

Dominix
- In combat alt (drone) line, coin flip. The ship would be fit in well if put into either the combat or attack line.
- High slot layout is okay since the other combat drone boat has an energy warfare bonus at the moment, though a utility slot would be nice.
- Drone boat is drone boat :P
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.

I have expressed my thoughts on the overall battleship design in the "Introducing Myself....." thread and it contains more detailed reasons for my comments on the specific ships above:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2871021#post2871021
Acac Sunflyier
The Ascended Academy
#1646 - 2013-04-11 21:29:15 UTC
Dominix needs a bigger drone bay because, as of now, there is no way to repaid damaged drones in your drone bay without docking or getting rr-s out. Drones are their life and so a bigger drone bay is required.
Rukhsana Uxor
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1647 - 2013-04-11 21:51:07 UTC
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Gallente:
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.

Use what? i dont know what are you talking about :)

Anyone know what is "defenders" mean?
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1648 - 2013-04-11 21:53:47 UTC
Acac Sunflyier wrote:
Dominix needs a bigger drone bay because, as of now, there is no way to repaid damaged drones in your drone bay without docking or getting rr-s out. Drones are their life and so a bigger drone bay is required.

The Dominix needs a bigger drone bay because the Armageddon got the same amount of bandwidth, making the drone based DPS of the two ships identical.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
#1649 - 2013-04-11 21:53:51 UTC
Rukhsana Uxor wrote:
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Gallente:
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.

Use what? i dont know what are you talking about :)

Anyone know what is "defenders" mean?


I see what you did there...
http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/302/195/2e0.jpg

The missiles have lower DPS. I approve this message. We don't need defenders.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp
Wolfe Malar
Lone Wolves of Malar
#1650 - 2013-04-11 22:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Wolfe Malar
Phoenix Torp wrote:
Rukhsana Uxor wrote:
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Gallente:
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.

Use what? i dont know what are you talking about :)

Anyone know what is "defenders" mean?


I see what you did there...
http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/302/195/2e0.jpg

The missiles have lower DPS. I approve this message. We don't need defenders.



Then what is the purpose of putting only 1-2 missile hardpoints on a ship at all? Serious question. I understand defenders are considered bad atm. However, what is the point of even having that few missile hardpoints then? It doesn't make sense to replace turrets or fill utility highs with a launcher or two for dps? Hyperion with one torp launcher? Defenders are currently probably not the best use for the slot, but if the launcher slots are not for defenders then what is their purpose? Please inform me i really would like to know.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1651 - 2013-04-11 22:15:15 UTC
Acac Sunflyier wrote:
Dominix needs a bigger drone bay because, as of now, there is no way to repaid damaged drones in your drone bay without docking or getting rr-s out. Drones are their life and so a bigger drone bay is required.


375 m3 is enough for three full flights of sentries

what

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
#1652 - 2013-04-11 22:20:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Torp
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Phoenix Torp wrote:
Rukhsana Uxor wrote:
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Gallente:
- Would like a missile hardpoint or two in order to allow the use of defenders.

Use what? i dont know what are you talking about :)

Anyone know what is "defenders" mean?


I see what you did there...
http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/302/195/2e0.jpg

The missiles have lower DPS. I approve this message. We don't need defenders.



Then what is the purpose of putting only 1-2 missile hardpoints on a ship at all? Serious question. I understand defenders are considered bad atm. However, what is the point of even having that few missile hardpoints then? It doesn't make sense to replace turrets or fill utility highs with a launcher or two for dps? Hyperion with one torp launcher? Defenders are currently probably not the best use for the slot, but if the launcher slots are not for defenders then what is their purpose? Please inform me i really would like to know.


Ok. Will adapt my answer. Defenders are for sniper setups, like the Rokh. The Gallente (or at least the Mega, the Hype can be another matter) boats were not made to fit defenders, as they are more adapted to short-range fittings. Even having a missile boat hitting you so near (your optimal), you will deal more damage than him. And the approach to fit Rage Torpedoes need added modules that low his tank. That's the reason why you don't need defenders in the Mega. The other two can be put in consideration, but not the Mega. EDIT: And, in addition, as you have said, "are considered bad atm", as his performance is ridiculous. When they fix them, maybe.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp
Ninavask
Alexylva Paradox
#1653 - 2013-04-11 22:46:21 UTC
To Elaborate on my complaints from earlier.

The way I see it the Hyperion should be the dedicated gunship, the Megathron should be the middle ground between gunship and drone boat, with a bit of a leaning towards guns.

The Hyperion should be less durable then the mega and dominix but capable of dishing out intense amounts of pain with eight guns, both usable as a blaster and as a sniper platform. Think a battleship that acts like a heavier battlecruiser.

The Megathron should have the thick tank, but good DPS of a mainstay battleship. Jack of most trades you could say. Able to take the damage and dish it right back out.

Dr. Ninavask Revan

Colonist

Alexylva Paradox

The views above are the opinions and beliefs of Dr. Ninavask and do in no way reflect on his employeers or associates at the time of posting.
Wolfe Malar
Lone Wolves of Malar
#1654 - 2013-04-11 22:48:22 UTC
Phoenix Torp wrote:

*snip*

Ok. Will adapt my answer. Defenders are for sniper setups, like the Rokh. The Gallente (or at least the Mega, the Hype can be another matter) boats were not made to fit defenders, as they are more adapted to short-range fittings. Even having a missile boat hitting you so near (your optimal), you will deal more damage than him. And the approach to fit Rage Torpedoes need added modules that low his tank. That's the reason why you don't need defenders in the Mega. The other two can be put in consideration, but not the Mega. EDIT: And, in addition, as you have said, "are considered bad atm", as his performance is ridiculous. When they fix them, maybe.


That makes sense and is all true. I would probably never put them on close range set ups for the exact points you have made. However, I am of the opinion that the option should be there. Many ships have extra hardpoints that are far from the optimal use of the ship and almost never used. It just nice that the option exist. Often its just for the luls, but every so often they can find a use.
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
#1655 - 2013-04-11 22:55:19 UTC
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Phoenix Torp wrote:

*snip*

Ok. Will adapt my answer. Defenders are for sniper setups, like the Rokh. The Gallente (or at least the Mega, the Hype can be another matter) boats were not made to fit defenders, as they are more adapted to short-range fittings. Even having a missile boat hitting you so near (your optimal), you will deal more damage than him. And the approach to fit Rage Torpedoes need added modules that low his tank. That's the reason why you don't need defenders in the Mega. The other two can be put in consideration, but not the Mega. EDIT: And, in addition, as you have said, "are considered bad atm", as his performance is ridiculous. When they fix them, maybe.


That makes sense and is all true. I would probably never put them on close range set ups for the exact points you have made. However, I am of the opinion that the option should be there. Many ships have extra hardpoints that are far from the optimal use of the ship and almost never used. It just nice that the option exist. Often its just for the luls, but every so often they can find a use.


I would argue for that If I would think that the fitting changes aren't nice. But, to be honest, I think we don't need to change it from the exact point it is. If, doing combat, I see that has a lack of something that can be solved with a utility high slot (maybe for defenders, maybe for neuts/nos, maybe for drone modules), I would say it, but for the actual state of things I think not. I would keep the Mega the state it has now in the OP. To add a utility high slot would be a combat ship and not an attack ship. And that would convert it in the new overpowered BS, that leads to problems all we know.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp
Derath Ellecon
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1656 - 2013-04-11 23:15:16 UTC
Andski wrote:
Acac Sunflyier wrote:
Dominix needs a bigger drone bay because, as of now, there is no way to repaid damaged drones in your drone bay without docking or getting rr-s out. Drones are their life and so a bigger drone bay is required.


375 m3 is enough for three full flights of sentries

what


A friggin Gila has a bigge drone bay.

What.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1657 - 2013-04-11 23:24:31 UTC
Derath Ellecon wrote:
A friggin Gila has a bigge drone bay.

What.


three full flights of sentries and a flight of warriors

what a difference

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Wolfe Malar
Lone Wolves of Malar
#1658 - 2013-04-11 23:27:54 UTC
Phoenix Torp wrote:

*snip*

I would argue for that If I would think that the fitting changes aren't nice. But, to be honest, I think we don't need to change it from the exact point it is. If, doing combat, I see that has a lack of something that can be solved with a utility high slot (maybe for defenders, maybe for neuts/nos, maybe for drone modules), I would say it, but for the actual state of things I think not. I would keep the Mega the state it has now in the OP. To add a utility high slot would be a combat ship and not an attack ship. And that would convert it in the new overpowered BS, that leads to problems all we know.


I'm not proposing a utility high be added to anything, just a missile hardpoint. 7 high, 7 turret, 1-2 missile, 0 utility high

Gallente currently is the only combat turret ship with a utility high (Hyperion). Other ships have a limited (not equal) set of alternate hardpoints such as the Rohk which has no utility slots, and the Typhoon and Tempest which are attack ships.
Julius Foederatus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1659 - 2013-04-11 23:27:59 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Julius Foederatus wrote:

This tracks the way low sec megas usually get fit these days. But the new problem we have with the current iteration is that we get the same amount of tank we had before, but we have to have that third mag stab just to get to the dps levels of the current mega because of the drone bay nerf, all the while sacrificing that extra high slot for a neut or whatever else you want to throw in there. So really we aren't getting anything new, we're just losing that utility that made the mega actually sometimes worth choosing over a baddon or rokh or whatever other brawling BS you want to use.


That's the thing - you can now supertank it in a brawl if you want to, fit it for a larger damage envelope in gangs, give it a real resist profile, or even build it competitively for fleets.

It gained so much, and lost so little. The fact it can still do the one dimensional blaster brawler fit while opening up all these new paths is a huge boost, and there is still a blaster brawler with a utility high - which can either fit a real buffer tank or even go triple rep active.

Gallente gained far, far more options than they ever had before.


Well no, not really. If we already have to use a mag stab to get it to the same dps that we have on the 7 low slot version now, then we would have about as much dps on the current mega if we simply used 1 mag stab and used the other slot for more resists. It loses too much in dps to make up for this new low slot, which will only be used to bring it back up to par with the current version, but without the utility high to help it.
Phoenix Torp
Almost Absolute
#1660 - 2013-04-11 23:36:39 UTC
Wolfe Malar wrote:
Phoenix Torp wrote:

*snip*

I would argue for that If I would think that the fitting changes aren't nice. But, to be honest, I think we don't need to change it from the exact point it is. If, doing combat, I see that has a lack of something that can be solved with a utility high slot (maybe for defenders, maybe for neuts/nos, maybe for drone modules), I would say it, but for the actual state of things I think not. I would keep the Mega the state it has now in the OP. To add a utility high slot would be a combat ship and not an attack ship. And that would convert it in the new overpowered BS, that leads to problems all we know.


I'm not proposing a utility high be added to anything, just a missile hardpoint. 7 high, 7 turret, 1-2 missile, 0 utility high

Gallente currently is the only combat turret ship with a utility high (Hyperion). Other ships have a limited (not equal) set of alternate hardpoints such as the Rohk which has no utility slots, and the Typhoon and Tempest which are attack ships.


See the next post to yours. We have problems to deal more damage than before (I don't agree with that as now we will have more effective dmg than before with the speed boost) and you are talking about drop one hybrid (or 2) to fit defenders. I think that it's not the matter. For that reason the Hyperion can fit 1 launcher (combat, so utility, and a defender slot is a utility slot, and not a DPS slot) and the Mega not (attack role). The matter that other combat / attack races can fit launchers it's not mandatory to say that the Mega also need 1-2 slots. And the Dominix is made to be versatile. In other case, should be a situation to think if the other attack ships for the other races need a defender launcher slot, but not to say that the Mega need them.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Phoenix_Torp