These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1061 - 2013-04-12 13:58:58 UTC
As I mentioned in my post all the way back in page 12 - this is a "Gimp the Amarr, Call it Improvements" thread.


They won't talk about Tachyon lasers as they know it points out every single flaw in their redesign situation. and I like how the moment I post, CCP Rise disappears for lunch :P

"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
Avald Midular
Doomheim
#1062 - 2013-04-12 14:00:20 UTC
Shinzhi Xadi wrote:
Notice how CCP Rise ignored every mention of Tachyon beam lasers.. The fact that no amarr battleship can use them without totally crippling the rest of its fit, yet other races battleships can use their largest weapon systems without major penalty.

Even with max skills and implants, T2 tachs won't fit on any of the new amarr bs without wasting slots for PG mods. Then of course there is the massive cap they burn up.


That's the new Amarr racial theme, they've given the armor thing to gallente with the the 8th slot and now a third of Amarr ships are missile, now the new theme is can't fit our own weapons anymore without PG mods and cap rechargers.

If you don't want to or can't use Pulse Scorch yet, the only progression path is

Oracle -> Navy Harbinger -> Paladin -> Nightmare

Wow that is expensive. This made it passed the meeting tables, and patch note revisions, really?
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1063 - 2013-04-12 14:00:38 UTC
Please swap the roles of the Apoc and Arma.

Arma should be the faster attack bs it has the hull which looks faster compared to a more solid looking apoc.
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1064 - 2013-04-12 14:05:55 UTC
Quote:
That's the new Amarr racial theme, they've given the armor thing to gallente with the the 8th slot and now a third of Amarr ships are missile, now the new theme is can't fit our own weapons anymore without PG mods and cap rechargers.


So the Amarr theme is what now exactly? Suddenly finding out that our Empress is infact a Xenomorph Queen with a ridiculously high disguise stat?

"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
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1065 - 2013-04-12 14:17:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Greywolf
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Can you comment on Amarr slot homogenization and why you don't feel the need to break out of 4 mids 7 lows or or make a single one of the platforms have 8 lows?


This is actually the thing I'm personally most unsatisfied with. Part of my goals through the rebalance was to create more slot variation overall in battleships, and one of the best previous examples of this was the 8/3/8 Geddon. We had some versions of the Apoc with 8 lows, but in the end this layout seemed to fit best with the bonuses we wanted to go with. I'm convinced that the current lineup looks the healthiest of all the options we considered, and I expect the Navy BS to fill some of the gaps that still exist.


There is an easy fix to this that many have proposed on this thread - Give the 8th low to the Abaddon.

Take 2 turrets out. Make it 6 highs (and 6 turrets) and a damage bonus equal to the %5 laser damage per level when @ Amarr BS level 5 (10% or something?). Then give it an 8th low.

This will give you the slot variation you're looking for that you're unsatisfied with AND help relieve the cap issues for the Abaddon by having it have less turrets to fire.

Why can't you do this? Please explain. It helps cap issues, makes slot variations among the Amarr BSs AND FITS as an Amarr laser/armor brick boat. Many of us are just so confused why Gallente is getting an 8th low when not a SINGLE Amarr BS does.
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1066 - 2013-04-12 14:19:38 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Nalha Saldana wrote:
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Being called Gallentean right after Gallente were saying we hate Gallente is pretty awesome.
You're right about the primary racial roles, but Amarr has been establishing a stronger drone representation throughout tiericide. Tormentor -> Dragoon -> Arbitrator -> Prophecy. And Khanid has always existed as a missile focused division of Amarr. I don't think we are straying far at all from Amarr offensive system organization with this battleship line.

What about old consistency?
Punisher > Maller>Abaddon
Executioner (yeah that is a bit far-fetched) > Omen > Armageddon
Crucifier > Dragoon > Arbitrator > New disruption battleship?

Punisher > Maller > Abaddon
Executioner > Omen > Apocalypse
Crucifier/Tormentor > Arbitrator > Armageddon
I don't see the problem here, it works fine.


Well and I can certainly see a few. P

Punisher > Maller > Abaddon - ok

Executioner > Omen > Apocalypse

sorry what?

Omen:
10% Medium Energy Turret cap use
5% to Medium Energy Turret Rate of Fire
Apoc:
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret optimal range
+7.5% Large Energy Turret tracking speed

It works what again now ? How is this consistent?

Crucifier/Tormentor > Arbitrator > Armageddon

Again, sorry what?
First of all. Tormentor, realy? Why?

And here we go:
Crucifier:
5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness
5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor optimal range
and it has 45 m^3 drone capacity and that is massive for a frig.

Arbitrator:
7.5% bonus to Tracking Disruptor effectiveness
10% bonus to drone hitpoints, damage and mining yield

And now we have GeDomi.
+10% to Drone damage and Hit Points
+10% Energy Neutralizer and Energy

and it is "attack" battleship not a "disruption" battleship

Where are you seeing consistency here?

So GedDomi is a new "disruption" battleship wannabe and probably needs a new hull.
And amarr "attack" ship lineup needs it old Armageddon back, without this energy neuting shenanigans.


The Omen and Apoc is in the same line because they are both Attack ships, they have increased speed and good ranged damage for their class.

Ok the tormentor have been redesigned since i last looked at it and it doesn't really fit there anymore.

Dont go blind on the bonuses themselves and rather look at how the ships are used, amarr drone boats are really good neut boats and the Geddon fills this role really nicely this way.

Maybe it should be renamed to disruption but the stats are good so thats just a name change.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1067 - 2013-04-12 14:26:54 UTC
Ruze wrote:
Cardano Firesnake wrote:
I am really concern about the cap regen.
Laser + Armor Repair is draining so much capacitor.
If you add the Propulsion, I hope these BS will have enough regen.
Of course it is a usual problem with Amarr ships...


As another pilot said, the balance of 'no cap for you' was due to how very overpowered lasers were back in the day. No ammo, extreme damage capabilities, and could fire as long as you had cap.

This mindset fell to the way-side when the nerfed lasers originally years ago. Then they added cap boosters since our penalty was now too high. It's just the way it's thought to be for Amarr. And now with overheating and crystals, we go through ammo too.

I've been left wondering ... Why is it still so important that Amarr can't keep their cap up running full mods?


^^^^ This, by alot, I want to see addressed.
Khaeros
Mardukan Military Industries
#1068 - 2013-04-12 14:34:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Khaeros
Armageddon, Khanid style

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+10% to Drone damage and Hit Points
+10% Tracking Disrupter effect

Slot layout: 6H(-2), 4M(+1), 8L(+-0); 5 launchers(+5) <- yep, no turrets at all
Fittings: 13500 PWG(-3000), 550 CPU(+65)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 6800(+1331) / 8500(+1859) / 8000(+1789)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second) : 6200(+887.5) / 1087s / 5.7
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 100(-5) / .13(+.002) / 105200000 / 18.96s (+.29)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 375(+250)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 110 / 7
Sensor strength: 21 Radar Sensor Strength (+4)
Signature radius: 450 (+80)[/quote]

Reasons behind this suggestion:

Neut range is too great a bonus on T1 non-faction ship. Changing it to TD bonus is staying within Khanid theme.
Turrets got tossed out, since with them this ship is just too versatile, an anathema to current "one fit - one role" design policy. Without turrets Khanidgeddon gets to be an armor/drone/missile/disruption ship.
8th Low slot is there since Khanid ships usually are tanky and without resist bonuses this is, in my opinion, the only way to simulate that. Plus Amarr should really have at least 1 BS with 8 lows.

Current (proposed) Dronegeddon is just too powerful and versatile. I might be able to accept it as it is, since I could slap some autocannons/arty on it and pretend I stole it from some Ammatar scum.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1069 - 2013-04-12 14:35:02 UTC
mm.. CCP if you are going to keep the geddon as a neut ship then it should become a disruption line ship and be changed to reflect this.

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#1070 - 2013-04-12 14:36:39 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
For those of you still concerned about the cap issues that Amarr will now face with both of its turret based options: we hear you. We are really caught here because a significant number of players find the cap bonus less exciting than a bonus like tracking. That said, its a really important bonus because of what it allows laser ships to do. We've been talking with the CSM, watching this thread, and doing experimenting of our own with the new ships internally to try and figure out how much of a problem it is. So far, we remain convinced that you will enjoy the Apoc more, on average, without the cap bonus.
I wish you'd just adjust lasers to be what you advertised--that is, the weapons themselves have innate bonuses to damage/tracking/etc. that makes them good on their own, and the cap bonus on the ship makes it easier for Amarr pilots to use them.

"Selling" one thing one day (i.e. "Lasers are good on their own with innate bonuses and we like the cap usage bonus") to a completely different stance the next day ("We think you'd like this bonus instead of cap usage, but nevermind about how they'll cost a inordinate amount of cap more...") is wrong. You guys (you and Fozzie) need to get your stuff together and stay on message, or, you know, you can deliver on what was advertised in the first place.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#1071 - 2013-04-12 14:40:44 UTC
Lasers aren't advertised as a high-tracking weapon, and nor should they be.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#1072 - 2013-04-12 14:44:46 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
Lasers aren't advertised as a high-tracking weapon, and nor should they be.



Beams are and have always been. beams have suepriro tracking to other logn range weapons. Compare mega beams to rails or arties. The difference is substantial.
Mr Hyde113
#1073 - 2013-04-12 14:49:12 UTC
Oh looks like we finally got some responses!

Looks like CCP Rise's posts boil down to this:

"Thank you for posting. We changed Gallente becuase the changes didn't fit with the race flavor, but this doesn't apply to you. I am redefining Amarr's racial flavor so my changes make sense and your complaints are invalid. I win. Bye"


Roll


I, along with most dedicated Amarr pilots, DID NOT WANT A 'NEW EXCITING (aka terribad) DIRECTION' FOR OUR RACE. Our direction (Lasers & Armour supplemented by drones) WAS FINE. We just wanted you to do some quality of life changes to let the ships fully complete their existing roles, not decide that Amarr is no longer Amarr.

If people wanted to fly a drone boat, TRAIN GALLENTE AND GET THE DOMINIX.

If people wanted a Neut boat, PUT 8 HEAVY NEUTS ON THE BATTLESHIP OF YOUR CHOICE.


Actually CCP, just leave us alone. Don't touch our ships at all. I would rather you leave us as we are, as actual Amarr ships, than 'enjoy' your 'upgrades'.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1074 - 2013-04-12 14:55:42 UTC
Arya Greywolf wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Can you comment on Amarr slot homogenization and why you don't feel the need to break out of 4 mids 7 lows or or make a single one of the platforms have 8 lows?


This is actually the thing I'm personally most unsatisfied with. Part of my goals through the rebalance was to create more slot variation overall in battleships, and one of the best previous examples of this was the 8/3/8 Geddon. We had some versions of the Apoc with 8 lows, but in the end this layout seemed to fit best with the bonuses we wanted to go with. I'm convinced that the current lineup looks the healthiest of all the options we considered, and I expect the Navy BS to fill some of the gaps that still exist.


There is an easy fix to this that many have proposed on this thread - Give the 8th low to the Abaddon.

Take 2 turrets out. Make it 6 highs (and 6 turrets) and a damage bonus equal to the %5 laser damage per level when @ Amarr BS level 5 (10% or something?). Then give it an 8th low.

This will give you the slot variation you're looking for that you're unsatisfied with AND help relieve the cap issues for the Abaddon by having it have less turrets to fire.

Why can't you do this? Please explain. It helps cap issues, makes slot variations among the Amarr BSs AND FITS as an Amarr laser/armor brick boat. Many of us are just so confused why Gallente is getting an 8th low when not a SINGLE Amarr BS does.

This is a good part of my point, as well as (as I've said repeatedly) giving the low skilled pilots a BS that they can still work with for missions.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1075 - 2013-04-12 14:59:36 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
For those of you still concerned about the cap issues that Amarr will now face with both of its turret based options: we hear you. We are really caught here because a significant number of players find the cap bonus less exciting than a bonus like tracking. That said, its a really important bonus because of what it allows laser ships to do. We've been talking with the CSM, watching this thread, and doing experimenting of our own with the new ships internally to try and figure out how much of a problem it is. So far, we remain convinced that you will enjoy the Apoc more, on average, without the cap bonus.
I wish you'd just adjust lasers to be what you advertised--that is, the weapons themselves have innate bonuses to damage/tracking/etc. that makes them good on their own, and the cap bonus on the ship makes it easier for Amarr pilots to use them.

"Selling" one thing one day (i.e. "Lasers are good on their own with innate bonuses and we like the cap usage bonus") to a completely different stance the next day ("We think you'd like this bonus instead of cap usage, but nevermind about how they'll cost a inordinate amount of cap more...") is wrong. You guys (you and Fozzie) need to get your stuff together and stay on message, or, you know, you can deliver on what was advertised in the first place.

They have adujsted the cap regen on the Apoc to reflect what it needs to be to be balanced compared to the old fit if you had Amarr BS V. And this works out fine for the cap draw on it, but you still need the high cap skills for the new fit, thus, this doesn't make it available to the lower skilled/newer pilots. Hence why I am proposing the Abaddon changes I am, since apparently they are dead set on not changing the Apoc anymore.
Nolove Trader
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1076 - 2013-04-12 15:02:47 UTC
8 low Abaddon? While keeping the resistance bonus? You are insane. Some estimates where this stats would put an Abba with Slaves and Damnation?
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#1077 - 2013-04-12 15:07:03 UTC


Neuting Geddons just sidelined Curses.

Cheaper, easier to insure, more performance.

Where I am.
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#1078 - 2013-04-12 15:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Flyinghotpocket
ok people stop talking about khanid they are t2 line of ships NOT t1,

this about t1 ships, NOT t2, if you want a khanid armaggedon, ask them to change the redeemer to khanid

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Fronkfurter McSheebleton
Horse Feathers
CAStabouts
#1079 - 2013-04-12 15:13:03 UTC
Meduza13 wrote:
And to people who say logistics its too strong compared to local tank - ofc it is strong, becouse you have dedicated ships repping other ships, not just 1-2 local reppers. Thats the whole idea of logistics, isnt it?


It's because remote reps from bonused hulls are a bit too powerful in general, not just compared to local tank.

thhief ghabmoef
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1080 - 2013-04-12 15:20:22 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
And why, pray tell, is that new "exciting" direction to Amarr even necessary?


Such a tone!

Despite the fact that clearly there are people who were happy with the Amarr battleships in their former state, overall there was a significant gap in use between apoc/geddon and most other battleships (the only BS used less was the hyperion).

I looked across as many different environments/metrics as possible and this was a consistent theme.

Hope that helps!



Well its more of a case taht battleships were almost not used at all for PVP outside huge fleet fights. And I think we neede dsome work to change THAT.. more than finding new strange sub roles. Grnated the geddon will find its usage in low scale PVP because its very powerful But a lot of the other battleships cannot hope to get used more.

He was comparing BS use, not BS use to other ship classes.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.