These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Command Ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#881 - 2013-08-06 20:09:01 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:
Lasers seem pretty fine imo. You're going to be mainly flying these in a gang, just sit back a little and enjoy the extra damage projection you get over blasters and autocannons.

I wouldn't want the laser bonuses on the Absolution changed unless they were going to give it a role bonus for cap usage... Tracking would be kinda nice to set it aside from the Legion / Zealot mind.


lasers are far from fine
-cap usage is 3 times that of blasters if not more
- tracking is poor, up close especially
- amarr ships usually lack mids for control
- amarr ships lack speed to stay at range
- lasers can be neuted out and TD'ed easily and very effectively

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
bloodknight2
Revenu.Quebec
#882 - 2013-08-06 20:10:54 UTC
I was really hoping to see a third rigs (on all CS) and a fourth med slot on the abso =(
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#883 - 2013-08-06 20:13:24 UTC
bloodknight2 wrote:
I was really hoping to see a third rigs (on all CS) and a fourth med slot on the abso =(


mm.. well they should all have an 18th slot really there's no reason why navy should have the extra slot here..
yet you like at navy frigs to AF's there is 2 slots difference ... navy cruisers and HAC's have the same slots the inconsistency is irritating..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#884 - 2013-08-06 20:50:41 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Mr Floydy wrote:
Lasers seem pretty fine imo. You're going to be mainly flying these in a gang, just sit back a little and enjoy the extra damage projection you get over blasters and autocannons.

I wouldn't want the laser bonuses on the Absolution changed unless they were going to give it a role bonus for cap usage... Tracking would be kinda nice to set it aside from the Legion / Zealot mind.


lasers are far from fine
-cap usage is 3 times that of blasters if not more
- tracking is poor, up close especially
- amarr ships usually lack mids for control
- amarr ships lack speed to stay at range
- lasers can be neuted out and TD'ed easily and very effectively


None of these things (well, except TDs) matter if you're shooting from scorch range. Lasers are fantastic compared to, say, the **** that is ACs right now. On a range-boosted ship, my medium lasers do full DPS out to 30km without range mods, while ACs are down to half damage at 20km. Even at point blank the raw damage of ACs is worse, only their tracking is better.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#885 - 2013-08-06 20:56:37 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Mr Floydy wrote:
Lasers seem pretty fine imo. You're going to be mainly flying these in a gang, just sit back a little and enjoy the extra damage projection you get over blasters and autocannons.

I wouldn't want the laser bonuses on the Absolution changed unless they were going to give it a role bonus for cap usage... Tracking would be kinda nice to set it aside from the Legion / Zealot mind.


lasers are far from fine
-cap usage is 3 times that of blasters if not more
- tracking is poor, up close especially
- amarr ships usually lack mids for control
- amarr ships lack speed to stay at range
- lasers can be neuted out and TD'ed easily and very effectively


None of these things (well, except TDs) matter if you're shooting from scorch range. Lasers are fantastic compared to, say, the **** that is ACs right now. On a range-boosted ship, my medium lasers do full DPS out to 30km without range mods, while ACs are down to half damage at 20km. Even at point blank the raw damage of ACs is worse, only their tracking is better.


Thats the only thing pulse lasers do.

Lolscorch.

Every single ******* amarr ship relies entierly on ******* stupid ass lolscorch

Yes i'm ******* bitter about the ******** ass state of amarr sub BC t1's

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Marcus Harikari
#886 - 2013-08-06 21:02:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Harikari
lol so you add a bonus to the nighthawk which makes it nice but then you take away 1 launcher hardpoint? LOL? so for solo work, there is still almost no point to train for and buy the much more expensive nighthawk over the drake? Lol...mmmkay RollRollRoll

well at least it has higher resists and a bit more shield, but still meh
mine mi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#887 - 2013-08-06 21:42:12 UTC
mine mi wrote:
As I said before, I divide the ships command into two types, one for small fleets where every dps account and one for fleets where survival is the most important.

DPS comand ship

Absolution: No change
Nighthawk: No change
Astarte: No change
Sleipnir: No change

Tank comand ship

Damnation: No change

Vulture:
Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Shield Resistances
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
Command Ships skill bonuses:
1̶0̶%̶ ̶b̶o̶n̶u̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶M̶e̶d̶i̶u̶m̶ ̶H̶y̶b̶r̶i̶d̶ ̶T̶u̶r̶r̶e̶t̶ ̶o̶p̶t̶i̶m̶a̶l̶ ̶r̶a̶n̶g̶e̶ / change by / 10% bonus to all Shield hitpoints
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage (was link bonus)

Eos:
Gallente Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer effectiveness
10% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints (was 5% MHT damage)
Command Ships skill bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Heavy Drone tracking and microwarp velocity (was drone bay bonus)
7̶.̶5̶%̶ ̶b̶o̶n̶u̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶M̶e̶d̶i̶u̶m̶ ̶H̶y̶b̶r̶i̶d̶ ̶T̶u̶r̶r̶e̶t̶ ̶t̶r̶a̶c̶k̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶(̶w̶a̶s̶ ̶l̶i̶n̶k̶ ̶b̶o̶n̶u̶s̶)̶ / change by / 10% bonus to all Armor hitpoints

Claymore:
Minmatar Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile rate of fire (was MPT RoF)
7.5% bonus to shield boosting amount
Command Ships skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile rate of fire (was link bonus)
5̶%̶ ̶b̶o̶n̶u̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶H̶e̶a̶v̶y̶ ̶M̶i̶s̶s̶i̶l̶e̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶H̶e̶a̶v̶y̶ ̶A̶s̶s̶a̶u̶l̶t̶ ̶M̶i̶s̶s̶i̶l̶e̶ ̶e̶x̶p̶l̶o̶s̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶v̶e̶l̶o̶c̶i̶t̶y̶ ̶(̶w̶a̶s̶ ̶M̶P̶T̶ ̶t̶r̶a̶c̶k̶i̶n̶g̶)̶ / change by / 10% bonus to all Shield hitpoints

Forgive me, but I have must insist, this is the correct way
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#888 - 2013-08-06 21:48:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Floydy
Have a +1 on that above post. I'd be happy with that :)
Extra buffer on the Claymore/Eos. Without losing the active bonuses, matches the Damnation.
Doesn't ruin any of the good things about any of the current field command ships. Thumbs up :)

Harvey James wrote:
lasers are far from fine
-cap usage is 3 times that of blasters if not more
- tracking is poor, up close especially
- amarr ships usually lack mids for control
- amarr ships lack speed to stay at range
- lasers can be neuted out and TD'ed easily and very effectively


I'll point out Lasers are my favourite weapon by some way. I'm not suggesting they are perfect, but I'd laugh hysterically if they got a huge buff to cap usage, tracking or range. I'd like this game to be balanced, so here you go:

1) Cap bonus, Like I said, I wouldn't want to lose the cap bonus for the lasers without getting a role bonus to cover this. The use a lot of cap, deal with it. You don't need to carry a tonne of ammo and wait for reloads. Balance.

2) Tracking is perfectly good enough if you fight at optimal. Ofcourse they track worse than blasters/autocannons. Thing is, they can actually track similar sized targets at their optimal range unlike blasters and acs.

3/4) Yes this is true, it's a pain if solo. It's less of an issue in many fleet comps, can't have everything.

5) So can blasters, blaster ships also tend to have a smaller cap reserve than Amarr ships, they're also less regularly seen with a booster to make up for this. TD is effective against all guns.

Next please.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#889 - 2013-08-06 22:05:20 UTC
I think pulse lasers need to worry far more about the new beam lasers stepping on their toes, not blasters and ACs....

As for the abso... I'd much rather see it at 11 relative turrets as it's got far less range than the legion/zealot, is slower with a larger sig (less fleet level tank even with the new full t2 resistance) and aligns much slower... Yes, the abso does currently do more dps than the legion/zealot, however I don't think it's enough.
Varesk
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#890 - 2013-08-06 22:21:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Some good points, although I'm curious about why you didn't post them with your main. I think you know that I have plenty of respect for your opinions.

Wing command bonuses from fleet is something that I 100% want to get fixed, although there are a few complications that mean I can't promise a specific timeline for it yet.

Command processors are also something that I agree have a lot of problems, not least of which is the big imbalance it created between armor and shield booster ships.


Its seems pretty pointless to rebalance ships when there are issues with the modules,bugs with bonuses or the imbalance of armor and shield boosting ships. Why not fix these problems before you continue to make changes?
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#891 - 2013-08-06 23:25:29 UTC
Mr Floydy wrote:
Lasers seem pretty fine imo. You're going to be mainly flying these in a gang, just sit back a little and enjoy the extra damage projection you get over blasters and autocannons.

I wouldn't want the laser bonuses on the Absolution changed unless they were going to give it a role bonus for cap usage... Tracking would be kinda nice to set it aside from the Legion / Zealot mind.

When they added drones to the Proph and all the other weird ****, all the indicators pointed towards homogenization and I pleaded with them to introduce racial role bonuses to at least keep up the illusion of variety.
Obvious/perfect choice for Amarr is a +50% on all cap related internal mods (excl. nos/neut/inject) meaning useless mods (in PvP) like relays and batteries suddenly becomes viable.
Mr Floydy wrote:
...Next please.

Them thar be fightin' words!

1. The short reload is a red herring/curse and I actually think a 5s one is better .. first you only ever really use one ammo (you have one guess) extensively and when you do use the short reload to get NMF in there you have a ~25% chance of one gun in a stack not loading preventing the entire stack from firing.
Ammo costs are still the same and it is not as if one saves cargo when injecting is pretty much mandatory now that more and more hulls have lost the cap bonus without being appropriately compensated in raw stats and everyone else are packing neuts.
2. Optimal is incredibly hard to maintain when everything you encounter is faster than you, is spamming TD's and when you have no mids to alleviate much of anything optimal related .. guess one could eat into the tank for some extra oomph, but since the tank is in most cases the saving grace of laser boats ... Smile
3/4. But why is it only Amarr that must suffer that disease? There are numerous ways to balance out more mobility and mids even for laser boats .. mobility/mid deficiency is irrelevant in numbers but crippling to the point of going elsewhere in small gangs/solo.
5. TD's hit laser boats a lot harder as you don't have speed/mids to regain range once the enemy closes with you heating up empty space and you don't have the tracking/fight-control/drones to survive with an enemy close in.
Activation cost of lasers is so much higher than blasters ditto that you will be gunless far sooner and for much longer .. cap reservoirs have almost been normalized with tiericide, Harb (laser cap bonus) vs Brute has a whopping 4% difference and Maller (no laser cap bonus!) vs Thorax has a staggering 3.5% difference.

As you said .. next please Big smile

On topic (AMARR!):
Damnation needs to be able to vastly out-dps the Sacrilege when going balls out (being a brick is not a damn virtue), and a sixth gun or a fourth mid (take it from the highs) needs to added to the Absolution
Eldrith Jhandar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#892 - 2013-08-06 23:50:36 UTC
tl;dr - step in the right direction, but not enough...

as most have pointed out these changes seem rather... underwhelming, although they are a step in the right direction for sure.
damnation seems meh
nighthawk seems meh (troll ship apparently?) 5 mid 5 low?
and one of the few i've been following (the eos) seems quite meh)
you had something going with the sleipnir's old slot count, but instead of carrying the extra slot over you nerf the sleip/claymore slot layout, you need to put that slot back onto all of the CS's
and i dont like the current slot layout of the eos, yes its a drone boat so -1 compared to all of the other ships makes sense, but not when you have 4 unbonused guns, just tracking? (lol)
the 7.5% tracking to heavy drones is interesting, and unique... i like it, but 250 drone bay? needs much more, especially when you are trying to get people to use heavy drones, a cruiser (ishtar) shouldnt have 125m^3 more than a battlecruiser...

all of the ships seem lacking in overall DPS, they need a bit more, even if you destroy your tank for dps, 905 dps and 617 tank (eos) is quite hilariously.... bad... and this seems to be a general trend... these ships are slow and large... they cant effectively kite against much, so they need to have an actual tank, and a good amount of dps while tanking halfway effectively

give all of the commandships the +1 slot they deserve
give the eos more dronebay, and a better 4th bonus
something like 7.5% MHT tracking and damage would be much better, and make it worth not having the extra slot the other CS's have
or roll the tracking of MHT into the heavy drone tracking (weird yes) and add a +10% armor bonus (still not worth -1 slot tho for being a drone ship)

a 7.5% MHT tracking/damage bonus for its 4th bonus, 6/4/7 eos with 375 dronebay would be much better, and worth using.
and because of the split weapon systems, you wouldnt get a silly 1500 dps ganker on roids, with 3 drone damage mods, only 1074dps and 617 tank...
heck, the eos is an active tanker, it needs a second cap booster to be effective, a 6/5/7 slot layout might be a bit too much, but maybe not...

most ships that need help with tank should get a midslot for shield tankers or lowslot for armor tankers, excluding the damnation which already has a very nice tank, give it a 5th mid and change its velocity bonus to damage bonus, or give it an extra high and missile turret

but why are you bringing t2 bc's down in slot layout? t1 -> t2 cruisers give you +1 slot
t1 -> t2 frigs give you +2 slots...
t1 bc -> t2 bc should give you +1 slot, its ridiculous not to...
Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#893 - 2013-08-07 00:58:37 UTC
Marcus Harikari wrote:
lol so you add a bonus to the nighthawk which makes it nice but then you take away 1 launcher hardpoint? LOL? so for solo work, there is still almost no point to train for and buy the much more expensive nighthawk over the drake? Lol...mmmkay RollRollRoll

well at least it has higher resists and a bit more shield, but still meh

6 launchers with 5%/level bonus is the same as 5 launchers with 10%/level bonus at BC 5, which is required to fly the ship anyway. It just means you have less ammo usage and another utility high.

That said, the mid/low slots on the nighthawk are silly, it should be 6/4, and as it's currently written there's very little reason to use a Nighthawk instead of a Claymore.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#894 - 2013-08-07 09:31:50 UTC
Nighhawk looks terrible.

It needs 6 mids and 4 lows and +250 grid at least to make it a viable choice over the other missile command the Claymore.

Looking at the 2 at the moment

NH has a less useful kin only damage bonus bonus.
33% less grid for only 5% more cpu
can only field 5 light drones versus meds
its slower , less agile
loses a useful mid to gain a worthless low.
It has less desirable gang bonuses.

Looking at the 2 and being able to fly both I can not find a single reason why I would choose a NH over a Clay.
Sigras
Conglomo
#895 - 2013-08-07 09:52:31 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Thats the only thing pulse lasers do.

Lolscorch.

Every single ******* amarr ship relies entierly on ******* stupid ass lolscorch

Yes i'm ******* bitter about the ******** ass state of amarr sub BC t1's

thats like complaining that the only thing artys do is "lolalpha"

Who the heck cares if you can only do one thing, as long as that one thing is super useful.

In fact, thats what you want! I'll take a ship thats super good at one thing over a ship that does a lot of things kinda ok any day.

The real problem is that you people fail epically at staying on topic because laser balance != command ship balance.
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#896 - 2013-08-07 13:09:52 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Command processors are also something that I agree have a lot of problems, not least of which is the big imbalance it created between armor and shield booster ships.



move to a rig away from the mid slot?
sten mattson
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#897 - 2013-08-07 14:40:08 UTC
The abso needs a fourth mid! 3mids is fine and dandy on an omen but this is an effin command ship!!

IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#898 - 2013-08-07 14:41:34 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
It's literally the Obama Care of Eve the way the push through this crap without any thought.


Cool

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#899 - 2013-08-07 14:41:57 UTC
....and caught up with this thread.

Updates based on your feedback coming very soon.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Shpenat
Ironman Inc.
Transgress
#900 - 2013-08-07 14:43:06 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
....and caught up with this thread.

Updates based on your feedback coming very soon.


Great to hear. You are doing superb job.