These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Pirate Faction Cruisers

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Koizumi Atsuchi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#561 - 2014-04-08 18:25:29 UTC
Longdrinks wrote:
having to fit a ACR to get back the lost pg = highly crippled


Wats the point in having to fit a fitting module to a ship for it to act as it supposed to be. Why would i want to sacrifice extra dps or DC just to make it work. Theres no point in introducing a new ship into a game with some broken mechanics built in it already. Remove a slot then, or add damage bonus, so fitting an ACR would not affect its abilities. Or just remove the ship entirely, if its such a struggle to fly it successfully. If this change gets added no one will fly cynas anymore.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#562 - 2014-04-08 18:27:37 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Wow thanks for keeping quiet substantial pwg nerf on vigilant while you save Cyna/Ashimmu !!! Gj Rise. Cynas should stay as good as they are and Ashimmu won't suffer with pwg since it won't fit one more med neut/nos at all.


CCP has this idea that 800mm plates are actually viable, I think.
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
Meta Reloaded
#563 - 2014-04-08 18:29:38 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Wow thanks for keeping quiet substantial pwg nerf on vigilant while you save Cyna/Ashimmu !!! Gj Rise. Cynas should stay as good as they are and Ashimmu won't suffer with pwg since it won't fit one more med neut/nos at all.


CCP has this idea that 800mm plates are actually viable, I think.

Mixed with an AAR, 800mm plates are indeed quite viable. Quit being such a bitter soul and open your mind.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#564 - 2014-04-08 18:29:58 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Wow thanks for keeping quiet substantial pwg nerf on vigilant while you save Cyna/Ashimmu !!! Gj Rise. Cynas should stay as good as they are and Ashimmu won't suffer with pwg since it won't fit one more med neut/nos at all.


CCP has this idea that 800mm plates are actually viable, I think.


mm.. 800's are not very good ... would be nice too have something like a 1200 plate as an effective inbetween

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
Naomi Anthar
#565 - 2014-04-08 18:34:42 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
Imagine if a drake with 2 invulns had better tank than any other ship in the game could get with any number of slots devoted to tank. Would that be a well balanced ship?

If serpentis had what the bonus intended (50% stronger webs) it wouldnt be an issue. But what they actually have is 500% web power.


It's long time since people simply closed eyes to how serpentis webs work. I'm just happy it got pwg nerf preventing neutrons along with mwd/1600 combo.

Sadly having 2 serpentis webs is WAY better than having 4 webs.

But hey i hear it is ok and is on par with bonuses like 7,5% tracking or so. Guess it must be true ;).

So yeah at the end of day i will take 150 pwg nerf. At least it will deal less dps.
Mehashi 'Kho
New Eden Motion Pictures
#566 - 2014-04-08 18:34:55 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Mehashi 'Kho wrote:

What is wrong with webs?

Almost every pvp ship has one, and outside of this thread I have never heard them referred to as overpowered.


they're too good, and kind of wreck the sig and speed vs tank thing that's supposed to be a big deal in eve. 90% webs allow anything to hit anything. with regular webs, you need to put in a bit more effort and use a few of them, possibly with painters as well. it should be obvious - the reason every ship has one is because they're really really good.

I always assumed it was more like damage controls.

You dont put a damage control on every ship because they are omg wtf op, you do it because it is the logical thing to do and although not necessarily the best, it's at least the most flexible use youll get out of a low slot. And on any ship that doesn't project damage beyond 20 km or track well under 10km, it is likewise just the sensible thing to do to use a web so you can apply your damage. It is not the best of anything, but the most likely to be useful.

I only really do solo and small fleet (<50) stuff myself, but I can't say webs have ever been an issue worth looking at.

I fear a 40+km curse neut than can't be kited more than an 18km 90% vigilant web. But I don't think either are unbalanced for the cost to bring them to the battle.

Yes some ships and their abilities are strong, but that is the variation that makes it interesting, and especially with the ludicrous cost of pirate cruisers the only reason they are worth the isk over the t1 base ship. Let us not race to the bottom, this is all getting boring enough without losing variation in fittings and flying styles. All this homogenising is removing flavour.

If you reduce the web bonused ships, they lose their niche as range dictation which being hybrid boats is the only thing keeping them viable for their cost. Then they are just like any other ship but unable to apply their dps properly, a vigi at 20km+ is an expensive paperweight.

And why do we always get dropped on by you guys with sacrileges, t3s, absolutions etc? Surely if they were so OP you should be dropping vindi and vigilant fleets on any passing t1 cruiser gang... maybe webs aren't that op after all?
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#567 - 2014-04-08 18:35:57 UTC
Sniper Smith wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
I disagree with this. Of course there will be an outcry when you propose to nerf someones favourite toy, but that shouldn't prevent you from making the right balance decision.

I feel a bit annoyed that experienced players would make an outcry for selfish reasons without the general balance of the game being taken into consideration. Throwing their toys out the pram just because they wont be able to insta kill frigates with dreadnoughts is quite pathetic.

Personally, webs are very strong, I think they should be bought down to a maximum of 50% strength for the T2 web. And it is simply bad mechanics that a single ship can effectively take the whole speed/transveral/positioning aspect of pvp out of the picture, and makes for a very boring experience.

Could say the same thing about you people.. OMG OP Serpentis Web ships that are for the most part RARELY seen in combat, and still only have an effective range of ~25km Overheated.. Bring something that can dictate range. Bring something with Ranged Weapons. Bring something with neuts. Bring Blood ships with Neuts and long range webs to dictate range.

There are many many counters to the 3 Serpentis ships. And this is above the fact that they aren't cheap, and are most always primary when seen on grid.

Maybe after this we can cry because Arty ships sometimes alpha us, so it's OP. Or now Angel ships will be able to outrun us so we can't catch em.. OP. OMG it Neuted me.. OP. I'm jammed.. OP..

It's not OP, it's you've had a bad experience, and don't know how/can't be bothered to think up/adjust tactics accordingly. That's not CCP's problem. That's yours. And as CCP has been nice enough to say several times now, including in this thread, it's not changing.

HTFU, or go make (yet another) thread to whine about the evil webs.

Thanks for the most petulant whiny post I've seen on the forums for while.

I know you like to use these to insta kill frigates with your dreadnoughts, but that doesn't mean the whole game should be balanced around you ok. Think about the bigger picture.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#568 - 2014-04-08 18:36:04 UTC
Kmelx wrote:
Sniper Smith wrote:
And as CCP has been nice enough to say several times now, including in this thread, it's not changing.


Actually no they haven't, Rise, Fozzie and Ytrrebium have all put forward or stated their agreement to the idea of nerfing 90% webs before, however, as Rise noted in his post, the last time it was mentioned in passing it spawned a forum threadnought full of ship toasting from people who wanted to continue abusing this OP bonus.


Yes it obviously couldn't be from people who think the serpentis ships add something unique to the game and could give a damn less about your gate camps

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#569 - 2014-04-08 18:46:40 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Sorry for the 5 instead of 4.5 typo. It will be 50% increase for all of them so 4.5 for the Cynabal.

When you say that you're also increasing acceleration, does that mean that you are decreasing how quickly they go into and out of their max AU/s warp speed, how quickly it can align then get into warp or both?

P.S. I like the idea quite a bit, but seeing something like carrying the same bonuses over from the dramial, dropping a gun and adding 2 launchers would be an ideal rebalance for the ship itself. I think you would see a lot more happy eggers if you focused on the ship's potential versatility with a 2nd high, and keeping the forming fitting, actually DECREASING the mass a little bit would help it to compete but not surpass its competitors. You don't have to respond to this part if you don't want to; more interested in the top half since that is what is likely going to be just applied.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#570 - 2014-04-08 18:47:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
Carmen Electra wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Internally we are a bit divided even though we all agree it's one of the game's most powerful bonuses. I want to try and leave it because unique points of power like this one, as long as they aren't oppressive, are more interesting than moving everything towards a middle ground.


I agree, I haven't made much use of serpentis web bonuses, but all the rage in this thread makes me want to go give it a try now. If ship features (in this case, web bonus) can't stand out in meaningful ways, then why bother with this balancing work in the first place? "Moving everything towards a middle ground" as you put it is what most games do, and reduces true variety to a mere illusion of variety.

Also, I'm a little unclear on where the Cynabal stands now. Giving it a warp speed bonus feels a big gimmicky. Gimmicky is fine as long as this token bonus isn't being used to justify a nerf elsewhere. If you're doing fleet warps, it'll be a moot point point 90% of the time. I can't say that warp speed comes up too often in our PvP postmortems. Ugh

The cynabal really doesn't need to be nerfed, at least no one here seems to think so. Is the idea is to just move it out of the spotlight a bit to give other ships a larger chunk of the mindshare?

If you don't see the benefit of effectively giving a ship the warp speed of the ship class below it, then you are doing it wrong.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#571 - 2014-04-08 18:48:11 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Wow thanks for keeping quiet substantial pwg nerf on vigilant while you save Cyna/Ashimmu !!! Gj Rise. Cynas should stay as good as they are and Ashimmu won't suffer with pwg since it won't fit one more med neut/nos at all.


Just as an aside, does anyone think that snarky/snide attitude really convinces p[people that the idea being proposed is valid? ie don't you understand that you hurt your own cause by doing that?

I swear, sometimes reading these posts reminds me of this scene (and the kitchen staff reminds me of what I imagine CCP does after reading these posts).
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#572 - 2014-04-08 18:49:13 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Sniper Smith wrote:
The missile pirate faction doesn't exist yet. There's Lasers, Projectiles, Drones x2, and Hybrids. Missile faction coming soon.. maybe. Minm+Caldari faction.

I was hoping it might be released to coincide with the Pirate rebalance...


Or that they'd leave the drone bays for guristas themselves intact, then focus on missiles for them...
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#573 - 2014-04-08 18:49:45 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Sorry for the 5 instead of 4.5 typo. It will be 50% increase for all of them so 4.5 for the Cynabal.

When you say that you're also increasing acceleration, does that mean that you are decreasing how quickly they go into and out of their max AU/s warp speed, how quickly it can align then get into warp or both?

P.S. I like the idea quite a bit, but seeing something like carrying the same bonuses over from the dramial, dropping a gun and adding 2 launchers would be an ideal rebalance for the ship itself. I think you would see a lot more happy eggers if you focused on the ship's potential versatility with a 2nd high, and keeping the forming fitting, actually DECREASING the mass a little bit would help it to compete but not surpass its competitors. You don't have to respond to this part if you don't want to; more interested in the top half since that is what is likely going to be just applied.


wouldn't it end up more minnie like than it already is??

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
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#574 - 2014-04-08 18:51:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Or that they'd leave the drone bays for guristas themselves intact, then focus on missiles for them...

I think it was obvious after the initial Pirate Frigates thread that these weren't going to be the Guristas ships we were looking for… Drones got nerfed in lieu of a mixed kinetic/thermal damage bonus. I suspect we all have a good idea of what the new Rattlesnake is going to look like, but I don't think anyone is going to be ecstatic about it.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#575 - 2014-04-08 18:51:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
gila dps numbers don't show flight time or orbit fail. while their drone paper dps is like assault frigs, along with their sig radius that is slightly larger and practical dps that is more like >100, you're getting T1 frigate performance. damage application is a long fall from instant damage sentries, which is usable with throwaway T1 sentries from gate-to-gate. the PVE application is going out the window, rise.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#576 - 2014-04-08 18:53:11 UTC
Liam Inkuras wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Wow thanks for keeping quiet substantial pwg nerf on vigilant while you save Cyna/Ashimmu !!! Gj Rise. Cynas should stay as good as they are and Ashimmu won't suffer with pwg since it won't fit one more med neut/nos at all.


CCP has this idea that 800mm plates are actually viable, I think.

Mixed with an AAR, 800mm plates are indeed quite viable. Quit being such a bitter soul and open your mind.

yeah? how many more seconds will a 800 and AAR live against 5 vexor navys? compared to 1600.

less i think

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Bertrand Butler
Cras es Noster
#577 - 2014-04-08 18:53:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Bertrand Butler
Really really dig the Gila changes CCP, it will be a monster after summer!! Especially if you take into account the speed changes coming to med drones.

12 medium drones out, 48 more in the bay, 7,5 effective launchers for thermal/kinetic and a resistance bonus..

WTB mDDE BPO...XD
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#578 - 2014-04-08 18:54:02 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Sorry for the 5 instead of 4.5 typo. It will be 50% increase for all of them so 4.5 for the Cynabal.

When you say that you're also increasing acceleration, does that mean that you are decreasing how quickly they go into and out of their max AU/s warp speed, how quickly it can align then get into warp or both?

P.S. I like the idea quite a bit, but seeing something like carrying the same bonuses over from the dramial, dropping a gun and adding 2 launchers would be an ideal rebalance for the ship itself. I think you would see a lot more happy eggers if you focused on the ship's potential versatility with a 2nd high, and keeping the forming fitting, actually DECREASING the mass a little bit would help it to compete but not surpass its competitors. You don't have to respond to this part if you don't want to; more interested in the top half since that is what is likely going to be just applied.


wouldn't it end up more minnie like than it already is??


"More minnie"? You wanna put lasers on it or something? It's good as a projectile boat. The only other cruiser with falloff and tracking bonuses is the Loki, so it's not "more minnie" if it helps take it away from being a worse vagabond without the tank bonus.
Koizumi Atsuchi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#579 - 2014-04-08 18:54:49 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Carmen Electra wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Internally we are a bit divided even though we all agree it's one of the game's most powerful bonuses. I want to try and leave it because unique points of power like this one, as long as they aren't oppressive, are more interesting than moving everything towards a middle ground.


I agree, I haven't made much use of serpentis web bonuses, but all the rage in this thread makes me want to go give it a try now. If ship features (in this case, web bonus) can't stand out in meaningful ways, then why bother with this balancing work in the first place? "Moving everything towards a middle ground" as you put it is what most games do, and reduces true variety to a mere illusion of variety.

Also, I'm a little unclear on where the Cynabal stands now. Giving it a warp speed bonus feels a big gimmicky. Gimmicky is fine as long as this token bonus isn't being used to justify a nerf elsewhere. If you're doing fleet warps, it'll be a moot point point 90% of the time. I can't say that warp speed comes up too often in our PvP postmortems. Ugh

The cynabal really doesn't need to be nerfed, at least no one here seems to think so. Is the idea is to just move it out of the spotlight a bit to give other ships a larger chunk of the mindshare?

If you don't see the benefit of effectively giving a ship the warp speed of the ship class below it, then you are doing it wrong.


Warping speed buff is great, but its a lame bonus. Lowering scan res and agility an giving more sig, these bonuses just contradict each other, how would you imagine ship ship to be used?
Iorga Eeta
Hekatonkheires Industries
#580 - 2014-04-08 18:59:52 UTC
nikon56 wrote:
just did a simulation,...

result:
http://hpics.li/a1593c4
in a nutshell: 788 DPS drone + missiles, 623dps drones only / 73k EHP

the drones just got crazy tank:
http://hpics.li/c9b3c01

and this is just with my skills, with no implants

with better missiles skills, a cpu implants and missiles implants.....well, this can't be good for the game


Hey,

Can you do the same thing for the new Augmented Valkyrie?