These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#1841 - 2014-05-02 20:10:21 UTC
ill still be flying the rattler. it still has tank and my 5 small drones will still do more damage to frigs because of my DDA's. so i still expect it to be a stronger mission ship than a kitey mordus ship with scram range.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1842 - 2014-05-02 20:16:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
KaDa en Bauldry wrote:
Still haven't seen the light on this one, specially with how you make it *truly* useless for PvE.

I fail to see how this is fundamentally any different from the proposed iteration of the Rattlesnake that CCP Rise has put forward - except that the new Rattlesnake will neither except at PvP or PvE, and most likely fall out of favor with players quickly. But insofar as I'd like to have a serious dialog about the Rattlesnake, lack of dev response to date would seem to indicate these features were set in stone long before ever being announced. CCP Rise does not have a good track record of actually listening to player input and feedback or following up with assurances to address shortfalls. I could cite recent examples but those who follow these dev announcements already know which ones I'm referring to.

Daichi Yamato wrote:
ill still be flying the rattler. it still has tank and my 5 small drones will still do more damage to frigs because of my DDA's. so i still expect it to be a stronger mission ship than a kitey mordus ship with scram range.

The Barghest is going to totally rock. It's black, after all. Twisted

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1843 - 2014-05-02 20:17:18 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Superdrones are unbalanced when you add too many of them.

The idea drops resistance to disruption for an increase in tank. 4 superdrone heavies is too much in the other direction, back to almost the original use of a standard drone bonus with heavies, but at double the damage.

Increasing it to 500%, leaving 50 bandwidth, but also having the bonus apply to the effects of Combat Utility drones would provide the focus on Ewar you want.

One Ewar drone would be the equivalent of 6---better than a full flight. You could in essence field one heavy and one web drone and each would be worth almost a full bonused flight. The combat utility drones are in need of a balance pass anyway, so this would be a good time to do that to make sure that this bonus didn't overpower them.

Sure, I'm not opposed to the 50mbit bandwidth and increased heavy drone bonus. The main idea was to give it an expanded EW role that's unique. A bonused target spectrum breaker could add a really interesting element since it renders Rattlesnakes immune (but only Rattlesnakes), so it would be conducive to small gang or even solo roams. CCP Rise has indicated the missile bonuses extend to rapid light launchers as well, so with some light ECM, a solid target breaker and some "Hero" drones (that's the term they're using) - the Rattlesnake would be quite an interesting ship for PvP.

Would I fly a ship like this in PvE or PvP? Absolutely - without question. You can tank it for missions and the target breaker adds an interesting twist against NPC rats. As for PvP, this thing could and should roam solo - and with an array of weapons (ECM, missiles, drones and target breaker) can probably hold its own against any battleship or a small opposing force of cruisers or frigates.
NPC rats seem to aquire targets near instantly, losing much of the novelty of breaking their locks with the spectrum breaker. Normal ECM is equally pointless the vast majority of the time compared to the benefit of fitting to help damage application. And still worse this makes the ship worse at range, likely reducing ranged DPS and application compared to bonused sentries.

Sure, you CAN use it for PvE, but I can't reasonably think of a situation where one would be the best option unless being bait for a PvP encounter.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#1844 - 2014-05-02 20:20:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
well except for when he re-looked at the rapid lights, and then made a slight change. Now rapid lights are more popular now than they were before they were made burst style weapons.

edit, and when the battleships went through tiericide he took player feedback and made alterations as well.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1845 - 2014-05-02 20:20:59 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
KaDa en Bauldry wrote:
Still haven't seen the light on this one, specially with how you make it *truly* useless for PvE.

I fail to see how this is fundamentally any different from the proposed iteration of the Rattlesnake that CCP Rise has put forward - except that the new Rattlesnake will neither except at PvP or PvE, and most likely fall out of favor with players quickly. But insofar as I'd like to have a serious dialog about the Rattlesnake, lack of dev response to date would seem to indicate these features were set in stone long before ever being announced. CCP Rise does not have a good track record of actually listening to player input and feedback or following up with assurances to address shortfalls. I could cite recent examples but those who follow these dev announcements already know which ones I'm referring to.


He has delivered the most balanced ship line up we have ever known.

The rattle he has offered is much better than anything anyone else has tried to come up with.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1846 - 2014-05-02 20:22:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
NPC rats seem to aquire targets near instantly, losing much of the novelty of breaking their locks with the spectrum breaker. Normal ECM is equally pointless the vast majority of the time compared to the benefit of fitting to help damage application. And still worse this makes the ship worse at range, likely reducing ranged DPS and application compared to bonused sentries.

Sure, you CAN use it for PvE, but I can't reasonably think of a situation where one would be the best option unless being bait for a PvP encounter.

It's entirely possible the EW bonuses might have less than ideal PvE application. Then again, the Rattlesnake is also picking up an 8th mid slot in my iteration - so the tank hasn't effectively changed, either. So the EW becomes an added bonus. Yeah, one less missile launcher - but it's going to be dropped anyway for a second DDA in missions. So the heavy drones get a bit more of a buff to make things interesting.

Bottom line is the Rattlesnake is losing all its long-range capability, and being the slowest battleship (the Nestor isn't a real battleship) it's not like it has a lot of agility to offset this. Machariels, rail Vindis and Nightmares will literally run circles around the Rattlesnake (in missions and otherwise).

baltec1 wrote:
The rattle he has offered is much better than anything anyone else has tried to come up with.

This is such a load of bullish*t. Next you'll try to convince us that a polished turd such as the Nestor is in fact not absolute crap.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
KaDa en Bauldry
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1847 - 2014-05-02 20:25:34 UTC  |  Edited by: KaDa en Bauldry
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
KaDa en Bauldry wrote:
Still haven't seen the light on this one, specially with how you make it *truly* useless for PvE.

I fail to see how this is fundamentally any different from the proposed iteration of the Rattlesnake that CCP Rise has put forward - except that the new Rattlesnake will neither except at PvP or PvE, and most likely fall out of favor with players quickly.

Since I use 95% of the time sentries with the Rattlesnake, and once I have too many frigates on me I just jump away and pop them with sentries like an egg (unless the 3min of the jump is not justified, that's the remaining 5% or less), the changes proposed by CCP Rise mean that...
  • I need to plan my jumps better because of the reduced drone range.
  • Need to seriously consider missile rigs, as they will do a lot more than the current "utility" damage.

    • While I don't fully like the changes (was hoping for a role bonus of the Marauder's LMJD, and no loss of bonused lights), I'm willing to give it a spin, might be better than what I have now!

    Taking the sentries away breaks it 100% for me, then I'd rather go with a ...Raven.

    Edit:
    Quote:
    Yeah, one less missile launcher - but it's going to be dropped anyway for a second DDA in missions.

    Nop.
    5 launchers, 80km drone range, around 60km on missiles before the next salvo launches, fits nicely together.

    ...
    Why am I agreeing with baltec1 again?!
    Grrr.

    Don't forget about ship insurance before undocking. Don't forget about copy-paste saving before posting.
    baltec1
    Bat Country
    Pandemic Horde
    #1848 - 2014-05-02 20:34:18 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:

    This is such a load of bullish*t. Next you'll try to convince us that a polished turd such as the Nestor is in fact not absolute crap.


    Its not. Its expensive but it does have its uses.

    The rattle in the OP is set to be one of the most adaptable ships isk can buy and a very tough nut to crack.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1849 - 2014-05-02 20:39:28 UTC
    baltec1 wrote:
    Its not. Its expensive but it does have its uses. The rattle in the OP is set to be one of the most adaptable ships isk can buy and a very tough nut to crack.

    Of course it does. One that ensures the CFC can acquire Nestors for less than anyone else and continue to manipulate the market to artificially inflate the price. Which tells anyone with half a brain what (or who) the real driving force behind the Nestor was… because it sure as hell wasn't your average player.

    I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1850 - 2014-05-02 20:40:52 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    NPC rats seem to aquire targets near instantly, losing much of the novelty of breaking their locks with the spectrum breaker. Normal ECM is equally pointless the vast majority of the time compared to the benefit of fitting to help damage application. And still worse this makes the ship worse at range, likely reducing ranged DPS and application compared to bonused sentries.

    Sure, you CAN use it for PvE, but I can't reasonably think of a situation where one would be the best option unless being bait for a PvP encounter.

    It's entirely possible the EW bonuses might have less than ideal PvE application. Then again, the Rattlesnake is also picking up an 8th mid slot in my iteration - so the tank hasn't effectively changed, either. So the EW becomes an added bonus. Yeah, one less missile launcher - but it's going to be dropped anyway for a second DDA in missions. So the heavy drones get a bit more of a buff to make things interesting.

    Bottom line is the Rattlesnake is losing all its long-range capability, and being the slowest battleship (the Nestor isn't a real battleship) it's not like it has a lot of agility to offset this. Machariels, rail Vindis and Nightmares will literally run circles around the Rattlesnake (in missions and otherwise).
    Personally no, I wasn't planning on dropping the 5th launcher for a DLA on my proposed fit sine I felt 82km was plenty of working range and the additional DPS from 0-83km was of greater benefit than the ability to use sentries at 83km+ on a ship that even with sentries doesn't lend itself to MJD strategies as well as alternatives.

    I do not agree that in the context of PvE the RS as proposed is range challenged since most encounters happen well within that 80km range. Furthermore making the ship even more range combat challenged while being slow as it is very much strikes me as being very backwards when trying to justify using it for PvE.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1851 - 2014-05-02 20:44:53 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    baltec1 wrote:
    Its not. Its expensive but it does have its uses. The rattle in the OP is set to be one of the most adaptable ships isk can buy and a very tough nut to crack.

    Of course it does. One that ensures the CFC can acquire Nestors for less than anyone else and continue to manipulate the market to artificially inflate the price. Which tells anyone with half a brain what (or who) the real driving force behind the Nestor was… because it sure as hell wasn't your average player.
    What? Who do you think the greatest supply of nestors is coming from? Even with it's horrid exchange rate I'd be willing to bet the majority still originate from highsec, meaning those suppliers would be setting the trends in pricing and I doubt those few that originate in null, whether via sanctuary LP or rogue drone drops, are wanting to undercut their wave of relative profit advantages they have.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1852 - 2014-05-02 20:47:15 UTC
    Fair enough. I've never been keen on the hybrid dual-weapon setups anyway, so I think something like the Mordu line is going to have more appeal towards my style of play.

    I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
    baltec1
    Bat Country
    Pandemic Horde
    #1853 - 2014-05-02 20:48:08 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    baltec1 wrote:
    Its not. Its expensive but it does have its uses. The rattle in the OP is set to be one of the most adaptable ships isk can buy and a very tough nut to crack.

    Of course it does. One that ensures the CFC can acquire Nestors for less than anyone else and continue to manipulate the market to artificially inflate the price. Which tells anyone with half a brain what (or who) the real driving force behind the Nestor was… because it sure as hell wasn't your average player.


    Grr Goons.
    KaDa en Bauldry
    Aliastra
    Gallente Federation
    #1854 - 2014-05-02 20:53:56 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Fair enough. I've never been keen on the hybrid dual-weapon setups anyway.

    Now on that, we can agree.
    All the modules required to make it work out nicely...
    Further from AFK than ever before on a drone ship.
    ...
    Might have been the purpose all along.

    Don't forget about ship insurance before undocking. Don't forget about copy-paste saving before posting.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1855 - 2014-05-02 20:58:25 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Fair enough. I've never been keen on the hybrid dual-weapon setups anyway, so I think something like the Mordu line is going to have more appeal towards my style of play.
    I agree on the split weapons thing. I think that is where the design fall on it's face. A balanced approach fails because in order to keep the ship from being OP both weapons have to be somewhat subpar compared to dedicated alternative while hoping that somehow the combination of the 2 makes up the difference.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1856 - 2014-05-02 21:11:24 UTC
    On the Barghest (Mordu's Legion battleship), it looks like it's going to feature 8 launchers and possibly a rapid heavy missile launcher specialization. This could just be for mockup purposes, but you can see the RHMLs featured prominently on the Barghest in this image.
    http://i.imgur.com/a5IoojA.jpg

    I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
    afkalt
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1857 - 2014-05-02 21:14:54 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
    Can I suggest that before people rain more hate on it; they actually try an active, aggressive rattlesnake today for a number of hours. Fit launchers, fit BCUs; try it. Provided you have the skills, you'll not be disappointed once you get into the rhythm of it.

    Then, after that, imagine her with 50% more missile DPS and another launcher.

    Split weapons aren't great, but on an active shield tanked ship that many lows are begging for it.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1858 - 2014-05-02 21:20:42 UTC
    Feels Rise and Fozzie are taunting us by making the Mordu reveal without numbers unless I'm missing another thread.
    Arthur Aihaken
    CODE.d
    #1859 - 2014-05-02 21:28:02 UTC
    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    Feels Rise and Fozzie are taunting us by making the Mordu reveal without numbers unless I'm missing another thread.

    Nope - probably next week along with some of the other stuff (new Venture, freighters…).

    I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #1860 - 2014-05-02 21:32:13 UTC
    Arthur Aihaken wrote:
    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    Feels Rise and Fozzie are taunting us by making the Mordu reveal without numbers unless I'm missing another thread.

    Nope - probably next week along with some of the other stuff (new Venture, freighters…).

    New venture (Prospect) is already up here.