These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Ships that suck, what ship would you change?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Merovee
Gorthaur Legion
Imperium Mordor
#61 - 2011-12-12 06:19:27 UTC
Thgil Goldcore wrote:
Shuttles.... No weapons! WTF!

ok, likely E-war frigs. some are more useful than others, but they still are never used.



Shuttles: W20 on autopilot would be nice for them. I'll fly them again.Blink

Empire, the next new world order.
Xercodo
Cruor Angelicus
#62 - 2011-12-12 06:20:56 UTC
Olleybear wrote:
I'm probably not going to be popular by saying this:

Nerf all Battlecruisers.

Everywhere you look people are flying battlecruisers. Specifically the Tier 2 variants. Battlecruisers shouldnt be passive tanking like a Tier 1 battleship, or better when it comes to the drake, and putting out nearly as good DPS across a wider range of targets.

Nerfing battlecruisers will make other ship classes a bit more viable and worthwhile to fly. For instance, battleships were much more popular before the Tier 2 battlecruisers came out, as were hacs.

When you go out on a roam, either solo or in gang, wouldn't you like to see and engage something different than battlecruisers? I sure would.


Compare a tempest to a hurricane and you'll see this glaring you in the face.

But i don't think nerfing BCs is the solution, i think buffing BSes is. Getting 1000 DPS with only a couple damage mods should be the norm instead of having to cram 3 or 4 on while also using T2 ammo and overheating. This will make seeing a BS actually scary... especially when you get webbed to take full damage.

And probably give a few key ships a armor and shield EHP buff.

We also need a new anti-BS platform to counter this like T2 teir 3 BSes. They will have weapons tuned specifically for killing BSes and will be very vulnerable to the new teir 3 BCs.

To ensure that they don't one shot smaller things at range maybe make them all missile boats. Khanid Abby, Roden Hyperion, Boundless Creation Maelstrom, and Kaalakiota Rokh.

(Black and blue abby, Dark red and gunmetal hyperion, ash and molten orange maelstrom, and black adn red rokh)

The Drake is a Lie
Olleybear
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#63 - 2011-12-12 07:06:40 UTC
Xercodo wrote:
Olleybear wrote:


Battlecruisers shouldnt be passive tanking like a Tier 1 battleship, or better when it comes to the drake, and putting out nearly as good DPS across a wider range of targets.



Compare a tempest to a hurricane and you'll see this glaring you in the face.




I bolded the part of my post you missed. Tempest is a Tier 2 battleship.

When it comes to PvP, I am like a chiwawa hanging from a grizzley bears pair of wrinklies for dear life.
Headerman
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#64 - 2011-12-12 08:04:21 UTC
I think removing all tiers is pretty silly, could you imagine a Typhoon with the PG of a Mael?

Australian Fanfest Event https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=90062
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#65 - 2011-12-12 08:29:47 UTC
Olleybear wrote:
I'm probably not going to be popular by saying this:

Nerf all Battlecruisers.

Everywhere you look people are flying battlecruisers. Specifically the Tier 2 variants. Battlecruisers shouldnt be passive tanking like a Tier 1 battleship, or better when it comes to the drake, and putting out nearly as good DPS across a wider range of targets.

Nerfing battlecruisers will make other ship classes a bit more viable and worthwhile to fly. For instance, battleships were much more popular before the Tier 2 battlecruisers came out, as were hacs.

When you go out on a roam, either solo or in gang, wouldn't you like to see and engage something different than battlecruisers? I sure would.


I think the answer may be in the fact that the battlecruiser gets the luxury of using the cruiser sized rigs while other ship classes, while rigged with t1 rigs, increase the value of the total cost dramatically compared to what rigs do to a battlecruiser.

Would love if there was a graph genius out there that could show a nice visual comparison of all T1 ship sizes before and after they have T1 rigs and we can see what percentage the rigs represent in the total cost.
Ciar Meara
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#66 - 2011-12-12 08:31:31 UTC
Retribution: Only one med slot
Coercer: Only one med slot

- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#67 - 2011-12-12 08:41:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
All amarr ships with 1 mid slot need fixing. They should either be raging machines of death to compensate the huge drawback of only one mid slot or just get one more midslot. Even having only two mids is already a drawback that's not fully compensated for by having an extra low slot.

All amarr ships and subsystems whose only weapon bonus is -50% laser cap usage need fixing (Punisher, Maller, Prophecy, Legion subsystem).

EAFs need to have more EHP and maybe have smaller sig radius.

Tier 2 Battlecruisers are too good.

AFs still need *something*.

The tier system is marginalizing many ships that would otherwise be flown. Some lower tier ships succeed despite the tier system, but as a whole the system is just outdated and no longer needed.
Schnoo
The Schnoo
#68 - 2011-12-12 09:10:14 UTC
Xenial Jesse Taalo wrote:
I don't think the Coercer should get more than 1 slot. Yeah, it's terrible and such, but it's there for the variety of what that brings even if it is not a common one. More importantly, destroyers are destroyers - no boundaries to cross training them. No-one is stuck with a Coercer, so let it remain a kooky choice in my opinion.

The Retribution on the other hand... tough one. I would like to argue the same way - that it provides variety - but this time there are players who are really shafted without an alternative inside of a week's skill training, and that's before they even begin the cross-trained gunnery. Except, they get the Slicer. The Slicer is the saving grace of the Amarr frigs. So, dunno about the Retri.


"It's there for the variety of what that brings" - What the hell does it bring instead of just a useless ship?
Every time I see someone saying that it's okay that we have a clear imbalance (such as the ever popular minmatar ships), because you can just crosstrain, a clear lack of understanding is shown.
Games, EVE or otherwise (video or otherwise...) should have balance, much like the "rock, paper, scissors" game has it, but to a higher complexity and effect determined with choice rather than randomness. Otherwise valuable developer resources are wasted (one can argue that 1/2 of sub BS ships aren't being used), immersion is broken, and new players have a hard and long time getting into EVE when they realize they'd have to train additional months (to train minmatar) to be able to properly PVP (small gang/solo).
Jojo Jackson
Dead Red Eye
#69 - 2011-12-12 09:15:19 UTC
ghost st wrote:

The Prophecy is for situations where survivability is a little more important than dps.

Except, that you can make the Harb more tanky then the Prophecy.

First of I would remove the HOLE 10% cap/level for laser bullshit and gave all this ships a base cap/recharg equal to 50% cap usage for laser to compensate it.

Next step I would check which REAL bonus this ships need as second bonus. Not all might need the same bonus.
A Maller with 5% RoF might be cool, a Abaddon with 5% RoF will be OP ... just as excample.

Next I would switch the remote energy bonus from T1 suport cruiser to remote rep bonus. Maybe this ship might be used then.
And yes, I know the Gallente has the same bonus .. but who cares. Nothing wrong when SOME ships from different races are very simmilar. It's a game and all that count is playablity.

Why the hell can't I fitt capital repairs or shield booster on an Orca ... it's an CAPITAL ship!
Rixiu
PonyTek
#70 - 2011-12-12 09:21:58 UTC
Remove the tier system from frigs and cruisers making them all viable but while still being different. As it stands now the rupture is by far the best cruiser and the rifter the best frig, have them be the reference that all other cruisers and frig should be like.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#71 - 2011-12-12 09:36:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Jojo Jackson wrote:
The Prophecy is for situations where survivability is a little more important than dps.


The problem with the Prophecy and the Harbinger is that they both do the same thing in the same way: they're passive tanked laser platforms with a flight of drones. The Harbinger does this better than the Prophecy.

I disagree that the Prophecy is worth flying by the way, being good at taking damage is useless in this game if you can't dish it out as as well (and the Harbi does this better as I said). Nobody primaries a Prophecy, nobody is fooled by a bait Prophecy. To think this ship is worth flying is an illusion.
ghost st
Sua Sponte
#72 - 2011-12-12 09:41:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ghost st
Jojo Jackson wrote:
ghost st wrote:

The Prophecy is for situations where survivability is a little more important than dps.

Except, that you can make the Harb more tanky then the Prophecy.

First of I would remove the HOLE 10% cap/level for laser bullshit and gave all this ships a base cap/recharg equal to 50% cap usage for laser to compensate it.

Next step I would check which REAL bonus this ships need as second bonus. Not all might need the same bonus.
A Maller with 5% RoF might be cool, a Abaddon with 5% RoF will be OP ... just as excample.

Next I would switch the remote energy bonus from T1 suport cruiser to remote rep bonus. Maybe this ship might be used then.
And yes, I know the Gallente has the same bonus .. but who cares. Nothing wrong when SOME ships from different races are very simmilar. It's a game and all that count is playablity.


A ship with a bonus to tanking should be able to tank better than one without, why ply a prophecy at all when it a harb tanks the same, and has better dpsRoll

Anyhow, I also agree that the cap 'bonus' taking away a bonus for every laser boat needs to go.

Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Jojo Jackson wrote:
The Prophecy is for situations where survivability is a little more important than dps.


The problem with the Prophecy and the Harbinger is that they both do the same thing in the same way: they're passive tanked laser platforms with a flight of drones. The Harbinger does this better than the Prophecy.

I disagree that the Prophecy is worth flying by the way, being good at taking damage is useless in this game if you can't dish it out as as well (and the Harbi does this better as I said). Nobody primaries a Prophecy, nobody is fooled by a bait Prophecy. To think this ship is worth flying is an illusion.


Just because a ship doesnt do great dps doesnt make it useless. Look at the drakeP
mingetek
Brainless in Space
#73 - 2011-12-12 09:47:40 UTC
All amarr laser ships that have cap "bonus"

imo all amarr laser boats should have a automatic 50% cap reduction for lasers and one of the following bonuses. Tracking/optimal range/damage/armour resis.

aintm ade my mind up about the curse/pilgrim and sentinal. only thing i can think of is ZERo cap usage on neuts.. but thats way too op.

thats all amarr laser boats need to be truely uqual with matar/galante ships.
..
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#74 - 2011-12-12 09:53:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Xenial Jesse Taalo wrote:
The Malediction. It's like a set of self-contradictions. Range bonuses to scramblers but they give it rockets. Armour bonuses on an interceptor. A tackle interceptor specialty of holding a super long point that its targeting can't even reach. The only thing it did well was look good, but thanks to Crucible that's gone too.
Keep the rockets, ditch the armour bonuses. Give it something that makes sense and is interesting. Random suggestion: 10% reduction in webifier speed penalty per level. 5% increase in rocket range. Big buffs I admit, but it's not like it's going to arrive anywhere near overpowered, and those ideas would make it less of a contradiction of bonuses.


The Malediction is fine as it is. It can stand up to combat interceptors and will eat other tackler intys for lunch, that is what makes it unique. The only thing that could be improved is the low targeting range, but imo all interceptors need a bit higher targeting range.
Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2011-12-12 10:04:31 UTC
mingetek wrote:
All amarr laser ships that have cap "bonus"

imo all amarr laser boats should have a automatic 50% cap reduction for lasers and one of the following bonuses. Tracking/optimal range/damage/armour resis.

aintm ade my mind up about the curse/pilgrim and sentinal. only thing i can think of is ZERo cap usage on neuts.. but thats way too op.

thats all amarr laser boats need to be truely uqual with matar/galante ships.


Well if that comes, i am going to train large lasers... i already got hulls covered.
Professor Cranberry
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#76 - 2011-12-12 16:48:58 UTC
Imicus needs a new look , a bulker type ship sitting between the likes of an Itty V & frieghter, a mining barge/hulk type with a beefed up offensive/defensive capability

But for all ships the idea of modular slots, you buy the ship & it comes with X number of slots & you choose how many highs, mids, lows & rig you make out of the available slots before they become fixed, would make for more versatile ship set ups depending on what your upto. Just a thought.
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#77 - 2011-12-12 17:20:14 UTC
1. All Amarr Laser boats with a cap consumption bonus.

It's a remnant from times when lasers were conceptualized to heavily outshine any other weapon system and hence most Amarr ships wouldn't need another range/rof/damage bonus.

Since CCP obviously forgot about that (projectiles) in recent years, lasers should use less cap out of the box and the cap consumption bonus should be changed to something useful.

2. Gallente ships with an active tanking bonus - since active armor tanking isn't really an option outside pve under most circumstances, it should be changed to a resistance bonus, so active and passive tanks profit from it. 
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
#78 - 2011-12-12 17:21:59 UTC
MOST Tech 1 Cruisers need a look at but mostly for fitting space, especuly for the newer cruiser pilots who dont have maxed out fitting skills, and some cruiser do need a role change or just a more defined role.
David Grogan
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2011-12-12 18:47:14 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
Imicus, the hull that is.


also the helios needs a third high slot so i can fit a cloak, probe launcher and cyno gen

Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless you are from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs.
Dorian Tormak
RBON United
#80 - 2011-12-12 19:26:01 UTC
Well first of all, not that the Enyo sucks in any way IMO, but I would change the Enyo's optimal bonus to a falloff bonus. Yar, I would be so happy with that change!

Retribution/Ceorcer: give the more mid-slots, etc.

CRUOR: Fix this fail ship, why do I need a web bonus AND a neutralizer bonus?? So I can web AND neut my enemy frigate? Too bad it doesn't really work when you do only 100 DPS and your tank is sub-par... And the slot layout: hey, want a cap booster so you can actually utilize your neutralizer bonus? Too bad, you have a web bonus that you need to use your last mid-slot for! Completely fail logic with this ship.

INCURSUS: This is my favourite T1 frigate because fitted well it can be a beast, but it is actually hilarious how gimped this ship is. Compare it to a Rifter and you get: 1 less low slot, 1 less high slot, less EHP with just a DCU on both ships (WTF??), less PG and CPU, and blasters use way more PG/CPU than Autos. It's also slower than a Rifter. WOW that is fail. When I think about being able to kill Rifters in this ship I am genuinely surprised at myself.

That's it I guess for now, that's my thoughts on this subject

Holy Satanic Christ! This is a Goddamn Signature!