These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Let's Improve T1 Cruisers!

Author
Spork Witch
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2011-12-16 23:42:20 UTC
Jan'tor wrote:
The T1 ships on the skillplan that my alliance suggests to help out newbies are actually great at a lot of things.

Quote:
Want to learn how to fly logistics? ASK. CTA's are rarely 23/7 affairs, ask your goonmates to go into a belt and teach you about properly repping (honestly, it's not exactly rocket science: watch broadcast, right click person asking for reps, target, click module on, complain to CCP that logi's get screwed on killmails unless we split our attention and targets with sentries to get a cheese shot in for the KM).


I already went through the lessons on it that my alliance does for free (thank you, friends). In theory I already know how to fly a logistics, however I don't particularly enjoy the fact that I have to train support skills for a year before I can even get an idea of how it handles in fleets, and whether or not I actually want to do it. If I want to learn how to tackle in fleets, I have other options to practice with that aren't a major expense. If I want to learn how to fly logi in fleets, it's "you can maybe come along at logistics 4, but you should probably just wait for logi 5". If I want to learn how to fly a Broadsword, there isn't a t1 option to practice with, but it's not quite as costly or unexpected to lose Sabres in fleets as practice for that. Fortunately for me, whenever I need to figure out how to fit a Sabre I can just ask my alliance leader.

Quote:
You, being unable to fly the ship _built for that role_, are more useful as additional damage.


I don't think I've ever flown "additional damage".

If you're that new, then they probably have you as tackle, which you can do the second you create your character, or within 10 to 20 minutes.

As to the rest, again, there's nothing that says there has to be a t1 ship that can do everything a t2 can. They're not supposed to. I gave you a couple great examples of t2 ships that do things that nothing else in the game can do. How about capitals? That's even more training, and do you think anything teaches you how to use them? Those are even t1!

That's the thing of it, this is not some simple kiddy game of Hello Kitty Online, or WoW. This is EVE. Everything has its thing, it's role, its purpose, but not everything is a clear linear progression. As to the skillplans they have for you to fly certain ships, there's generally good reason for it: a lot of times the fit simply won't work without those skills. I've got an Ishkur fit (assault frigate, t2) that, prior to the hybrid buff in the last patch, had something like 0.02 power grid free, and that's with all skills that affect that ship and the fittings, at level 4 or 5. Logistics are one of those ships, the effective setups require high skills, because you need to maximize your ability to repair quickly, but also be able to maintain it indefinitely. Your job, as in any game, is also one of those most important: if the healer dies, everyone dies. They can't afford for you to be in there screwing up the cap chain, or getting in the way, and if you can't be productive in that role yet, there are other roles where you _can_ be useful with.

Alternatively, you can leave the goons, go to high-sec, and learn the game the way everyone else does, where you actually might get a chance to use those ships, like the support cruisers, that don't do the job as well. You'll get that chance, because the stakes aren't as high, and the stuff you're trying to protect not so valuable. When the guy you're supposed to try to keep from dying is flying half a billion or more worth a ship, can you really blame him for wanting the best repping him?

At the end of the day, the problem isn't the ships, it's your expectations of them. If you truly cannot wait to earn and unlock it like everyone else does, in every other game, then hop on the character bazaar forum and start looking at logistics pilots, then buy some PLEX to sell and get the isk to buy it.
Jan'tor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2011-12-17 00:10:17 UTC
They don't "have me" as anything. I fly what I want to fly. Right now that's ewar, though my race's ewar cruiser isn't any good so I had to crosstrain. I would like it if all t1 electronics cruisers were viable in fleets, but they aren't, so a different race it is for now.

I don't know if you're familiar with my alliance, but sometimes we fly cheap stuff, and a t1 support cruiser isn't even welcome there, so it's not like some dude in a half-billion ship is rejecting them out of elitism. I was in a fleet last night that wasn't even worth half a billion put together, my alliance is very newbie-tolerant. They are also awesome as hell, so excuse me if I find your suggestion of moving to highsec a horrible fate. If it weren't for my alliance logi classes I wouldn't even know what a Scimitar does.

I don't know if it's some kind of language barrier or something, since I know this game has a lot of non-native speakers, but I don't really understand how you're defining the specialization that t2 ships have. I don't have a problem with t2 ships being better at certain things than its t1 counterpart, but If a t2 ship can do everything a t1 ship can, and more things on top of that, the t1 ship isn't "more generalist." Whatever that means. Not every t2 ship outshines its t1 version at every role, but there are many that do, and there are certainly lots of t2 ships that are more versatile than the t1 hull (some of which I've already named).
tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#43 - 2011-12-17 00:19:12 UTC
ok, so the basic premise of all of this as follows:

t1 logi cruisers are less effective than other t1 cruisers when being compared to their respective t2 counterparts on a percentage basis, regardless if this is cost effectiveness or actual performance (the latter of which logi cruisers take a real beating).

lol goonwaffe

blarg we don't get this

rantrantrantrantrant



So, sticking by the first point, I have to agree that something must be done. However, I think the issue may be in the modules being used than the ships. Buff the RR modules (mostly amount repped per cycle) while increasing capacitor need. Then give all eight logi ships (logistics cruisers and their t1 counterparts) a role bonus that reduces capacitor need for their specific RR module type(s).

Though it may be better to fix the ships themselves. The Basi is too slow and has a large sig radius, too large for some alliances to consider for fleet combat. The Orineros is simply left to rot because the guardian does the same armor-fixing job with capacitor transfer abilities instead of remote tracking links.

In retrospect, it would seem there is a double-standard being held against the Orineros and Basilisk. It almost seems that everyone wants to forget that the Caldari and Gallente both exist and they want to focus on the Amarr/Minmatar douchfaggotry.

Where the science gets done

Jan'tor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2011-12-17 00:37:31 UTC
tankus2 wrote:
Then give all eight logi ships (logistics cruisers and their t1 counterparts) a role bonus that reduces capacitor need for their specific RR module type(s).


Six of the eight already have this, it's just the Scythe and Augoror that don't (but should). The T2 bonus for this is understandably much larger than the T1 (effectively double).
Jan'tor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#45 - 2011-12-18 02:53:48 UTC
Jan'tor wrote:

If t2 logistics ships didn't exist people still wouldn't use t1 support cruisers in fleets. That says a lot about how non-functional they are at the logistics role.

Spork Witch
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2011-12-18 11:20:41 UTC
tankus2 wrote:
ok, so the basic premise of all of this as follows:

t1 logi cruisers are less effective than other t1 cruisers when being compared to their respective t2 counterparts on a percentage basis, regardless if this is cost effectiveness or actual performance (the latter of which logi cruisers take a real beating).

lol goonwaffe

blarg we don't get this

rantrantrantrantrant



So, sticking by the first point, I have to agree that something must be done. However, I think the issue may be in the modules being used than the ships. Buff the RR modules (mostly amount repped per cycle) while increasing capacitor need. Then give all eight logi ships (logistics cruisers and their t1 counterparts) a role bonus that reduces capacitor need for their specific RR module type(s).

Though it may be better to fix the ships themselves. The Basi is too slow and has a large sig radius, too large for some alliances to consider for fleet combat. The Orineros is simply left to rot because the guardian does the same armor-fixing job with capacitor transfer abilities instead of remote tracking links.

In retrospect, it would seem there is a double-standard being held against the Orineros and Basilisk. It almost seems that everyone wants to forget that the Caldari and Gallente both exist and they want to focus on the Amarr/Minmatar douchfaggotry.

The reason the oneiros doesn't see as much use is that it doesn't have the cap transfer bonus of the guardian, and it's less tanky, thus less survivable. The guardian is chosen for that cap transfer bonus allowing you to have 2 or 3 guardians always have each other locked, and it's only taking up two target slots on each, so they can still do their job, but can also quickly get reps onto others as needed, and still have FCs and the like permalocked as well.

The same is the reason that, personally, I see the basilisk chosen over the scimitar so often. The basi gets the cap transfer bonux, the scimitar doesn't.

As to your suggestions on buffing the modules and upping the cap use bonus on those cruisers, again, there's no need. Doing so would, in fact, make many spider-tank setups unfittable, destroying some of the most effective, yet underutilized, low-skill fleet setups in the game. The problem being complained about in this thread is not with the ships, it's not with the modules. The problem is people wanting everything to be linear and homogenous, rather than realize that you need to adjust your tactics, not the ships and modules stats. Ask the guys in Agony Unleashed what they think of this. Now go attend one of their wolfpack frigate classes. On more than a couple, they've taken out numerous battleships and capitals with t1 frigate fleets, just with everyone fitting a single RR in a highslot; those spider-tank fits would disappear if you screw up cap performance with your proposal, and you've basically forced remote repair into two ship types only: the t1 support cruiser, and the t2 logistics cruiser. As I've said before, this isn't WoW, stripping out the complexity and numerous potential working combinations is _not_ a good thing, and all changes suggested in this thread do exactly that: break the varied strategies and tactics that work, and make only the most obvious effective at all (although it does make it so you can do it in a month, instead of two; again, making it easier for the impatient noob that doesn't want to wait a month is not justification to strip away all those varied setups and tactics).
Alara IonStorm
#47 - 2011-12-18 12:38:50 UTC
Spork Witch wrote:

As to your suggestions on buffing the modules and upping the cap use bonus on those cruisers, again, there's no need. Doing so would, in fact, make many spider-tank setups unfittable, destroying some of the most effective, yet underutilized, low-skill fleet setups in the game.

As well as creating new ones using these ships.
Spork Witch wrote:

The problem being complained about in this thread is not with the ships, it's not with the modules. The problem is people wanting everything to be linear and homogenous, rather than realize that you need to adjust your tactics, not the ships and modules stats. Ask the guys in Agony Unleashed what they think of this. Now go attend one of their wolfpack frigate classes. On more than a couple, they've taken out numerous battleships and capitals with t1 frigate fleets, just with everyone fitting a single RR in a highslot;

They can still do that. They can choose not to but having a good T1 Logi will not change there current effectiveness.
Spork Witch wrote:

those spider-tank fits would disappear if you screw up cap performance with your proposal, and you've basically forced remote repair into two ship types only: the t1 support cruiser, and the t2 logistics cruiser.

No you have. You can use those setups all you want. The fact that there are Spiderfleets with T2 Logi existing proves this. This adds to your arsenal, you are the one taking away from it.
Spork Witch wrote:

As I've said before, this isn't WoW, stripping out the complexity and numerous potential working combinations is _not_ a good thing, and all changes suggested in this thread do exactly that: break the varied strategies and tactics that work, and make only the most obvious effective at all (although it does make it so you can do it in a month, instead of two; again, making it easier for the impatient noob that doesn't want to wait a month is not justification to strip away all those varied setups and tactics).

T1 Ship Roles = WoW everyone

T1 SHIP ROLES = WoW. Everyone Freak Out Now Because It = WoW!!!

Roll

It breaks no varied strategy it just takes ships that are not used and boosts there effectiveness with said strategy. If you primary the new weak Logi and remove them from the field first you are left with your Spider and they have nothing. Tactics greater then all, new weapons just allow you to modify said tactics if you so choose and come with all the weaknesses along with benefits of streamlining said tactics.
Jan'tor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#48 - 2011-12-25 04:24:17 UTC
There seems to be quite a bit of support around the forum for making more ships useful in pvp that are currently not useful, and that's a good thing.
Drichter
Private Productions
#49 - 2011-12-25 13:16:08 UTC
Agree with OP.

The tiers and the drawbacks which come with them (less PG, CPU, HP, Slots) may have been usefull some time in the past. Especially when the price-differences between those tiers meant something (there was a time where the price difference for cruiser-tiers meant the same thing to those players as todays price-differences between Battleship-tiers).

Todays NPE gives players quiet a lot of isk and enough standing even for lvl 3 missions.

As for certain ships, minmatar cruisers are a good example: If the Rupture is better at being a Stabber than the Stabber itself, it is sad. Also the the rupture pretty much outweighs any bonuses a scythe could field.

Better are Caldari: Both Moa and Caracal are quiet good ships. The Blackbird is good enough for being first-target in any engagement, although just for lolECM. The Osprey ... well it can mine at least.

Jan'tor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#50 - 2011-12-26 19:44:33 UTC
I flew t2 logistics for the first time tonight, despite still being a horrible newbie, so this problem doesn't really affect me quite as much anymore. I still feel the same about giving the t1 versions a real pvp role, however.
Previous page123