These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Delightful Things
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Valkorsia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#21 - 2016-08-10 06:57:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkorsia
Viktor Amarr wrote:



Ok, for people who actually move around and leave their system once in a blue moon, the T3D (and Svipul in particular) have completely ruined the landscape :)

They overshadow AF making them even more useless. They're the most used pvp ship of all (and that is just the Svipul alone, not counting the others). They're hilariously silly even after several nerfs where Clown2 and Fuxxy promised us they knew what they were doing even when we told them beforehand it wouldn't help, to a point where CCP finally admitted they don't know what they're doing and have enlisted a group of "wise men" (known pvp players) for a round table to try and fix this mess.


Funny, I was just mentioning this in another thread.

Totally agree. A few days back after six years and I'm seeing Svipul's literally everywhere in pvp, usually in packs of 3-4, but they're doing well in solo action, too - checking some killboards.

*Protip* If you're seeing the same ship(s) in pvp a lot, there's a problem. And the T3D Minmatar destroyer is just that - a problem. The people defending an upcoming nerf know it, too. Meanwhile, if you can't beat em', join em.

Also, I'll add the Cynabal seems OTT, too.
W0lf Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2016-08-10 07:02:22 UTC
What? The cynabal is garbage, its totally and utterly ****.
Valkorsia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#23 - 2016-08-10 07:08:24 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
What? The cynabal is garbage, its totally and utterly ****.


Not in the hands of an experienced pvp pilot. Here's just one example; Intigo
W0lf Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2016-08-10 07:33:24 UTC
Valkorsia wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
What? The cynabal is garbage, its totally and utterly ****.


Not in the hands of an experienced pvp pilot. Here's just one example; Intigo


Nope, its still ****. Medium acs are just extremely bad.
Valkorsia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2016-08-10 07:38:50 UTC
You're probably right, Wolf. I don't know this game at all anymore. Too much has changed.
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#26 - 2016-08-11 03:14:40 UTC
I have a bit of different view regarding Svipul and T3 destroyers (and T3 cruisers to some extent). EVE players are sometimes so masochistic they expect every ship to be crippled in some ways. :p When you think abput it, what the Svipul packs and small gangs are doing is what people always wanted AF wolf pack to do. It's just on a different platform and twist, but people always wanted this fast, mobile, fun ships at reasonable cost, that they can roam in these ships solo and in small gangs.

If you look at Svipul on its own, it's a very nicely balanced fun ship. It's what ship designs should achieve. It's just that when you compare it with other ships and cost you start thinking about comparative balance.

Personally I really enjoyed the Battlecruiser Online era. Hurricanes were dominant, but people fearlessly flew solo in battle cruisers and it was not uncommon at all to find another solo BC roamer and have a good fight. Then that got nerfed into ground.

I understand that peoplenare really wary of power creep and balance implications, especially when things scale up and affect the overall landscape. But on the other hand it's sad to see fun and viable solo and small gang ships repeatedly nerfed in turns and everything becomes more and more shoehorned into a defined 'role'.

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!
Roenok Baalnorn
Baalnorn Heavy Industries
#27 - 2016-08-11 05:25:23 UTC
Viktor Amarr wrote:
Well if they're not that awesome as you put it, why do you put so much time into writing walls of text trying to not get them changed? I mean, they're not that great so why fly them right?

Or could it be that they ARE really great and you just don't want to have your OP toy taken away from you so you'll use some hilarious :logic: and :reason: to try and convince people that they really aren't that amazing.

That might be a wall of text for you, but its not for me. I can easily max out the character limit on a post and have many times. I also read 100 times more than that post on any given day. Also i can type like 100 words a min so thats what maybe a 5 min post?

Svipuls dont need to be changed. All the t3ds are fine as they are. Svipuls, like all ships in eve, are great in certain situations. In all other situations they arent so good. And as i pointed out there are other ships with far better kill records. While most combat ships that are NOT mostly for pve tend to hold around 10:1 kill ratio the same as svipuls. That says they are balanced to me.

I have 10-12 fleet doctrines in my hanger, of which svipuls are one. That doesnt include my non doctrine pvp ships which i have another 6-8 of. If svipuls were the pwnmobiles people here claim them to be i wouldnt have a dozen doctrine ships, i would have 12 svipuls instead( which would save me several billion isk as well)

They can be killed by pretty much anything bigger than them and some ships their size depending on fits, pilots skills, and pilots experience. But then again i fly in fleets that kill carriers in only interceptors, so maybe we are just special snowflakes? Or maybe the people screaming nerf, need to learn game mechanics and that the ship/fit they are flying cant kill every ship they come across.

Am i special snowflake? Am i? Am i?!!!
W0lf Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2016-08-11 05:31:21 UTC
People seriously defending svipuls, topest of keks. The ship is beyond ********, a linked svipul can take multiple cruisers and bcs at once or whoel frigate gangs. It can instawarp, do 500dps with frig tracking, tanks insane levels, locks as fast as a ceptor, has the sig of a frigate, is way faster then any af, has the fitting to do pretty much anything.

Either the svipul is broken or every single frigate/dessie/other t3ds which isnt the confessor needs a giant buff. It basicely is on hac levels of power.
Valkorsia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2016-08-11 05:36:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkorsia
Toobo wrote:
EVE players are sometimes so masochistic they expect every ship to be crippled in some ways.


No, we expect each racial class to be balanced against another - ship to ship. Is that too hard to do? Apparently for CCP it is.


Toobo wrote:
If you look at Svipul on its own, it's a very nicely balanced fun ship.


Not compared to other racial classes, or you wouldn't be seeing so many in pvp small gangs. They are OP, obviously, which is why you're seeing Svipul's everywhere.

Hey, CCP. I have an idea. Instead of nerfing the Svipul, how about equalizing other races? And you know why they won't do that? Because it's time intensive. It's easier (less time intensive and cheaper) just to use the nerf bat - that's standard CCP operatiing proceedure.


Toobo wrote:
It's what ship designs should achieve. It's just that when you compare it with other ships and cost you start thinking about comparative balance.


Yes, when you compare it to 'other ships', including the same class in different races ... Comparative balance is totally off, ship for ship, class for class.


Toobo wrote:
But on the other hand it's sad to see fun and viable solo and small gang ships repeatedly nerfed in turns and everything becomes more and more shoehorned into a defined 'role'.


Right, so instead of nerfing the Svipul, buff up other races ships to equal their power. But they won't do that for the reasons I stated above. This has been the story in Eve for years. It's never to equalize other races ship for ship ... it's always been too nerf the ship(s) that everyone likes.
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#30 - 2016-08-11 06:23:30 UTC
Valkorsia, I wasn't suggesting what 'should' be done, it was more of sentiments comments on seeing fun ships get nerfed.

Svipul in particular is a real odd ball though. CCP spent considerable time and effort on the whole tiercide thing and spent long time for cruiser and below class, then came T3Ds and suddenly we are back to small ship balance issue again. The faster patch cycles we are in these days post the era of expansions, it feels like we are in constantly changing process where ships and modules are always changing, and after one cycle of changes end CCP has broken something they workend on earlier and need a revision again :p

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!
Valkorsia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#31 - 2016-08-11 08:59:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Valkorsia
Toobo wrote:
Valkorsia, I wasn't suggesting what 'should' be done, it was more of sentiments comments on seeing fun ships get nerfed.

Svipul in particular is a real odd ball though. CCP spent considerable time and effort on the whole tiercide thing and spent long time for cruiser and below class, then came T3Ds and suddenly we are back to small ship balance issue again. The faster patch cycles we are in these days post the era of expansions, it feels like we are in constantly changing process where ships and modules are always changing, and after one cycle of changes end CCP has broken something they workend on earlier and need a revision again :p


Oh, I know. I'm going to suggest it, though. After less than three weeks back in the game, I'm seeing a lot broken. What needs to be done is an entire race/class ship by ship rebalance ... instead of nerfing the fun ships, buff other races in the same ship/class types. Then, line by line, rebalance what they've apparently spent a lot of time just hacking up in the last few years. There are ships now that aren't even worth owning. They might as well de-list them. I could give CCP a list of about 20 ships right now they can just take out of the game for being so worthless. They are a waste of good minerals.
W0lf Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2016-08-11 12:52:03 UTC  |  Edited by: W0lf Crendraven
That just happened/is happening now, every ship from t1 frig upwards has been changed or is changing soon. Buffing everything also isnt a healthy thing for the game, nerfing is much better. Buffing everything is what that are doing though.


But way way less ships then there used to are useless, every t1 frig is viable (some are pretty bad like the rifter, but not unflyable), every dessie is viable (t1 t2 and t3), every t1 cruiser is viable in one way or another (some like the rupture are pretty bad, but again, not unflyably bad). And so on. Theres almost no ship thats totally uesless.
Velarra
#33 - 2016-08-11 13:47:51 UTC
Hi!

Couple cheery thoughts :

1. Welcome back to eve :)

2. How would you fit a pve Raven/CNR, in today's game?....
Viktor Amarr
#34 - 2016-08-11 16:39:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Viktor Amarr
Velarra wrote:
How would you fit a pve Raven/CNR, in today's game?....


Depends on what you're fighting, the sensor booster and signal amps are now really useful when fighting Guristas due to their bonus to sensor strength. Guidance comps are quite handy too but don't really make up for rigor/flare rigs in that it would take too many slots so the rigs are still the same (although with flare now for now sure, due to stacking). Also, those shield boosters are cheap as hell now so you'd have to be mad not to use them.


[Raven, LVL 4 Guristas]
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Signal Amplifier II
Signal Amplifier II

100MN Afterburner II
Large Micro Jump Drive
Pith B-Type Large Shield Booster
Shield Boost Amplifier II
Thermal Dissipation Field II
Kinetic Deflection Field II
Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script

Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Cruise Missile
Small Tractor Beam II

Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Warhead Flare Catalyst II

Hobgoblin II x5
Warden II x2
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#35 - 2016-08-11 17:08:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Velarra wrote:
Hi!

Couple cheery thoughts :

1. Welcome back to eve :)

2. How would you fit a pve Raven/CNR, in today's game?....


Haha, thanks! It's been good to be back! I've only done a single SOE mission in a Mach since coming back, so I'm not super sure. I've looked over the changes and I think I'd start with a CNR fit as follows:

[Raven Navy Issue, Mission CNR]
Dread Guristas Ballistic Control System
Dread Guristas Ballistic Control System
Dread Guristas Ballistic Control System
Dread Guristas Ballistic Control System
Missile Guidance Enhancer II

Large Micro Jump Drive
Pith X-Type Large Shield Booster
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
EM Ward Field II
Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script
Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script

Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Cruise Missile

Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst II
Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I

Warrior II x5
Bouncer II x3

The Raven fit above is probably fine, though I'd say there's not a lot of reason to go B-Type instead of X-Type considering the price difference, and last time I did the numbers an extra Rigor I did a better job than the Flare II.

-Liang

Ed: If it became apparent that I really needed an AB, I'd probably roll back to a more traditional tank and just face tank it as I used to. The damage reduction from the MJD is pretty sweet though. Also, for cheap mission running (in a battleship), I'm not sure there's a reason to use the Raven over the Phoon?

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Viktor Amarr
#36 - 2016-08-12 05:38:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Viktor Amarr
Liang Nuren wrote:
last time I did the numbers an extra Rigor I did a better job than the Flare II.


Redo that math :P



Also, that's a tad pimped for a Raven. By that time there's no point in flying the Raven but instead go for the CNR or SNI. The AB helps close the distance to gates and mission objectives and as such it saves time, you don't need the extra slot for tank anyway.
Velarra
#37 - 2016-08-12 17:12:08 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:

Ed: If it became apparent that I really needed an AB, I'd probably roll back to a more traditional tank and just face tank it as I used to. The damage reduction from the MJD is pretty sweet though. Also, for cheap mission running (in a battleship), I'm not sure there's a reason to use the Raven over the Phoon?


Well :) ... I was more wondering with what & how you'd redefine Raven a la Liang for today's eve more than anything :) ... Say, ... call it Mk. II :)
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#38 - 2016-08-15 17:16:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Velarra wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

Ed: If it became apparent that I really needed an AB, I'd probably roll back to a more traditional tank and just face tank it as I used to. The damage reduction from the MJD is pretty sweet though. Also, for cheap mission running (in a battleship), I'm not sure there's a reason to use the Raven over the Phoon?


Well :) ... I was more wondering with what & how you'd redefine Raven a la Liang for today's eve more than anything :) ... Say, ... call it Mk. II :)


Hmmm, so the biggest change appears to be mobile tractors, MJDs, and missile tracking computers/enhancers. The MJD is fundamentally a distraction, because the old Ravens/CNRs were plenty capable of tanking a L4. Mobile tractors don't make much of a difference to L4 blitzing, I think.

That leaves the tracking enhancers/computers. One of the things I always found frustrating about running missions with a missile ship was counting volleys and painter cycle times. It looks like you lose a bit of volley damage running TCs if you have max painter spec, but I'm not sure it ends up mattering in the end. Without max painter spec, it looks like TCs are straight up better.

So, this looks attractive:

CNR, Missions (~1.2b)
8x Cruise II
100mn AB II, Hvy Cap Booster II, Pith X-Type LSB, 3 Hardeners, MGC II
4x DG BCU, Sig Amp II
2x Rigor II, Flare II

Considering I have a maxed out missile clone and standings to run missions, I may as well do so at some point.

-Liang

Ed: It's unclear whether I'd be willing to trade the lock range and +2 targets for the tracking enhancer.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Previous page12