These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Winter] New destroyers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kai'rae Saarkus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#681 - 2012-10-09 08:20:55 UTC
Mike Whiite wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Major Killz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
I'm not really seeing how a 7 or 8 launcher destroyer platform is not obsoleting 95% of all frig/dessy warfare in game... just saying



Might be the case, just saying... v0v


would make more sense to nerf light's range to about 30km max before we have drake 2.0 problems and then some dev come's along an overnerfs lights in 4 more years after massive bitching.


..



Then look at the ship, don't nerf lights because we might have a ship that will be op.

Though with the new Caldari slot lay out I'd be worrying about Rocket Destroyers.


Just make TDs affect missiles. Oh wait....
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#682 - 2012-10-09 10:44:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
I'm Down wrote:
Major Killz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
I'm not really seeing how a 7 or 8 launcher destroyer platform is not obsoleting 95% of all frig/dessy warfare in game... just saying



Might be the case, just saying... v0v


would make more sense to nerf light's range to about 30km max before we have drake 2.0 problems and then some dev come's along an overnerfs lights in 4 more years after massive bitching.

But then again, what's range got to do with anything... just look at the HML neft idiocy attached to the range nerf.

Zarnak Wulf wrote:
.


Words cannot describe ....



Yeep. You're right. Maybe, light missile may need or should have a range reduction. I had a look @ unbonused light missile launchers compared to the other small long range turrets. all t2 with t2 long range ammo on z turrets.

Rails have z longest range @ 50k and light missiles are @ 40k. The other 2 are @ 27k. Maybe light missile should be reduced to around 35k. I mean I do plan on leading fleets that will abuse z **** out of these changes and in solo. A lot of dudes I know are foaming @ z mouth over z Caracal and these new missile destroyers. Along with light missiles on z crow, hawk and kestrel.

From what I can see. There are no big protest because alot of dudes don't understand what these changes will mean. CCP may notice it or they may not. Who cares really v0v

However, Caldari will have one of z strongest if not z strongest destroyer and tech 1 cruiser (Caracal). Maybe!

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#683 - 2012-10-09 11:08:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Spugg Galdon
Major Killz wrote:


Yeep. You're right. Maybe, light missile may need or should have a range reduction. I had a look @ unbonused light missile launchers compared to the other small long range turrets. all t2 with t2 long range ammo on z turrets.

Rails have z longest range @ 50k and light missiles are @ 40k. The other 2 are @ 27k. Maybe light missile should be reduced to around 35k. I mean I do plan on leading fleets that will abuse z **** out of these changes and in solo. A lot of dudes I know are foaming @ z mouth over z Caracal and these new missile destroyers.

From what I can see. There are no big protest because alot of dudes don't understand what these changes will mean. CCP may notice it or they may not. Who cares really v0v

However, Caldari will have one of z strongest if not z strongest destroyer and tech 1 cruiser (Caracal). Maybe!



Does mammy and daddy let you use the computer much?
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#684 - 2012-10-09 13:15:37 UTC
Kai'rae Saarkus wrote:
Mike Whiite wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
Major Killz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
I'm not really seeing how a 7 or 8 launcher destroyer platform is not obsoleting 95% of all frig/dessy warfare in game... just saying



Might be the case, just saying... v0v


would make more sense to nerf light's range to about 30km max before we have drake 2.0 problems and then some dev come's along an overnerfs lights in 4 more years after massive bitching.


..



Then look at the ship, don't nerf lights because we might have a ship that will be op.

Though with the new Caldari slot lay out I'd be worrying about Rocket Destroyers.


Just make TDs affect missiles. Oh wait....



Yeah, not like a 1 Sensor damp wouldn't ruin 99% of frigates days trying that one on a ship that naturally outranges all it's competition and has mid slots to burn.
CheekyBabey
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#685 - 2012-10-09 15:24:58 UTC
Quote:
I'm not really seeing how a 7 or 8 launcher destroyer platform is not obsoleting 95% of all frig/dessy warfare in game... just saying


I would guess the same way a 8 neutron catalyst doesn't with it's lack of range I mean it is missile speed as a bonus not flight time.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#686 - 2012-10-09 15:34:20 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Major Killz wrote:


Yeep. You're right. Maybe, light missile may need or should have a range reduction. I had a look @ unbonused light missile launchers compared to the other small long range turrets. all t2 with t2 long range ammo on z turrets.

Rails have z longest range @ 50k and light missiles are @ 40k. The other 2 are @ 27k. Maybe light missile should be reduced to around 35k. I mean I do plan on leading fleets that will abuse z **** out of these changes and in solo. A lot of dudes I know are foaming @ z mouth over z Caracal and these new missile destroyers.

From what I can see. There are no big protest because alot of dudes don't understand what these changes will mean. CCP may notice it or they may not. Who cares really v0v

However, Caldari will have one of z strongest if not z strongest destroyer and tech 1 cruiser (Caracal). Maybe!



Does mammy and daddy let you use the computer much?



Noez = (

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#687 - 2012-10-09 18:46:37 UTC

Rant incoming...

Seriously... the more I think about it... we don't really need another FOUR WAYS to kill frigates.

As a friend of mine said after making them train in frigates for a couple months to become good PVPers - "you know what I found out after these last few months? There's a thousand ways to die in a frigate!"

And it's true.

Seriously, frigates don't need more ANTI-frigate stuff.

My Enyo and other AFs, which is already a tough bird, can't take on a Thrasher without some serious piloting skills as it is. Just way too much raw DPS, even with resists. Catalysts, Coercers, ETC do tons of damage to these frigates already.

Now you want more ways to kill them, and it's just pretty absurd really. How are Frigates the most "OP" thing there are that you need to add MORE counters to them? It's not like other ships can't kill frigates really. Drones tear them up, a few lucky shots from a medium autocannon tends to mince them to pieces. I mean, unless you start making Frigates "difficult" to kill, I don't see a real point to this whole extra set of destroyers?

What are they really creating for EVE PVP other than forcing more frigates to not be flown, which is pretty sad as it is pretty hard to convince people that want to be good at PVP that they really should be flying frigates to learn to be good players.

No, instead. We get more anti-frigate platforms, like every ship with a drone bay (hint, most of them) isn't already good at dealing with this situation.

I don't really have a good proposition to replace the concept of these dessies, and I really don't think it would matter if I had a good idea if you're dead set on more anti-frig stuff already. But, that's my rant.

Where I am.
CheekyBabey
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#688 - 2012-10-09 19:02:16 UTC
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#689 - 2012-10-09 19:18:40 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:

Rant incoming...

Seriously... the more I think about it... we don't really need another FOUR WAYS to kill frigates.

As a friend of mine said after making them train in frigates for a couple months to become good PVPers - "you know what I found out after these last few months? There's a thousand ways to die in a frigate!"

And it's true.

Seriously, frigates don't need more ANTI-frigate stuff.

My Enyo and other AFs, which is already a tough bird, can't take on a Thrasher without some serious piloting skills as it is. Just way too much raw DPS, even with resists. Catalysts, Coercers, ETC do tons of damage to these frigates already.

Now you want more ways to kill them, and it's just pretty absurd really. How are Frigates the most "OP" thing there are that you need to add MORE counters to them? It's not like other ships can't kill frigates really. Drones tear them up, a few lucky shots from a medium autocannon tends to mince them to pieces. I mean, unless you start making Frigates "difficult" to kill, I don't see a real point to this whole extra set of destroyers?

What are they really creating for EVE PVP other than forcing more frigates to not be flown, which is pretty sad as it is pretty hard to convince people that want to be good at PVP that they really should be flying frigates to learn to be good players.

No, instead. We get more anti-frigate platforms, like every ship with a drone bay (hint, most of them) isn't already good at dealing with this situation.

I don't really have a good proposition to replace the concept of these dessies, and I really don't think it would matter if I had a good idea if you're dead set on more anti-frig stuff already. But, that's my rant.


Supporting RANT!

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Dato Koppla
Balls Deep Inc.
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#690 - 2012-10-09 22:39:19 UTC
Actually right now the Attack Frig class handles destroyers pretty well as you can TD down their short range weapons while whittling them down from afar. The new drone destroyers and missile destroyers are actually pretty good at dealing with these frigates cause of Mwd Speed Bonus on bonused drones and excellent range on light missiles.

I'm sure frigates will survive another set of destroyers, hardier frigates will be able to deal with the drones from the Amarr/Gall one decently while hopefully mitigating gun damage, fast AB frigs can speed tank the light missiles pretty well and the Caldari and Minnie destroryers must choose between good range (light missiles) with no tank or decent tank with crappy range (rockets)
Zyella Stormborn
Green Seekers
#691 - 2012-10-10 00:00:20 UTC
I just hope to the every pagan god out there that they take another look at the Amarr destroyer. I was praying for a khanid missile boat, but if they are going to make it another arbitrator / curse, they need to make drones faster at the very least, or it will be a very poor anti frigate platform indeed. ;(

There is a special Hell for people like that, Right next to child molestors, and people that talk in the theater. ~Firefly
AlexHalstead
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#692 - 2012-10-10 00:28:40 UTC
Zyella Stormborn wrote:
I just hope to the every pagan god out there that they take another look at the Amarr destroyer. I was praying for a khanid missile boat, but if they are going to make it another arbitrator / curse, they need to make drones faster at the very least, or it will be a very poor anti frigate platform indeed. ;(
Oh yeah, that remind me. They said no Khanid for Tech One ships. That make me a very sad Khanid character.
Dato Koppla
Balls Deep Inc.
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#693 - 2012-10-10 00:40:35 UTC
Yeah a T1 Amarr HAM lineup is something I was hoping for as well, it would have added diversity to missile boats and the Amarr lineup would have less overlap.

I guess I can only dream of a Punisher/Maller/Prophecy/Apocalypse missile lineup.
Mordecai Heller
Offstation Fund Administration
#694 - 2012-10-10 01:19:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Mordecai Heller
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Update!

Caldari:
  • Removed one high slot and launcher slot, gained one mid slot - thus layout now is 7 / 4 / 2, 7 launchers



    • Oh great so a model that already has spaces for 8 launchers will have an annoying blank space just like the drake. Ugh

    Couldn't you balance it by cutting back on tank or its bonuses? Why'd you have to go and ruin the beauty of a row of 8 launchers?

    Anyway isn't missile damage supposed to compensate for the fact that they are useless at long range?
    Dato Koppla
    Balls Deep Inc.
    Minmatar Fleet Alliance
    #695 - 2012-10-10 03:25:26 UTC
    Mordecai Heller wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!

    Caldari:
  • Removed one high slot and launcher slot, gained one mid slot - thus layout now is 7 / 4 / 2, 7 launchers



    • Oh great so a model that already has spaces for 8 launchers will have an annoying blank space just like the drake. Ugh

    Couldn't you balance it by cutting back on tank or its bonuses? Why'd you have to go and ruin the beauty of a row of 8 launchers?

    Anyway isn't missile damage supposed to compensate for the fact that they are useless at long range?


    They removed the launcher and the slot, and moved it to a mid, so there's no blank space in the highs.
    AlexHalstead
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #696 - 2012-10-10 03:33:41 UTC
    Dato Koppla wrote:
    Mordecai Heller wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!

    Caldari:
  • Removed one high slot and launcher slot, gained one mid slot - thus layout now is 7 / 4 / 2, 7 launchers



    • Oh great so a model that already has spaces for 8 launchers will have an annoying blank space just like the drake. Ugh

    Couldn't you balance it by cutting back on tank or its bonuses? Why'd you have to go and ruin the beauty of a row of 8 launchers?

    Anyway isn't missile damage supposed to compensate for the fact that they are useless at long range?


    They removed the launcher and the slot, and moved it to a mid, so there's no blank space in the highs.

    He meant the visual model. If the model was made to depict 8 launchers when you equip them, then if the visual model isn't adjusted when you reduced the maximum number of launchers; it will show an empty slot on the destroyer's model where an eight launcher should be visually.
    Dato Koppla
    Balls Deep Inc.
    Minmatar Fleet Alliance
    #697 - 2012-10-10 03:44:28 UTC
    AlexHalstead wrote:
    Dato Koppla wrote:
    Mordecai Heller wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!

    Caldari:
  • Removed one high slot and launcher slot, gained one mid slot - thus layout now is 7 / 4 / 2, 7 launchers



    • Oh great so a model that already has spaces for 8 launchers will have an annoying blank space just like the drake. Ugh

    Couldn't you balance it by cutting back on tank or its bonuses? Why'd you have to go and ruin the beauty of a row of 8 launchers?

    Anyway isn't missile damage supposed to compensate for the fact that they are useless at long range?


    They removed the launcher and the slot, and moved it to a mid, so there's no blank space in the highs.

    He meant the visual model. If the model was made to depict 8 launchers when you equip them, then if the visual model isn't adjusted when you reduced the maximum number of launchers; it will show an empty slot on the destroyer's model where an eight launcher should be visually.


    Ah my bad, misunderstood. That is quite the nitpick though I'm not one to talk, played EvE on my laptop for the first year with the graphics turned all the way down. Yeah I didn't see the beauty of Eve till I got my PC fixed last year.
    Bloodpetal
    Tir Capital Management Group
    #698 - 2012-10-10 04:00:30 UTC
    CheekyBabey wrote:
    I think you need to read all the frig rebalancing threads, they aren't giving up on frigs yet :P

    Support Frigates
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=146069

    Exploration Frigates
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=143584

    Ewar Frigates
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=142136

    Combat Frigates
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=144693

    Also Current Destroyer Rebalance.
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=142102




    Dude. I've read all those and commented on every one of them and gotten CCP responses to some of my thoughts.

    Anti-Frigate is anti-frigate. It doesn't matter how much they're "buffed", by definition - they're supposed to KILL FRIGATES. So, those threads are irrelevant to my point, because if they were relevant then the Destroyer wouldn't be good at its job as an anti-frigate platform.

    More anti-frigate is really absurd at this point, even with rebalancing. I think they can have another role, that's my point.

    Where I am.
    Aaron Barton
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #699 - 2012-10-10 04:11:15 UTC
    Mordecai Heller wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!

    Caldari:
  • Removed one high slot and launcher slot, gained one mid slot - thus layout now is 7 / 4 / 2, 7 launchers



    • Oh great so a model that already has spaces for 8 launchers will have an annoying blank space just like the drake. Ugh

    Couldn't you balance it by cutting back on tank or its bonuses? Why'd you have to go and ruin the beauty of a row of 8 launchers?

    Anyway isn't missile damage supposed to compensate for the fact that they are useless at long range?


    There might be enough time for the art department to remove that eighth hardpoint. And CCP Ytterbium has been pretty attentive to this thread, so hopefully he'll see what you pointed out and will relay it to the art department.

    For what it's worth, I'd have loved a destroyer decked out with eight launchers.
    Lauren Chev
    Shadow Wolf Squadron
    #700 - 2012-10-10 08:46:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Lauren Chev
    Aaron Barton wrote:
    Mordecai Heller wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!

    Caldari:
  • Removed one high slot and launcher slot, gained one mid slot - thus layout now is 7 / 4 / 2, 7 launchers



    • Oh great so a model that already has spaces for 8 launchers will have an annoying blank space just like the drake. Ugh

    Couldn't you balance it by cutting back on tank or its bonuses? Why'd you have to go and ruin the beauty of a row of 8 launchers?



    There might be enough time for the art department to remove that eighth hardpoint. And CCP Ytterbium has been pretty attentive to this thread, so hopefully he'll see what you pointed out and will relay it to the art department.

    For what it's worth, I'd have loved a destroyer decked out with eight launchers.

    Agreed.
    I cried inside when it was taken back to 7 slots. That destroyer would have looked so awesome. Like a baby Rokh, but modern. Hell, even if they nerf the ship bonus damage and just boost like, range or something so we can have the x8 launchers.... I could sleep at night then.. plus, don't really need a 4th mid. Two for tank, one for speed, and a friend to point. Done.

    Also agree with the fact we don't necessarily need another 4 destroyers.
    In fact, the way I'd interpreted it the first time I read about a missile destroyer was that it was going to be a race hybrid ship. Eg, Caldari+Minmitar would have shields & missiles, and shared skill pre-req's, while Amarr and Gally would be a drone & armor and shared skill pre-req's
    Kinda like the pirate faction ships, but without the pirateness of it all.

    Having said that, I can't wait for the Caldari Peregrine Destroyer (because you all agreed with me on that name, remember Cool )

    xx