These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Amarr

First post First post First post
Author
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1141 - 2013-04-13 06:24:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
I am a bit worried about the trend towards getting rid off cap bonuses entirely.

As far as I can remember the general philosophy regarding lasers (before the projectile buff, before the hybrids buff, ...) used to be:

Amarr ships get extra PG, extra capacitor and a capacitor use reduction (instead of some damage related bonus) because lasers already have a built-in damage bonus. These fitting constraints (and the associated ship bonuses) are necessary because otherwise people would wreak havoc by fitting (overpowered) lasers to non-amarr hulls (which might have stronger ship bonuses than amarr hulls are allowed to have).

If the capacitor use reduction is removed from amarr hulls it is very likely that some non-amarr hulls could become comparatively viable laser platforms.
And given that - despite the buffs to other weapon systems - lasers are still in a pretty good spot (Scorch!) and given that we have no balancing experience in this area whatsoever as cross-fitting lasers hasn't been an option for the past several years this might lead to all sorts of balance problems.

.

SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1142 - 2013-04-13 08:04:38 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
I am a bit worried about the trend towards getting rid off cap bonuses entirely.

As far as I can remember the general philosophy regarding lasers (before the projectile buff, before the hybrids buff, ...) used to be:

Amarr ships get extra PG, extra capacitor and a capacitor use reduction (instead of some damage related bonus) because lasers already have a built-in damage bonus. These fitting constraints (and the associated ship bonuses) are necessary because otherwise people would wreak havoc by fitting (overpowered) lasers to non-amarr hulls (which might have stronger ship bonuses than amarr hulls are allowed to have).

If the capacitor use reduction is removed from amarr hulls it is very likely that some non-amarr hulls could become comparatively viable laser platforms.
And given that - despite the buffs to other weapon systems - lasers are still in a pretty good spot (Scorch!) and given that we have no balancing experience in this area whatsoever as cross-fitting lasers hasn't been an option for the past several years this might lead to all sorts of balance problems.


The whole "People will fit Lasers on everything !" is completely overrated.

Why would you fit Lasers on a Tempest ? Why would you fit lasers on a Moa ? On a Scorpion ? Hurricane ? Stabber ? Deimos ?

I wouldn't fit Lasers on a non-bonused-for-lasers ship, because I'm better off with my races' weapons, simple as that.

But if you absolutly want to deal with capacitor issues, feel free to.

Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1143 - 2013-04-13 09:50:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Naso Aya wrote:

It's less the fact the ship was designed to carry drones, and more the fact that people really love the Lasergeddon.


The Laser Geddon is an iconic ship in Eve. They might as well have said they were deleting the Rifter, Thorax, Drake, or Hurricane. I don't mind the new Geddorn, but it's damn sure not a ******* Armageddon. And I want my ******* Armageddon back.

-Liang
How about somewhere in-between?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2874095#post2874095

Doesn't step on Domi's toes, keeps laser bonus, still has the new Neut bonus.


At this point, anything is better than what's proposed. Fitting Lasers+Neuts would be too crazy on cap, but Laser+NOS would be perfect way to sustain combat and keep strong tank/DPS. Needs at least 6 turrets though and I'd trade the med slot for another high unless thats too OP.
Tbh lasers and neuts would still be lower cap usage than just 7x neuts, so I think it could work. Plus with the larger drone bay (but not Dominix proportions or damage bonus) it would still have more options than the current (TQ) Armageddon.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1144 - 2013-04-13 10:28:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Veshta Yoshida
The argument that nos can provide you with any meaningful amount of cap is erroneous, it is a simple matter for the experienced pilot to maintain a 30-40% cap thus preventing you to get much of anything unless you deliberately cap yourself out, making all your modules stutter like a neckbeard who stumbled into the girls lockerroom .. and even then the return is far less than is needed (10cap/s is not exactly world shattering).
Nos works a lot better on small hulls where drain is better balanced with capacities and fights can be over in the blink of eye, but the vast cap reservoirs of BC+ makes them a rather pointless module for those sizes.

Notice the *new* Armageddon's mounts .. same fashion as the Dragoon, with equal room for missiles and guns and with cruise/torp getting a lift simultaneously the 100% capless weapon option opens up so seven neut fits will be restricted to specific tasks such as counter-hotdrop scenarios and logistics harassment - both cases where one must assume external cap is available in the form of transfer.
Compare it to how you'd fit the *old* Typhoon or the Dominix for that matter, the 'all neut' has its uses but for general operations you are be better off with 4-5 guns/launchers.

PS: While CCP has not turned me into a fan-boy, the past few days worth of data on their thinking/plans has allowed me to 'see' where they are going .. and it might work, but damn do they have some data mining in front of them to tweak this complete shake-up of ten years design philosophy over the coming years.
PPS: Still need more info on thinking/plans .. more, you hear MORE!
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1145 - 2013-04-13 10:41:57 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
PS: While CCP has not turned me into a fan-boy, the past few days worth of data on their thinking/plans has allowed me to 'see' where they are going .. and it might work, but damn do they have some data mining in front of them to tweak this complete shake-up of ten years design philosophy over the coming years.
PPS: Still need more info on thinking/plans .. more, you hear MORE!



Veshta - I have been staunchly against these changes since they were announced. Not because I am against change - far from it - but because of what they the changes are based on, what they have ignored, and the negative impact they will have on this line of ships.

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57

Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#1146 - 2013-04-13 10:46:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Pattern Clarc
I can see the general trend of loud handfull of people staunchly against the changes, and the vast majority silenced by the win and awesomeness amarr is once again bound to become.

Things can only be argued on subjective, personal grounds now, as functionally, these ships are damned good.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1147 - 2013-04-13 10:54:47 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
I can see the general trend of load handfull of people staunchly against the changes, and the vast majority silenced by the win and awesomeness amarr is once again bound to become.

Things can only be argued on subjective, personal grounds now, as functionally, these ships are damned good.



Highlighted the point I wish to argue - The vast majority are not silenced by the win and awesomeness. The vast majority barely recognise that these changes are coming along, or care so little because they don't realise how much of a violent shift this is until it is too late.

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57

Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#1148 - 2013-04-13 11:08:29 UTC
The sky is falling etc etc.

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#1149 - 2013-04-13 11:13:39 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
All your "justification" could be taken down to a simple "STFU, we will make it happen". As it is, it's no more viable, than my position, as you pictured it.
I have no issues with drone Abaddon, if anything, it actually LOOKS like a drone boat. It even have launch bays. But I'm flat out against cap-sucking abomination in whatever hull it would happen - leave that atrocity to blood raiders.
Also, the proposed "oh, just use cap boosters, you'll be fine" idea simply idiotic.

P.S.
If you have something constructive to say, please do. With quotes from EVE lore, that warranting the abovementioned changes. Though, I would save you alot of time, if you just stop it and accept the clear fact, that two mainline Amarr BS should not change roles.

If you look at the ship Amarr ship line up at any point in it's history you will see justification for Drone use, and justification for cap warfare and missile use starting several years ago.

Your protests and personal dislikes won't change that my friend.


OK, Ranger 1 when you say "justification for cap warfare" and "started several years ago" you mean tech 2 like amarr recons.

Or do you mean tech 1 dragoon that was introduced in a dev blog (October 25 2012) and we saw it in game on December 4 2012 when EVE Online: Retribution came out. So how much "several years ago" are we talking about 2, 3, 7?
Cause it is April 13 2013 where I live, but maybe you are from the future my friend where tech1 dragoon came out "several years ago".
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1150 - 2013-04-13 11:14:13 UTC
Arline Kley wrote:
Veshta - I have been staunchly against these changes since they were announced. Not because I am against change - far from it - but because of what they the changes are based on, what they have ignored, and the negative impact they will have on this line of ships.

As were I, still am in some respects. I am vehemently opposed to NOmen pigeon-hole and the dronification of the line-up .. honestly thought after the Punishers Abaddonification that they would do same for Maller/Proph, but they apparently had a different path setup in mind.
It is a major paradigm shift from start to end and will require them to do an abnormal amount of editing to the background in order to make it 'fit', but fact is that the Amarr lines will ultimately have a lot more versatility and be infinitely harder to counter ..
Remember U'Ks fits during the last war? .. EM/Therm hardened up the wazoo. Perfect counter to Amarr hulls at the time .. imagine that being tried against the post-tiericide line-up.

I still disagree with the general path CCP has chosen, that of catering to the scrub with clearly defined progression and negligible reason to cross-train but it does open up a lot of options for established players.
Question is if they can complete it without the races losing their flavours entirely, and they are damn close to that happening, which is why I balked at a Gallente hull having more (not same, but more) lows than the Amarr counterparts as that together with lasers and resists is one of the defining characteristics of Amarr.

Lore/RP, as far as CCP is concerned, is of secondary concern. They stated as much when they dismantled the Dept. responsible for it and opened up the slack to be picked up by ad-hoc pieces to be made by any employee with a bright idea and grandstanding ISD run 'events' ... wish it wasn't so but there it is.

PS: We few, we happy few (RP/Lore aficionados) should stick our heads together, open communications with one another, that we may shape the universe to our liking with the tools provided by the powers that be. If done properly and with enough collateral damage, we can force CCP hand and get them involved once more with the 'real deal' instead of the pop-queen/spectacle that is "events" .. the name of that most foul concept alone screams themepark.

In short: When the tsunami comes in, trying to shout it down will not be as effective as gathering ones resources, hopping on a boat and rebuild the aftermath to be stronger than that which was washed away .. vengeance will be ours, but it comes neither cheaply nor easily.
Ruze
Next Stage Initiative
#1151 - 2013-04-13 12:42:32 UTC
Ashlar Vellum wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
All your "justification" could be taken down to a simple "STFU, we will make it happen". As it is, it's no more viable, than my position, as you pictured it.
I have no issues with drone Abaddon, if anything, it actually LOOKS like a drone boat. It even have launch bays. But I'm flat out against cap-sucking abomination in whatever hull it would happen - leave that atrocity to blood raiders.
Also, the proposed "oh, just use cap boosters, you'll be fine" idea simply idiotic.

P.S.
If you have something constructive to say, please do. With quotes from EVE lore, that warranting the abovementioned changes. Though, I would save you alot of time, if you just stop it and accept the clear fact, that two mainline Amarr BS should not change roles.

If you look at the ship Amarr ship line up at any point in it's history you will see justification for Drone use, and justification for cap warfare and missile use starting several years ago.

Your protests and personal dislikes won't change that my friend.


OK, Ranger 1 when you say "justification for cap warfare" and "started several years ago" you mean tech 2 like amarr recons.

Or do you mean tech 1 dragoon that was introduced in a dev blog (October 25 2012) and we saw it in game on December 4 2012 when EVE Online: Retribution came out. So how much "several years ago" are we talking about 2, 3, 7?
Cause it is April 13 2013 where I live, but maybe you are from the future my friend where tech1 dragoon came out "several years ago".


Obviously, we've had the Arbitrator for drone use. Our usage, over the years, of drones has increased per ship. As I mentioned in another post, even the Armageddon used to have a tiny drone bay.

We've also had ships that used missiles. If I remember correctly, several ships had a couple slots here and there, even the Apoc. Memory isn't what it used to be on that one.

Mind our tech 2 variants, and we've had cap warfare. And it also isn't uncommon for Amarrians to consider the Bhaalgorn to be an Amarr ship, due to it's style and flair.

The Dragoon is recent, sure. But I still feel like the Abaddon, Harbinger, and t3 Cruisers are a recent addition. Heck, the Prophecy and Coercer weren't added too long ago ...

If you're driven to threaten others with harm or violence because of what they do in game, you can't separate fantasy from reality. That "griefer/thief" is probably more sane than you are. How screwed up is that?

Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#1152 - 2013-04-13 12:47:49 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Welcome to the Tech 1 Battleship rebalance, fasten your seatbelts!


Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% to Large Energy Turret damage
+4% Armor resistances (-1% per level)


-1% really ? why not make it 1.001% ? or -0.5% ?

These changes are stupid why would you remove 5% bonus to 4% ? that does not make sense.
Wenthrial Solamar
Brand Newbros
#1153 - 2013-04-13 13:19:11 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

Notice the *new* Armageddon's mounts .. same fashion as the Dragoon, with equal room for missiles and guns and with cruise/torp getting a lift simultaneously the 100% capless weapon option opens up so seven neut fits will be restricted to specific tasks such as counter-hotdrop scenarios and logistics harassment - both cases where one must assume external cap is available in the form of transfer.


Did I miss a post about Large Missiles getting love ?

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#1154 - 2013-04-13 13:19:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Tonto Auri
Ruze wrote:
Obviously, we've had the Arbitrator for drone use.

And I've used it well. Now, what? As I see it, such ships are there for new players to make their final decision. If they like the combat style of a certain weapon system, it's not too late to cross-train a race, that makes the best use of your weapon of choice. I did that in the past, myself.

Quote:
Our usage, over the years, of drones has increased per ship.

This doesn't mean you have a carte blanche to destroy ships, that (citation begin)represent the embodiment of the Amarrian warfare philosophy(end of citation) on the premise, that "numbers and observations tell othervise". That is BS, but not the "battleship" one. That's "bullshit" one.

Quote:
As I mentioned in another post, even the Armageddon used to have a tiny drone bay.

So, it was increased. So, it can be reduced back down, to let it go with new changes.

Quote:
We've also had ships that used missiles. If I remember correctly, several ships had a couple slots here and there, even the Apoc. Memory isn't what it used to be on that one.

And missile slots were removed because of weapon consolidation and overall removal of split weapon systems.

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#1155 - 2013-04-13 13:19:48 UTC
Quote:
Mind our tech 2 variants

Which are specialized ships, designed to fill a certain role, and not necessarily represent the race as a whole.
Quote:
And it also isn't uncommon for Amarrians to consider the Bhaalgorn to be an Amarr ship, due to it's style and flair.

Unsurprisingly, these "some" don't try to raise their ugly heads in this topic.

Quote:
The Dragoon is recent, sure. But I still feel like the Abaddon, Harbinger, and t3 Cruisers are a recent addition. Heck, the Prophecy and Coercer weren't added too long ago ...

And this was to prove what? That whole EVE is barely a 10 years old kid?

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#1156 - 2013-04-13 13:50:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Veshta Yoshida
Wenthrial Solamar wrote:
Did I miss a post about Large Missiles getting love ?

Pretty sure it was mentioned in a reply or other but can't be arsed trawling through 200+ pages to find .. at any rate, do you really think that they'd claim to make BS relevant again, redesign them and leave out a weapon that a full quarter of them use as their primary .. including a *brand new* Winmatar BS?

Has been mentioned in various Dev posts since this time last year, that they were aware of the uselessness of particularly cruise and were getting ready to work on it .. it is only logical to assume that the revisions will in this BS patch/expansion or at the very least in the first emergency patch to patch the patch/expansion.
Tonto Auri wrote:
Quote:
The Dragoon is recent, sure. But I still feel like the Abaddon, Harbinger, and t3 Cruisers are a recent addition. Heck, the Prophecy and Coercer weren't added too long ago ...

And this was to prove what? That whole EVE is barely a 10 years old kid?

There, bolded, italicized and underlined the operative word for you .. takes a few years to get set in ones ways and find ones favourites. When changes are then made to the roster, either by addition or revision, one faces a struggle to break free from the set ways .. I too get the feeling that there is more around than I can ever get to learn properly.

Very common emotional response to an ever changing environment.

!WARNING, Real world comparison incoming!:
Do you think that iOS/Android/WinMob fan-boys are what they are because their chosen horse is the best of the best .. i'd wager they are so adamant in their convictions because they cannot cope with the prospect of having to mend their ways or do a full evaluation of the "others" to make an educated decision. Response is what one can read in any thread/forum concerning said systems .. rampant threats, smack, lies and outright denial.

Thus endeth the lesson.
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#1157 - 2013-04-13 14:24:53 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
!WARNING, Real world comparison incoming!:
Do you think that iOS/Android/WinMob fan-boys are what they are because their chosen horse is the best of the best .. i'd wager they are so adamant in their convictions because they cannot cope with the prospect of having to mend their ways or do a full evaluation of the "others" to make an educated decision. Response is what one can read in any thread/forum concerning said systems .. rampant threats, smack, lies and outright denial.

Thus endeth the lesson.

Not to stray too far off topic, but I need to say: I'm dealing daily with all of the three. And I can tell you the difference, if you wish.
I have no objections against iOS, it's a bit cumbersome after Android, but have it's logic behind the clutter, and I can get used to it - I just don't want to go by the exalted minority, that buy a new iPhone every year. Neither I can afford to throw $500 a year into trashcan. And winmob is just a bad copy of the previous. You think, I'm advocating Android? It has it's flaws no less than the other two. Choose what you prefer.

Back to topic, the changes proposed are still random and not backed by anything, but "numbers and observations". If I want a game of numbers, there's more readily available alternatives, thanks. EVE is still a living world, and you can't just go and twist and bend it to your will without anyone noticing the problem.

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison

Buzzmong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1158 - 2013-04-13 14:38:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Buzzmong
1) Apocalypse changes

Apoc needs to keep it's 7500 cap amount.

I remember the days it had 6000 and a 5% Per Level Cap Amount bonus, which due to being rubbish, was turned into the 7500 amount we see today and the interesting optimal range bonus.

It's a good value, especially with the cap use of lasers (I disagree with the cap use reduction on them btw), and also allowed Amarr ships to be sporting quite good local tanks.

I also thought high cap amount but lower cap regen was meant to be a feature of Amarr ships, although I will admit it's something CCP have never really pushed or played with on the other races.


2) Armageddon Changes


Although I'm sad to see the 8/3/8 Gankgeddon go, they're otherwise lovely.

I'd drop the missile slots though. I know you like versatility, but tech 1 Amarr is really all about lasers. Missiles should be reserved for the Tech 2 Khanid line. It keeps them special. Racial flavour is important.

3) Abaddon changes (or lack of)

Oh. Big changes to the more interesting ships of the Amarr empire, but you left the most bland of them as-is. Not sure if good or bad. It's a very boring ship.
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1159 - 2013-04-13 14:41:02 UTC
Dear CCP Rise

Why does the Geddon have 7 highs? Please remove 1 and give it another mid.

It has a whole host of things to put in mid slots compared to highs.

Things to put in mid: cap boosters (maybe 2 because of neuts) drone tracking link, prop mod, web, scram/point

Things to put in high slot: launchers and neuts

Thus, it should look like this:

6 highs
5 mids
7 lows

Thanks for reading.
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#1160 - 2013-04-13 14:48:52 UTC
Arya Greywolf wrote:
Dear CCP Rise

Why does the Geddon have 7 highs?


That's because it's a wrong ship for a wrong role.

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison