These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Johnny Aideron
Order of Rouvenor
#1201 - 2013-04-10 12:15:58 UTC
We should base ship balance on requiring the use of c-type modules that save a whopping 3 CPU over T2.
Lord MuffloN
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1202 - 2013-04-10 12:18:23 UTC
If only the new mega had just a little bit more CPU...

(Otherwise, awesome changes)
Jadiss
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
#1203 - 2013-04-10 12:18:59 UTC
Liked the 8 turret Hyperion more. (With 6 turret it looks bad imho)

How about keeping the turrets and tweaking the bonuses instead?

-keep 5 %/lvl hybrid damage bonus
-increase armor rep to 10%/lvl
-make it affect both local and (incoming)remote
-add cap need bonus to repair lets say 10 % less cap / lvl
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#1204 - 2013-04-10 12:21:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Askulf Joringer wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:
I'm toying with the new Mega atm - the ship is still extremely CPU starved, but the new layout is incredible. If only it could take full advantage of all its slots. CPU rigs hurt to fit.


Stop being bad and fit c-type adaptives


You can't overheat adaptives. Building it for fleets. It needs to be capable of overheating its tank when primaried or bombed for that to work.

It can run 130k EHP and a complete **** resist profile with 2 ANPs and an explo hardener + 3 trimarks and 2 plates. The alternative is 119k with an excellent resist profile running the same alongside 1 trimark, 1 therm and 1 kinetic rig.

The problem with both is it can only overheat vs explosive.
Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1205 - 2013-04-10 12:24:02 UTC
The Hyperion shouldn't have to lose its eighth hi-slot. Look at the model. Having eight turrets is literally modelled into it. I'm OK with having the Megathron losing some drone capability and losing its launcher slots but you can't take away the Hyperion's eighth turret. It'll look wonky as hell.

The rate of fire bonus on the Megathron still needs to be addressed, as it causes a lot of issues.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1206 - 2013-04-10 12:27:27 UTC
Andreus Ixiris wrote:
The Hyperion shouldn't have to lose its eighth hi-slot. Look at the model. Having eight turrets is literally modelled into it. I'm OK with having the Megathron losing some drone capability and losing its launcher slots but you can't take away the Hyperion's eighth turret. It'll look wonky as hell.

The rate of fire bonus on the Megathron still needs to be addressed, as it causes a lot of issues.


Its losing two turrets so it wont be wonky at all.
Kenshaiso
League of Non-Aligned Worlds
#1207 - 2013-04-10 12:29:03 UTC
Most of the Gallente changes make no sense What?

Giving the mega an extra mid is handy for that eccm, but as previously stated dual booster active setups will still fail because acitve armour reps are ****. (AAR's are even worse imo)

The hyper has now been made even worse - losing a mid means those realy fielded active setups wont have enough cap. why not get rid of the active bonus.... it makes no sense... ahhh!

I dont understand why the Gallente are the only race not to have an 8 gun platform thats any good for 'ship o the line' doctrines.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1208 - 2013-04-10 12:31:23 UTC
Kenshaiso wrote:
Most of the Gallente changes make no sense What?

Giving the mega an extra mid is handy for that eccm, but as previously stated dual booster active setups will still fail because acitve armour reps are ****. (AAR's are even worse imo)

The hyper has now been made even worse - losing a mid means those realy fielded active setups wont have enough cap. why not get rid of the active bonus.... it makes no sense... ahhh!

I dont understand why the Gallente are the only race not to have an 8 gun platform thats any good for 'ship o the line' doctrines.


Go back, read it again, and start over.
Kenshaiso
League of Non-Aligned Worlds
#1209 - 2013-04-10 12:33:13 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kenshaiso wrote:
Most of the Gallente changes make no sense What?

Giving the mega an extra mid is handy for that eccm, but as previously stated dual booster active setups will still fail because acitve armour reps are ****. (AAR's are even worse imo)

The hyper has now been made even worse - losing a mid means those realy fielded active setups wont have enough cap. why not get rid of the active bonus.... it makes no sense... ahhh!

I dont understand why the Gallente are the only race not to have an 8 gun platform thats any good for 'ship o the line' doctrines.


Go back, read it again, and start over.



Hahaha yeah im sperging, just re-read it and wow i obviously cant read! (hides in corner in shame) Ugh
Tennessee Jack
Doomheim
#1210 - 2013-04-10 12:38:34 UTC
2 questions

1) would you build a fleet doctrine on these new ships
2) would you fly them and would they work..
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1211 - 2013-04-10 12:43:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Roime
Rise,

what was the original reason to change the Mega?

Does it achieve something now that it couldn't before?

What is it supposed to do?

I would say
a) leave the slot layout as it is currently on TQ
b) if you just really really have to change it for undisclosed reasons, please go back to 7+1 - 5 - 6 as it is more Gallente than this Amarr clone without the armor HP or fittings to use rails & tank.

.
StoneCold
Decadence.
RAZOR Alliance
#1212 - 2013-04-10 12:45:12 UTC
Quote:

Megathron:

Gallente Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% Large Hybrid Turret rate of fire (replaces large hybrid turret damage)
+7.5% Large Hybrid Turret tracking speed

Slot layout: 7H(-1), 4M, 8L(+1); 7 turrets , 0 launchers(-2)
Fittings: 15500 PWG, 570 CPU(+20)
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 6300(+89) / 6500(-141) / 7500
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 5800(+175) / 1087s / 5.02 (+.15)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 122(+7) / .117(-.0046) / 98400000 / 15.96s (-.63s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75(-50) / 75(-50)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 72.5km / 95 / 7
Sensor strength: 21 Magnetometric Sensor Strength
Signature radius: 380(-20)


7 High, 4 Mid, 8 Low - i like it.
If there is anything you want to change on the blap-a-thron from this point please only touch the dronebay.
I used 5 heavy drones on the mega, but will be happy if i don´t have to fool around with drones while dakka-dakka.
Also it got enough room for drones to fight off small and fast things.

Not sure how i feel about the loss of the utility high, i always brought a heavy neut with me.

My true stories
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1213 - 2013-04-10 12:46:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariner6
Kenshaiso wrote:
Most of the Gallente changes make no sense What?

Giving the mega an extra mid is handy for that eccm, but as previously stated dual booster active setups will still fail because acitve armour reps are ****. (AAR's are even worse imo)

The hyper has now been made even worse - losing a mid means those realy fielded active setups wont have enough cap. why not get rid of the active bonus.... it makes no sense... ahhh!

I dont understand why the Gallente are the only race not to have an 8 gun platform thats any good for 'ship o the line' doctrines.


There are low slots mods for ECCM. it didn't lose a mid.

The Mega's problem as I can see is now a CPU one. I like the slot layout, but not sure if has the CPU for it. Not much point gaining a low, just to have to put a CPU upgrade, but struggling to replicate this in EFT so not sure.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1214 - 2013-04-10 12:47:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Askulf Joringer wrote:
Yeah, lets not balance a ship around available content... With this argument, we may as well balance everything with t1.

If you're having cpu issues, just like the mega and geddon have had in the past, go and fit a c-type adaptive instead of a t2 eanm. It pretty much solves the problem. If you're afraid of risking a "cheap" dead space module then go ahead and fit a co-proc.


Balancing ships around deadspace mods is dumb for a number of reasons. C-type ANPs are cheap but they're not readily available and their price is terribly unpredictable.

We rarely even put named T1 mods in our fleet doctrines, save for meta MWDs, much less faction/deadspace simply because they're highly vulnerable to hostile buyouts and the rush of buyers will destroy availability.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Lord MuffloN
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1215 - 2013-04-10 12:47:24 UTC
After sitting in EFT with these stats, for the love of god, someone send a i7 to the Gallente people for reverse-engineering!
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1216 - 2013-04-10 12:48:00 UTC
StoneCold wrote:


Not sure how i feel about the loss of the utility high, i always brought a heavy neut with me.


Just like everyone else since the dawn of the capsuleer. Heavy neut is/was one of the things that justified a Mega instead of a Proteus.

.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#1217 - 2013-04-10 12:48:40 UTC
Roime wrote:
Rise,

what was the original reason to change the Mega?

Does it achieve something now that it couldn't before?

What is it supposed to do?

I would say
a) leave the slot layout as it is currently on TQ
b) if you just really really have to change it for undisclosed reasons, please go back to 7+1 - 5 - 6 as it is more Gallente than this Amarr clone without the armor HP or fittings to use rails & tank.

This a thousand times.
Rush Majors
Combat Salvaged Byproducts Inc
#1218 - 2013-04-10 12:50:36 UTC
Hyperion is looking good, really, really good. Big smile
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1219 - 2013-04-10 12:52:20 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Ah yes, the Armageddon vs Dominix.

I do want to look at the dominix power grid and see if it we can't find a better balance with the Armageddon, by adjusting one or the other.

I think the drone bay thing is kind of odd. Up the ship line you have Amarr with more bay, less bandwidth and Gallente vice versa, but at the BS scale you really can't give a drone ship less than max bandwidth, and you don't gain much from having more bay than the dominix already does. I didn't want to lower the dominix bay, so we just set the armageddon equal.

You adjusted the Power Grid on both up for the Dominix and down for the Armageddon, the end result for that, the Armageddon is still better.

You could have easily given the Armageddon 100Mbps of bandwidth and 400m3 drone bay and left the Dominix bandwidth and drone bay alone. That would follow suit with the lower bandwidth but bigger drone bay.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Marxzo Andoun
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1220 - 2013-04-10 12:53:24 UTC
Roime wrote:

Another way to fix this would be to extend drone bonus to all drone effects, to actually make the mythical "drone utility" a reality. Halve ECM drone base strength while you are at it. This would also differentiate the Domi and Geddon, one would be a true drone boat, other a nasty ghetto Bhaal.

Also, I see no reason to not extend the native drone control range of Domi now to better suit it's sentry drone role.



Yes. This essentially does what having +drone control / + bandwidth beyond 5 drones had accomplished in the past.

I can only speak for myself when I say that when I picked droneboats to fly, it's because of the additional utility in swapping out drone sizes, and utility drones as the situation is needed and this gives the boat identity and purpose.

If it's just going to be a snipe platform, why not pick another ship to do that with that doesn't have all the weaknesses of sentries such as bomb/smartbomb vulnerability, immobility and a good chance of leaving them behind in a hectic encounter?

I'm a little worried however that CCP Rise's new found role will make him hesitant to approach such interesting changes such as revisiting +bandwidth or utility drone strength (which would have much farther reaching implications than the Domi), and simply flip a few slot numbers and call it a day.