These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Command Ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#161 - 2013-08-01 16:18:10 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Also why does the vulture need 2 optimal range bonuses to use blasters? .... its not a sniper come on damage or tracking please

Might be because Caldari mostly uses Railguns and not blasters. One could even argue that Railguns and Blasters work on 2 completely different theories and should be separated, but that is for a different thread.
Blasters and Rails are fine. They use the same ammo, and that means they're both Hybrids. The fact that one is extremely close, high tracking and the other is extremely long range, low tracking is as similar as ACs being close, high falloff, low alpha and Arties being long range, high optimal, high alpha. They don't operate under "completely different theories."

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#162 - 2013-08-01 16:22:31 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Each race should have one command ship that has a bonus to local reps and one that has a passive tank bonus!What?


Rather not. Amarr is quite bad at passive tanking because lack of med slots required for shield tanking. And you can't passive tank a armor tanker.
Doddy
Excidium.
#163 - 2013-08-01 16:22:32 UTC
Jonatan Reed wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
How much of an effect will the decrease in number of turrets/increase in DPS bonuses have on the DPS of command ships like the Sleipnir/Astarte/Abso?


You can look at in terms of effective turrets.

Sleipnir goes from 11.6666 effective turrets to 11.25
Astarte goes from 10.9 effective turrets to 10
Abso stays at 10 effective turrets


Can someone explain whatthe hell effective turrets even means? When the hell did this metric even come from?


Its an easy way of comparing different damage bonuses in a simple way that they have always used.

8 turrets with 25% bonus (so lvl 5 on a 5% per level skill) = 10 turrets
6 Turrets with 50% bonus (so level 5 on a 10% per level skill) = 9 turrets
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#164 - 2013-08-01 16:23:09 UTC
Also curious to know Fozzie .. in the future when OGB is removed what kind of ranges do you have in mind for links? and have you factored that into the CS rebalance?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#165 - 2013-08-01 16:23:51 UTC
The only thing I agree with is the damnation booster issue. Yes the flying chicken won't get alpha'd off the field, it won't be doing much of anything damage wise though.

And yea having 100+ships all target you and shoot at once can't be the main focal factor of the ship. The recent megabrawals... Not much was surviving once targeted. Subcaps do blow up in large fleet ops.

These can survive on the field. The changes are good, there's no need to hide the ship in a safe vs using it (it will still happen).

Yaay!!!!
Doddy
Excidium.
#166 - 2013-08-01 16:25:35 UTC
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Each race should have one command ship that has a bonus to local reps and one that has a passive tank bonus!What?


Rather not. Amarr is quite bad at passive tanking because lack of med slots required for shield tanking. And you can't passive tank a armor tanker.


I don't think you get passive tanking. Passive tanking = no repair, so any armour buffer tank is passive tanking. Amarr is by far the best race at passive tanking.

I think you are thinking of shield "passive" tanking which relies on shield regen. Whether it is actually passive tanking depends on how you define passive. The shield is regening, so its certainly not fully passive, but the player is not controlling it so it is passive on the pilots part.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#167 - 2013-08-01 16:27:08 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:

I'd like the see the damnation be put on par with the rest, as is there's no reason to use anything but that for large fleet fights, which doesn't really add flavor, but just negates choice.

Also, why does the EOS still get a bonus to MHT instead of it's drones, which are really the reason to use the ship over the Astarte. As is, its a poor Astarte and a slightly mediocre Myrmidon. Just throw it the Drone bonuses and give it a reason to exist. It won't step on the other drone boats as its used for a different purpose. Keep the bonus to Heavy's if you're worried about the sentry aspect.

Why does Gallente not get a bonus to Information warfare links? Isn't that their racial bonus?

I think the bolded part is actually part of the problem. There's only so many bonuses you can do for drones, and the drone boat space is looking a little crowded. I mean, how many varied bonuses can you give for drone boats? So far we have ships that do drone velocity, drone damage, drone hitpoints, drone tracking and drone optimal, in some combination of thereof. What's more, of the 125 mb/s drone ships, we have damage/hp + velocity/tracking (Nexor) and damage/hp, drone operation range, heavy mwd/tracking and sentry optimal/tracking (Ishtar). So where, then, is there room for an Eos with bonuses that don't completely overlap somewhere in there? Already Nexor and Ishtar's heavy uses overlap (with Ishtar being better at it); now the Eos will largely do the same thing, as well.

I'd almost say give Eos a dual tank bonus so as to not overlap *so* much with the Nexor or Ishtar. But overall, in the drone ship space, it's getting a bit cramped with an uncomfortable bit of overlap.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#168 - 2013-08-01 16:28:29 UTC
everything looks pretty good but.... The effective turret lost on the Astarte is pretty dumb...
Lucas Ericsson
Legio III Italica
#169 - 2013-08-01 16:28:36 UTC
Tobias Hareka
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#170 - 2013-08-01 16:29:45 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Each race should have one command ship that has a bonus to local reps and one that has a passive tank bonus!What?


Rather not. Amarr is quite bad at passive tanking because lack of med slots required for shield tanking. And you can't passive tank a armor tanker.


I don't think you get passive tanking. Passive tanking = no repair, so any armour buffer tank is passive tanking. Amarr is by far the best race at passive tanking.

I think you are thinking of shield "passive" tanking which relies on shield regen. Whether it is actually passive tanking depends on how you define passive. The shield is regening, so its certainly not fully passive, but the player is not controlling it so it is passive on the pilots part.


http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Tanking#Passive_tanking
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#171 - 2013-08-01 16:30:38 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Each race should have one command ship that has a bonus to local reps and one that has a passive tank bonus!What?


Rather not. Amarr is quite bad at passive tanking because lack of med slots required for shield tanking. And you can't passive tank a armor tanker.


I don't think you get passive tanking. Passive tanking = no repair, so any armour buffer tank is passive tanking. Amarr is by far the best race at passive tanking.

I think you are thinking of shield "passive" tanking which relies on shield regen. Whether it is actually passive tanking depends on how you define passive. The shield is regening, so its certainly not fully passive, but the player is not controlling it so it is passive on the pilots part.


Armor doesn't regen, so if you passive tank armor you're done after one fight, win or lose. You have to go back to a friendly station to repair, and that could be far away. If you passive tank shield you can survive in enemy space forever and keep killing until someone finally beats you.
Elendar
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#172 - 2013-08-01 16:31:32 UTC
Not really a fan of the changes from a large fleet perspective.

At present on TQ in armour fleets the damnation is the only viable armour command ship as its the only one with the ehp to be able to survive just getting vollied off the field, skirmish/info links are run on damnations in most armour fleets because claymores/eos are simply too weak. Nothing in this update will change that.

The vulture is again the only shield option but is somewhat weaker than the damnation and more reliant on active, neut-able, modules to get decent ehp than the damnation is (plus you can't slave the shield tank). Vultures tend to get vollied pretty early in most big fleet fights and again no other command ship is even slightly viable for shield fleets.

The vulture should really have a shield ehp bonus in place of one of those optimal range bonuses to give it a better chance of surviving a fleet fight. Its no fun fcing when you know you'll just get blapped of the field as soon as the fight starts because your command ship simply cannot have enough ehp (I run HG slaves and faction hardeners on my damnation so that it has a decent chance of actually living through the first 30 seconds of a big fight). And as anyone who has FC'd knows you really want to be the ship in the fleet command position so you can probe and fleet warp, which pretty much means running a command ship.

Imo the eos and claymore should also get at least a resist bonus in place of the local rep bonus. This would make them more viable for larger fleets while also giving them an effective rep bonus from the additional reps so they are still good for smaller gangs. This also leaves the slep/astarte with the local reps for those that want buffed local reps.

Please think of the FCs!
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#173 - 2013-08-01 16:32:42 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:


The damnations damage has universally been pathetic. The Eos and Astarte would mow it down to kibble.

Damnation will still be the fleet brick. I'd like to start seeing some Eos/Ast fits now.


If by "mow it down" you mean take 10+ minutes to kill, then yeah I agree with you...
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#174 - 2013-08-01 16:35:32 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
PinkKnife wrote:

I'd like the see the damnation be put on par with the rest, as is there's no reason to use anything but that for large fleet fights, which doesn't really add flavor, but just negates choice.

Also, why does the EOS still get a bonus to MHT instead of it's drones, which are really the reason to use the ship over the Astarte. As is, its a poor Astarte and a slightly mediocre Myrmidon. Just throw it the Drone bonuses and give it a reason to exist. It won't step on the other drone boats as its used for a different purpose. Keep the bonus to Heavy's if you're worried about the sentry aspect.

Why does Gallente not get a bonus to Information warfare links? Isn't that their racial bonus?

I think the bolded part is actually part of the problem. There's only so many bonuses you can do for drones, and the drone boat space is looking a little crowded. I mean, how many varied bonuses can you give for drone boats? So far we have ships that do drone velocity, drone damage, drone hitpoints, drone tracking and drone optimal, in some combination of thereof. What's more, of the 125 mb/s drone ships, we have damage/hp + velocity/tracking (Nexor) and damage/hp, drone operation range, heavy mwd/tracking and sentry optimal/tracking (Ishtar). So where, then, is there room for an Eos with bonuses that don't completely overlap somewhere in there? Already Nexor and Ishtar's heavy uses overlap (with Ishtar being better at it); now the Eos will largely do the same thing, as well.

I'd almost say give Eos a dual tank bonus so as to not overlap *so* much with the Nexor or Ishtar. But overall, in the drone ship space, it's getting a bit cramped with an uncomfortable bit of overlap.



Agreed. The 125 bandwidth limit on drones has caused allot of issues with the droneboats balancing wise. Its like everything droneboat got 125 bandwidth and has been a balancing act between 5 heavies vs 5 sentries. Now I like the Eos, I think its potential will be crazy, the tank is still in question as we all compare it to the Damnation.

Yaay!!!!
Baren
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#175 - 2013-08-01 16:36:21 UTC
Maybe the they could all use just a little more dps,
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#176 - 2013-08-01 16:37:08 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:


The damnations damage has universally been pathetic. The Eos and Astarte would mow it down to kibble.

Damnation will still be the fleet brick. I'd like to start seeing some Eos/Ast fits now.


If by "mow it down" you mean take 10+ minutes to kill, then yeah I agree with you...


Ok killing a damnation is about as fast as chopping down a tree with a Herring.

The damnation wont' be doing much besides just orbiting watching its health bleed.

Yaay!!!!
ALeKasandra
TERRA STAR TECHNOLOGY
#177 - 2013-08-01 16:37:49 UTC
Will change carriers? They are also able to be the command ship.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#178 - 2013-08-01 16:39:57 UTC
Elendar wrote:
Not really a fan of the changes from a large fleet perspective.

At present on TQ in armour fleets the damnation is the only viable armour command ship as its the only one with the ehp to be able to survive just getting vollied off the field, skirmish/info links are run on damnations in most armour fleets because claymores/eos are simply too weak. Nothing in this update will change that.

The vulture is again the only shield option but is somewhat weaker than the damnation and more reliant on active, neut-able, modules to get decent ehp than the damnation is (plus you can't slave the shield tank). Vultures tend to get vollied pretty early in most big fleet fights and again no other command ship is even slightly viable for shield fleets.

The vulture should really have a shield ehp bonus in place of one of those optimal range bonuses to give it a better chance of surviving a fleet fight. Its no fun fcing when you know you'll just get blapped of the field as soon as the fight starts because your command ship simply cannot have enough ehp (I run HG slaves and faction hardeners on my damnation so that it has a decent chance of actually living through the first 30 seconds of a big fight). And as anyone who has FC'd knows you really want to be the ship in the fleet command position so you can probe and fleet warp, which pretty much means running a command ship.

Imo the eos and claymore should also get at least a resist bonus in place of the local rep bonus. This would make them more viable for larger fleets while also giving them an effective rep bonus from the additional reps so they are still good for smaller gangs. This also leaves the slep/astarte with the local reps for those that want buffed local reps.

Please think of the FCs!



10 v 10 or 20 v 20, EOS will actually contribute.

100+.. yea I can see it geting wtf stomped in seconds vs the minute it would take to pop the Damnation.

Yaay!!!!
Bacchanalian
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#179 - 2013-08-01 16:40:00 UTC
Elendar wrote:
Not really a fan of the changes from a large fleet perspective.

At present on TQ in armour fleets the damnation is the only viable armour command ship as its the only one with the ehp to be able to survive just getting vollied off the field, skirmish/info links are run on damnations in most armour fleets because claymores/eos are simply too weak. Nothing in this update will change that.


To be honest, I think for that context of fight they'd be better off giving carriers the same bonuses as the command ships when it comes to links. Buffing command ships for the occasional 400 vs 400 leaves them unbalanced in other contexts.

Carriers have a bonus to the fitting on gang links, do they not? Why not give them the same leadership-related bonuses. It seems that as they had leadership skills as prerequisites for flying them, the notion existed in some past iteration of CCP and perhaps got lost along the way.
Shpenat
Ironman Inc.
Transgress
#180 - 2013-08-01 16:40:09 UTC
I am curious about astarte cargo capacity. The brutix has 475 m3 cargo bay while Myrmidon retains 400.

Should not astarte and eos follow the same path?
Astarte: 475 m3
Eos: 400 m3

After all astarte needs much more ammunition to store in its cargo hold.