These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Pirate Faction Cruisers

First post First post First post
Author
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#861 - 2014-04-11 14:54:19 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
just ship toasting or trolling as usual.


everything I say is correct, but presented in a bitter shitposty way
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#862 - 2014-04-11 14:55:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Abramul wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Rabbit P wrote:


according to the formula, the align time of ashimmu should be 8.85s
rise , seem you miss the post before, so i post it again, please check the align time Straight


You're right, sorry I missed it before. Will correct the OP.

How difficult would it be to put this in in-game attributes? Assuming it's pretty straightforward math, and would be handy.

Not diffucult at all.
Harvey James wrote:


how does the formula work?

IIRC: -ln(.25)*inertia*mass/1,000,000

Edit: Nailed it.

Edit 2: not quite, fixing it by putting in a negative where I forgot it.
Cheng Musana
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#863 - 2014-04-11 15:33:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Cheng Musana
Im worried that the rattlesnake will just be a mirror of the gila. i think it will get 50mb bandwith so it can launch 2 heavy drones, gets bonus only on heavy's and damage bonus for missiles. We all know that it wont get a sentry damage bonus cause thats a gallente exclusive thing now. Depending on whats beeing posted next week im gonna sell my rattlesnake as long its worth something.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#864 - 2014-04-11 15:36:08 UTC
Vadeim Rizen wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:

Ashimmu: 430
Cynabal: 400
Gila: 440
Phantasm: 410
Vigilant: 450

Look for the battleship post at the start of next week.


So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them.



Another one of those snipy insulting posts directed at the person making the changes. Yea, that will get him to change course!

if only people in real life could train social skills like we can in game, the world would be a better place.
Vadeim Rizen
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#865 - 2014-04-11 15:46:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Vadeim Rizen
Jenn aSide wrote:
Vadeim Rizen wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:

Ashimmu: 430
Cynabal: 400
Gila: 440
Phantasm: 410
Vigilant: 450

Look for the battleship post at the start of next week.


So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them.



Another one of those snipy insulting posts directed at the person making the changes. Yea, that will get him to change course!

if only people in real life could train social skills like we can in game, the world would be a better place.



What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#866 - 2014-04-11 15:55:35 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
why does the phantasm have such a high align time?
its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it

The vigilants align time is much higher than the phantasm. I think the Cynabel should have higher align that the Vigilant though, right now they are equal.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#867 - 2014-04-11 16:37:40 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
why does the phantasm have such a high align time?
its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it

The vigilants align time is much higher than the phantasm. I think the Cynabel should have higher align that the Vigilant though, right now they are equal.


cynabal align time is a fair bit better than the vigilants

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

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#868 - 2014-04-11 17:15:40 UTC
Vadeim Rizen wrote:



What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response.


I suggest you learn that this is a video game we are talking about . The DEVs don't owe you are me or anyone else a reply, but being snippy at a DEV is a surefire way to insure that you don't get one lol.

I was unhappy with the NPC AI change and posted about it a lot without getting DEV replies. I didn't then stoop to what amounts to insulting them. I had my say and was done with it. Later, after the changes I pointed out how some of my concerns can't to fruition. At the end of the day, CCP is gonna do what they want, our option then becomes "live with it and keep playing" or unsub.

Not that i'm telling you what to do, just pointing out that would you did was counter-productive to what you want to happen.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#869 - 2014-04-11 17:52:24 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:

Ashimmu: 430
Cynabal: 400
Gila: 440
Phantasm: 410
Vigilant: 450

Look for the battleship post at the start of next week.


why the delay?

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

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#870 - 2014-04-11 18:14:49 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
why the delay?

And the ominous foreboding begins...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#871 - 2014-04-11 18:20:34 UTC
Vadeim Rizen wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Vadeim Rizen wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
There's a reason the cargo holds don't usually make it into the OP but it isn't a good one. I'll try to work on that in the future. I'm going to change the cargo for the cruisers to the following numbers:

Ashimmu: 430
Cynabal: 400
Gila: 440
Phantasm: 410
Vigilant: 450

Look for the battleship post at the start of next week.


So of all the posts in regards to the combat ability and urging you to make certain changes or explain why you are making certain changes, the one you respond to is about cargohold? Glad you took the time to create a forum post about the changes to these cruisers so you can pretend to care what anyone thinks or has to say about them.



Another one of those snipy insulting posts directed at the person making the changes. Yea, that will get him to change course!

if only people in real life could train social skills like we can in game, the world would be a better place.



What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response.

See, one of these things is not like the others, one of these things is a simple statement of numbers that have already been determined. The others are things that have to be carefully deliberated, the preferred direction of the balance team taken into account, number tweaking, etc. And for the most part, a strong opinion is to be avoided when commenting on balance ideas until testing has been done.

Basically, he likely responded to the cargobay thing because it's as easy as copy+pasting some numbers from a spreadsheet. Responding to balance ideas... well, it's comes down to agreeing with someone, saying it's impossible, or trying to tactfully call someone an idiot. It takes some thought to do.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#872 - 2014-04-11 18:53:23 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
why does the phantasm have such a high align time?
its an attack cruiser right ?


Because:

Sansha (san*sha)
noun
1. excrement; feces.
2. an act of defecating; evacuation.
3. the *****, diarrhea.
4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense.
5. Slang. something inferior or worthless.

As in, Man that fit is totally Sansha. Or, I need a quick bio, I've got a massive Sansha to take.

or:

verb (used without object), Sansha, or Sanshat, Sanshating.
9.to defecate.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#873 - 2014-04-11 18:55:40 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
why does the phantasm have such a high align time?
its an attack cruiser right ?


Because:

Sansha (san*sha)
noun
1. excrement; *****.
2. an act of defecating; evacuation.
3. the *****, diarrhea.
4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense.
5. Slang. something inferior or worthless.

As in, Man that fit is totally Sansha. Or, I need a quick bio, I've got a massive Sansha to take.

or:

verb (used without object), Sansha, or Sanshat, Sanshating.
9.to defecate.

more common use is the Dirty Sansha, a cousin the the Dirty Sanchez
LaserzPewPew
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#874 - 2014-04-11 19:00:19 UTC  |  Edited by: LaserzPewPew
Fabulous Rod wrote:
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
Well I will simply never use my gila again.

Edit : I don't ever use my gila it's so bad already. I guess I'll just continue to never use my gila.

Good work as ever Roll (SARCASM)

Edit : Concerns over Gila

1. Far less damage
2. Inability to use sentry drones.
3. Removal of all shield tanking sentry ships (cruiser class) from the game.
4. Massive lack of adaptability.
5. Un-bonused light drones.

In short - You have nerfed the gila, which was admittedly already one of the worst pirate cruisers.


How have these concerns not been addressed in 40+ pages.

Is there anyone who actually use a gila who wants these ridiculous changes that make Guristas have extreme niche application?


As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch.


Having a ship pigeonholed into exactly one approach is never a good thing. Add that to a medium drone ai that is completely psycho and you have a gimped ship design never to see viable use.

To add insult to injury, the capacitor is bad and the topspeed with a mwd is slower than most t1 cruisers. It can't kite in the present form and can't brawl as the mediums do not stack up to a set of heavies or sentries. Brawling would imply a vantage in a straight up, close range slugfest. It will not.
Arushia
Nova Labs
#875 - 2014-04-11 19:16:07 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


PHANTASM

Amarr Cruiser Bonus:
7.5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret tracking speed

Caldari Cruiser Bonus:
20% bonus to Afterburner velocity bonus (was 5% energy turret damage)

Role Bonus:
150% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage (was 100% energy turret damage)


Slot layout: 4H(-1), 6M, 5L(+2); 3 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 890 PWG(-35), 380 CPU(-45)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2700(+266) / 2175 / 2065
Capacitor (amount / recharge / cap per second) : 1800(+105) / 495000 (+3750) / 3.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 228(+64) / .62(-.06) / 9600000 / 8.25s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15 / 15
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 59km / 275 / 7
Sensor strength: 20
Signature radius: 120(-10)
Cargo Hold: 410


While the speed buff is ok, I feel like this ship is badly in need of extra drone versatility. Preferably 25 bandwidth, 50 bay to allow it to field a full set of lights or salvagers and carry a spare set.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#876 - 2014-04-11 19:29:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Jenn aSide wrote:
Vadeim Rizen wrote:



What do you suggest, then? I have posted several thought out, constructive criticism posts... as have many other people in this thread, and it gets no answer. Things like how the changes really arent beneficial to the actual use/application of the ship. Not just on the Vigi/Cynabal which I personally have problems with, but other people's concerns about the other ships as well... they just get ignored. Then someone brings up cargohold and it gets an immediate response.


I suggest you learn that this is a video game we are talking about . The DEVs don't owe you are me or anyone else a reply, but being snippy at a DEV is a surefire way to insure that you don't get one lol.

I was unhappy with the NPC AI change and posted about it a lot without getting DEV replies. I didn't then stoop to what amounts to insulting them. I had my say and was done with it. Later, after the changes I pointed out how some of my concerns can't to fruition. At the end of the day, CCP is gonna do what they want, our option then becomes "live with it and keep playing" or unsub.

Not that i'm telling you what to do, just pointing out that would you did was counter-productive to what you want to happen.


I made a comment earlier about an interesting theory I had as to why the devs are seemingly so resistant to specific player ideas on these kinds of threads you might find relevant. I think it explains why we think there's a disconnect between the devs and us even though they set up these feature threads specifically for player feedback, even if it doesn't get changed when it needs to. Take a look at this:
Catherine Laartii wrote:

Judging how the last rebalance threads have gone, I'm thinking the reason why Rise doesn't consider implementing valid player ideas that get brought up is because the credit or subsequent blame would go to the player in question, causing unintentional collateral damage to a customer.

This is the main issue with having an open forum, as the responsibility for fixing an issue lies soley with the devs, so having someone come up with a legitimately good idea to implement a change doesn't happen because the dev in charge of rebalancing a mechanic can't appear to be picking sides.

A possible solution to this to help alleviate concerns on both ends would be to have the dev in charge periodically link a poll listing concerns with the subject of the thread, ideas posted by players from the thread to vote on, and a extremely displeased to extremely pleased scale options for players to choose from.

Would you consider this an acceptable method for helping these Feature posts, both from a player and Dev perspective? The only reason why I see him boxed into odd ideas is so they don't appear to exhibit favoritism, or have one idiot posting around everywhere, "Hey, that was MY idea! (link post) everyone should be paying attention to ME!"

I think this would help solve a lot of the major communication problems we are having from the player base to the developers, and cut down on a lot of the hate and angst in these threads.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#877 - 2014-04-11 20:14:39 UTC
LaserzPewPew wrote:
As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch.


Having a ship pigeonholed into exactly one approach is never a good thing. Add that to a medium drone ai that is completely psycho and you have a gimped ship design never to see viable use.

To add insult to injury, the capacitor is bad and the topspeed with a mwd is slower than most t1 cruisers. It can't kite in the present form and can't brawl as the mediums do not stack up to a set of heavies or sentries. Brawling would imply a vantage in a straight up, close range slugfest. It will not.


You're telling me that medium drones don't have 20% better damage application than heavy drones? Because that's the DPS difference between two Gila mediums post-patch and 5 heavies pre-patch. It's even smaller if you use augmented drones, which of course is much more viable when you only need to launch two of them.

While not being able to use sentries is an issue, "doesn't stack up to a set of heavies" is just ridiculous.
Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
#878 - 2014-04-11 20:51:42 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
LaserzPewPew wrote:
As a pilot with over 1000 solo kills with a gila and has been interviewed by themittani, I can safely say the ishtar is a more versatile ship. Hell, a shield stratios will be a better brawling ship than the gila post patch.


Having a ship pigeonholed into exactly one approach is never a good thing. Add that to a medium drone ai that is completely psycho and you have a gimped ship design never to see viable use.

To add insult to injury, the capacitor is bad and the topspeed with a mwd is slower than most t1 cruisers. It can't kite in the present form and can't brawl as the mediums do not stack up to a set of heavies or sentries. Brawling would imply a vantage in a straight up, close range slugfest. It will not.


You're telling me that medium drones don't have 20% better damage application than heavy drones? Because that's the DPS difference between two Gila mediums post-patch and 5 heavies pre-patch. It's even smaller if you use augmented drones, which of course is much more viable when you only need to launch two of them.

While not being able to use sentries is an issue, "doesn't stack up to a set of heavies" is just ridiculous.



Don't forget that mediums are also getting a MWD speed buff and the various racial versions are being balanced too. Mediums will already be in a better spot and then the Gila will be spitting out super drones. Put a couple of Gilas in a fleet with some of the 50 bandwidth HACs/Navy Cruisers and it will be hard to tell which of the medium drones are crushing them. Additionally low slot tracking modules for drones as well as scriptable omnis make hitting frigs with mediums trivially easy. So why anyone is afraid of losing a flight of lights is beyond me. A frig pilot would have to be insane to attack the new Gila.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#879 - 2014-04-11 22:02:17 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
why does the phantasm have such a high align time?
its an attack cruiser right ? so look at the vigilant align time and compare it

The vigilants align time is much higher than the phantasm. I think the Cynabel should have higher align that the Vigilant though, right now they are equal.


cynabal align time is a fair bit better than the vigilants

Yes you are right. Ok serves me right for skim reading the numbers. If it makes it any better, both align times comprise of exactly the same numbers, but just in a different order. :)
LaserzPewPew
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#880 - 2014-04-11 23:12:01 UTC  |  Edited by: LaserzPewPew
The forum ate my post! Round two. It appears I need to be more winded to explain drone ai. Drones will mwd to catch up to a target then shut its mwd off for ten seconds. This is problematic for anything mwding faster than 1500ms as medium drones have an activation range of 1500m. Add that to a server tick issue and your drones are getting one shot off every cycle regardless of the drone speed buff. So that rules out kiting scenarios.

Medium and heavy drones also have the same gun resolution. 125mm. If you have a target scrammed/webbed, tracking is no longer and issue and you apply the drone that puts out the most damage. Hammerheads post patch will be 600ish while ogres currently put down 850 and gardes come in at 800.