These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Mordu's Legion

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sheimi Madaveda
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#901 - 2014-05-20 21:54:45 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Not true. HAML already apply damage enough. There is a reason why we use so many cerberus and tengus with HAMLs. As long as you are not hunting interceptors


HAM are fine, but I was not talking about HAM. I was talking about the longer ranger variants - HML.

Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png 
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#902 - 2014-05-20 22:01:25 UTC
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
The Barghest seriously needs a buff, be it a change to 7.5% damage per Caldari Battleship skill level or another launcher slot- I don't want this to end up like the nestor...

Or a proper damage application bonus.. Or a mix of the two like I suggested back some pages ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4589746#post4589746 )
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#903 - 2014-05-20 22:38:07 UTC
Sniper Smith wrote:
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
The Barghest seriously needs a buff, be it a change to 7.5% damage per Caldari Battleship skill level or another launcher slot- I don't want this to end up like the nestor...

Or a proper damage application bonus.. Or a mix of the two like I suggested back some pages ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4589746#post4589746 )

Yeah, that'd do it

"A City made of Dreams is built in heaven"
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#904 - 2014-05-20 23:19:44 UTC
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
The Barghest seriously needs a buff, be it a change to 7.5% damage per Caldari Battleship skill level or another launcher slot- I don't want this to end up like the nestor...


The Barghest really needs that 8th launcher slot.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#905 - 2014-05-20 23:30:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
FT Diomedes wrote:
The Barghest really needs that 8th launcher slot.

No, it really doesn't... Some of us actually like having the utility high slot. The 5% missile damage bonus is completely workable, so while I'd personally be ecstatic with a bump to 7.5% - aside from sticker shock it's still going to be awesome.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#906 - 2014-05-21 00:18:18 UTC
Ok, ive been asking you to redo the angel line with missiles multiple times - which you basicely did with these and i really do like them but i have a few things to say about them - frigate is fine, maybe nerf the speed and the agility a tiny bit but otherwise its really good.

On the cruiser, a tad op - to much range with the point and to fast - slightly tone it down so you ahve to spend fitting space on speed mods making it all around a bit weaker. That thing will rock so hard.

On the bs, its crap, it looks really cool and nice but at least for solo/duo pvp its crap - it warps to slow making it non viable to roams, and since you need the rigs for rigors to do any actual dps you cant use them for anything else, in reality the cruiser will outdps the bs at any given point vs non bs. Add a application bonus - this frees up rigs for warp speed and the like making it at least semi viable.


In general, frig is fine, cruiser is a tiny bit to strong (or cyna is to weak), bs needs a few buffs.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#907 - 2014-05-21 00:27:12 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
The Barghest really needs that 8th launcher slot.

No, it really doesn't... Some of us actually like having the utility high slot. The 5% missile damage bonus is completely workable, so while I'd personally be ecstatic with a bump to 7.5% - aside from sticker shock it's still going to be awesome.

an 8th turret slot does not a utility high remove.

If people woudl rather fit a utility instead of an 8th turret, or a turret instead of a utility, that should be their prerogative.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#908 - 2014-05-21 01:16:34 UTC
It either needs another launcher or a higher damage bonus. For its cost, it needs to be a higher dps boat.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#909 - 2014-05-21 01:29:14 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
The Barghest really needs that 8th launcher slot.

No, it really doesn't... Some of us actually like having the utility high slot. The 5% missile damage bonus is completely workable, so while I'd personally be ecstatic with a bump to 7.5% - aside from sticker shock it's still going to be awesome.

an 8th turret slot does not a utility high remove.

If people woudl rather fit a utility instead of an 8th turret, or a turret instead of a utility, that should be their prerogative.


Exactly. Giving the Barghest the 8th launcher will enhance the ship's utility much more than giving it a "utility" slot will.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#910 - 2014-05-21 01:36:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
If people woudl rather fit a utility instead of an 8th turret, or a turret instead of a utility, that should be their prerogative.

Let's try to keep this in context, shall we? 7 launchers @25% is 8.75 effective launchers and 8 launchers @25% is 10.00 effective launchers; we're asking for 7 launchers @37.5% or 9.625 effective launchers PLUS the utility high. Not that we'd probably get a full 25% bonus with the 8 launchers since the State Raven features 8 launchers with a 25% ROF.

FT Diomedes wrote:
Exactly. Giving the Barghest the 8th launcher will enhance the ship's utility much more than giving it a "utility" slot will.

No, it means trading dps for a utility slot. That would be like giving the new Rattlesnake 5 launchers with 5 highs (try suggesting this in the other thread and see how well that goes over...). I'm not disagreeing with you in premise; but there's just no way the Barghest would be given an 8th slot to bring damage on-par or greater than a State Raven.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#911 - 2014-05-21 01:42:08 UTC
The Barghest and the Rattlesnake are two very different ships.

My support for the 8th launcher is 60% aesthetic and 40% because I think more people will buy the ship if it has eight launchers. I don't really think it will be that much more effective...

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#912 - 2014-05-21 01:45:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
FT Diomedes wrote:
The Barghest and the Rattlesnake are two very different ships.

My support for the 8th launcher is 60% aesthetic and 40% because I think more people will buy the ship if it has eight launchers. I don't really think it will be that much more effective...

Yes, my point was not to underestimate the value of a utility high. I was editing my post to reference the State Raven so I think you missed that portion, but from a purely aesthetic standpoint - yes, 8 launchers would be purtier. However, since this would put the damage above that of a State Raven - I don't expect we'd still see the 25% damage bonus on 8 launchers without taking a hit somewhere else.

Since we're into "wishful thinking", what I'd actually prefer is 6 launchers with a +50% damage bonus, one less high slot (total of 7) and an extra low slot (also 7). That actually gives it marginally better damage (9.0 effective vs. 8.75) as well as allowing for a decent armour tank configuration.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#913 - 2014-05-21 01:54:43 UTC
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
I don't want this to end up like the nestor...

No chance of that...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sheimi Madaveda
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#914 - 2014-05-21 01:56:47 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Yes, my point was not to underestimate the value of a utility high. I was editing my post to reference the State Raven so I think you missed that portion, but from a purely aesthetic standpoint - yes, 8 launchers would be purtier. However, since this would put the damage above that of a State Raven - I don't expect we'd still see the 25% damage bonus on 8 launchers without taking a hit somewhere else.

Since we're into "wishful thinking", what I'd actually prefer is 6 launchers with a +50% damage bonus, one less high slot (total of 7) and an extra low slot (also 7). That actually gives it marginally better damage (9.0 effective vs. 8.75) as well as allowing for a decent armour tank configuration.


It wouldn't break the DPS of the State Raven because 25% RoF is better than 25% Damage unless you are using RHML.

I remember throwing stuff into EFT sometime and the State Raven has the highest potential DPS of any BS in the game... it even beats the Vindicator by a measurable amount. Caldari's got mad deeps man, mad deeps.

Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png 
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#915 - 2014-05-21 02:05:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Sheimi Madaveda wrote:
It wouldn't break the DPS of the State Raven because 25% RoF is better than 25% Damage unless you are using RHML. I remember throwing stuff into EFT sometime and the State Raven has the highest potential DPS of any BS in the game... it even beats the Vindicator by a measurable amount. Caldari's got mad deeps man, mad deeps.

Try to imagine a torpedo Barghest with an alpha of 12305 (not a typo), 26.6km range and 239m explosion radius (before webs or target painters). That's 1781.25 dps (2095 dps overheated). And another 250 or so dps for drones. Not to mention the 15000 or so m/sec velocity, which is basically instantaneous. Now tell me an 8th launcher is even remotely in the realm of possibility... Yes, this entails a few Faction ballistic controls and +5 implants - but compared to the sticker price of the Barghest these upgrade "options" are chump change.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sheimi Madaveda
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#916 - 2014-05-21 02:14:48 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Try to imagine a torpedo Barghest with an alpha of 12305 (not a typo), 26.6km range and 239m explosion radius (before webs or target painters). That's 1781.25 dps (2095 dps overheated). And another 250 or so dps for drones. Not to mention the 15000 or so m/sec velocity, which is basically instantaneous. Now tell me an 8th launcher is even remotely in the realm of possibility... Yes, this entails a few Faction ballistic controls and +5 implants - but compared to the sticker price of the Barghest these upgrade "options" are chump change.


I wasn't rooting for it getting an 8th launcher. I love my utility highs too much to want an 8th launcher. I was just being annoying and saying that an ALLIANCE TOURNAMENT ship would get a little more damage than a Pirate BS even if you handed it another launcher.

Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png 
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#917 - 2014-05-21 02:16:49 UTC
Sheimi Madaveda wrote:
I wasn't rooting for it getting an 8th launcher. I love my utility highs too much to want an 8th launcher. I was just being annoying and saying that an ALLIANCE TOURNAMENT ship would get a little more damage than a Pirate BS even if you handed it another launcher.

We're both in agreement on the utility high. Lol
Dps, yes - no argument... A 12000+ alpha on the other hand...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#918 - 2014-05-21 02:29:42 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
The Barghest and the Rattlesnake are two very different ships.

My support for the 8th launcher is 60% aesthetic and 40% because I think more people will buy the ship if it has eight launchers. I don't really think it will be that much more effective...

Yes, my point was not to underestimate the value of a utility high. I was editing my post to reference the State Raven so I think you missed that portion, but from a purely aesthetic standpoint - yes, 8 launchers would be purtier. However, since this would put the damage above that of a State Raven - I don't expect we'd still see the 25% damage bonus on 8 launchers without taking a hit somewhere else.

Since we're into "wishful thinking", what I'd actually prefer is 6 launchers with a +50% damage bonus, one less high slot (total of 7) and an extra low slot (also 7). That actually gives it marginally better damage (9.0 effective vs. 8.75) as well as allowing for a decent armour tank configuration.

See my suggestion from some pages back -- https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4589746#post4589746

Similar, only I forfeit the slot altogether (19 slot rather than 20, like a NM) in exchange for an Applied DPS role bonus.

I think the 6/6 med/high is fine.. you can armor or shield tank it if you want, both are more than viable. I'd much rather a better punch than an extra low that is useless on shield fits, and would push this more into armor..
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#919 - 2014-05-21 02:38:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Sniper Smith wrote:
See my suggestion from some pages back...

So we give up the utility high and 0.5 effective launchers in exchange for the ability to run a pair of soon-to-be-neutered Geckos and some extra damage application for cruise and torpedoes (only) that can be replicated by a single rigor rig? I'll keep my utility high, the 7 launchers and the +5% damage bonus...

As I've repeatedly said, the proposed Barghest is perfect as is. A 7.5% damage bonus would just sweeten the deal.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#920 - 2014-05-21 03:00:06 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
I don't want this to end up like the nestor...

No chance of that...



Useless bonuses, crap fittings and questionable roles..


........have two of three covered.

The point bonus may be decent IF and only if the hull was as fast as a mach. Its not quite there, so all of the point range in teh world is still silly because its a damn battleship, battleships don't point, ESPECIALLY shiled battleships, when you have 50 other things that can go better in the mid slots.