These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Ships and mechanics to balance next? - fast and simple suggestions
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1 - 2011-11-18 13:26:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
With a good hybrid fix in place for now even if CCP refuse to give us the last tweaks on hybrid ammo we can soon start looking into other areas of balancing. I've made a short list of things and ships I would think could get fixed in a simple way.

MECHANICS

Active tanking :
Active tanking has since the HitPoint patches been reserved for PvE or multibillion isk lowsec pirates with crystal sets and boosters.
I think it is a shame and I believe all active reps and shield boosters should give 50% more hitpoints pr cycle.
At the same time I think it is important to change crystal implants to give more shield hitpoints balancing them with slaves as well as preventing unbreakable shield tanks.
This might not change fleets from buffertanks but it will give many ships a viable alternative especially in small/medium fights. Amongst many others I think this will specifically help the following ships: Tempest, Maelstrom, Rokh, Raven, Hyperion, Cyclone, Brutix, Myrmidon etc etc

Afterburners :
Very few people use the afterburner because the MWD is so dominating. Unless oversized I only see afterburners being used on dual prop setups or in HAC fleets getting bridged in on top of the enemy. I would love for CCP to look into boosting AB speeds to make them a usefull alternative. Either that or make the MWD eat your structure while using the MWD hehe but maybe thats a Pandoras Box to open hehe

Rigs :
Armor rigs makes it difficult for the Gallente to do their job while shield rigs just make shield boats take more damage from bigger guns which rarely has any consequences. I would either change the armor rig penalties to reduce sensor strength or scan resolution or give the shield rigs a little worse penalty.
Also the CCC rigs almost always is a better choice than cap reduction rigs for armor/shield because they affect the entire ship and not only part of it. I would suggest the bonus for the cap reduction rigs gives a bigger reduction or perhaps the ccc rigs gets a small reduction.
Anyway this would likely be a extra advantage to the Gallente ships when trying to get in blaster range.

EWar drones :
By the looks of it only 1 type of ewar drones makes a difference on the battlefield: ECM drones.
The web drones only existing in a heavy variant are too slow and ineffecient to web anything and the other drones are not worth the lost dps either. All of these are likely to need a small boost.
CCP should look into medium web drones as well as change the ecm-drones. Even ec-300 drones don't have much power, but it is chance based and a few ships are able to put out many many jamming attempts. But the real problem with ecm drones is that a jam will keep you jammed for 20 seconds. Make the small ecm drones only jam you for 5 seconds, medium drones for 10 seconds and the heavy drones for 15 seconds.

XL guns on titans :
These can reliable track and destroy even a small battlecruiser in 1-3 volleys. Plz make them unable to track THAT well even with remote tracking links plz

SHIPS

Prophecy :
This ship need a good role - currently it's just a brick with a heavy tank and no bite. Forget the cap bonus. With the usual passive buffer you can easily replace the bonus with something giving the ship a good role. Drone bonus, optimal bonus or even anything else should help the Prophecy have a purpose instead of being bait with autocannons...

Apocalypse :
Seems to actually handle itself fine with the range bonus. A very nasty ship with far hitting pulse lasers.
Maybe this don't need any help, but I just wanted to put it on the list to make sure it isn't overlooked.

Rokh :
As the highest tier battleship in the caldari line this ship dissapoints a lot. With the hybrid buff coming up at least it will now have the dps to be a decent ratting ship, but for PvP it still lacks either a bonus for damage or a medslot to utilize the tanking potential while still being able to tackle an oponent.
Optimal bonus is nice and all and works okay for BCs, but not really for battleships.
Suggestion 1 : replace optimal bonus with damage bonus and perhaps give the Hyperion a ROF bonus
Suggestion 2 : replace optimal bonus with damage bonus and take away a gunslot (still about 10% more dps)
Suggestion 3 : extra medslot on behalf of a lowslot or hi-slot

Raven :
This ship isn't actually that bad however for many reasons not used much in PvP. Tough fitting makes this ship rarely
use the last hi-slot anyway and could really use an extra medslot for tackle or extra tank. We all know how easily a Raven explodes even if it has a good tank. I would even be willing to give up a lowslot (less dps) for the ability to fit more tank or tackle. Keeping the current fitting attributes the Raven will have trouble with CPU so it will be difficult to abuse such a change.

Hurricane :
Being the swiss army knife of Eve this boat is dangerous. Fast, able to use both shield and armor tank, dps like a small battleship, able to carry 2 neuts and easily kill anything it seems it doesn't really lack any drawbacks.
I hate to nerf things but I would look into removing the entire drone bay on this ship.

All T1 cruisers :
I think all T1 cruiser hulls should receive an extra 10-20% hitpoints on shield/armor depending on their race. The battlecruisers in Eve today is lurking over these once great ships like a heavy shadow when new players almost start with enough isk and skillpoints to skip cruisers immediately and it's a shame...
Perhaps with the upcoming destroyer buff the frigates need a similar boost?
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#2 - 2011-11-18 13:28:23 UTC
Reserved for comments - I ran out of space so likely I forgot a few things...
Plz keep thoughts simple and easy or it will take forever to get the minor tweaks that could benefit the game a lot.
Daedalus Arcova
The Scope
#3 - 2011-11-18 14:51:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Daedalus Arcova
Active tanking :
- Main problems with active armour tanking (I have no experience of active shield) is the massive PG and cap use. Active tanking severely gimps your offensive abilities, due to lack of power, and your EWar due to need for cap boosters/rechargers.

Afterburners :
- Not sure this is much of a problem. There's more than a few fleet concepts based around the afterburner and sig tanking.
- Some ships could do with specific bonuses to afterburning, such as AFs and EAFs.

Rigs :
- The speed penalty should go, I agree. However, any new penalty needs to make sense. An agility penalty would be meaningful to armour tankers, but not completely gimp a single race.

Utility drones :
- ECM Drones are EWar, not utility. But yes, all other kinds of EWar drones need a boost. Small ECM drones are probably a bit too powerful.
- Agree that we need small and medium web drones.
- Utility (armour, shield, cap) drones could maybe use a boost as well. They seem underused, even by logistics ships that get bonuses to them.

A related, but slightly separate matter is drone skills. Drone skills have very little impact on the effectiveness of EWar drones.
- The Drone Interfacing skill should apply to the effectiveness of EWar and utility drones.
- Base stats of existing EWar drones and utility drones should be nerfed so they're not OP when skills apply. ECM drones should be nerfed particularly hard.
- All EWar drones should receive improved T2 variants, which should require EWar Drones V and the appropriate race's drone specialisation trained to III to use. With perfect drone skills, these new T2 drones should be on a par with existing ECM drones.

XL guns on titans :
- With Crucible, Tracking Links and Remote Sensor Boosters will no longer be able to be used on supercaps.

SHIPS

Prophecy :
- Agree completely about this ship. Maller has exactly the same problem.

Rokh :
- Rokh doesn't need more mids. It's a fleet ship - it's not supposed to be tackling things. What do you expect to tackle from 150km anyway?
- I'm really not sure how to buff the Rokh (or the Ferox, Moa and Eagle for that matter) without stepping on the Gallente's toes. Giving Gallente 5% ROF bonuses instead of damage won't help the active tankers, and isn't a significant difference. Since hybrids in general still need more damage, maybe give Gallente hybrid boats 7.5% damage bonus and Caldari 5%?

Hurricane :
- Minmatar ships are fine. It's autocannons that need to be toned down. They have too wide an envelope of effectiveness, from toe-to-toe (on blasters' turf) to mid-range kiting. Higher calibers need much lower tracking, longer optimal, but slightly shorter falloff. This way, they'll be less able to outperform blasters at being blasters, and TEs will have give them a less ridiculously OP boost to their effective range. They'll fit in nicely between blasters and pulse.

All T1 cruisers :
- Most T1 cruisers need a serious buff. A few of them are fine. Thorax is the only decent Tier 3 cruiser. Moa and Maller are just bricks with no firepower, Stabber is just speed with no firepower.
- Vexor, Omen, Rupture, Caracal are all good combat cruisers, but they could all do with a bit of a hitpoint buff.
- The 'logistics' cruisers (Exequror, Augoror, Scythe and Osprey) are all useless except for putting your alt in while you run missions. They all need a lot of work.
- Except for the Blackbird, the EWar cruisers are all crap. Nice concept, but terrible in implementation.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2011-11-18 15:21:43 UTC
Black Ops need a huge boost in range and T2 resists on the same scale as BC -> command ships.

With T3 ships so common, having a Cov ops fitted BOBS wouldn't be as overpowered as thought before.

Boost the base jump range to 5 ly.

The cost of these ships is already around half a bil,


Really, if CCP wanted a ship that could just bridge people, take a freaking Noctis hull, make it T2, and use it as a recon bridge ship.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2011-11-18 15:55:37 UTC
i would really like to know if CCP plans on reiterating Gallente ships soon.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#6 - 2011-11-18 19:13:38 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:


Active tanking :
Active tanking has since the HitPoint patches been reserved for PvE or multibillion isk lowsec pirates with crystal sets and boosters.
I think it is a shame and I believe all active reps and shield boosters should give 50% more hitpoints pr cycle.
At the same time I think it is important to change crystal implants to give more shield hitpoints balancing them with slaves as well as preventing unbreakable shield tanks.
This might not change fleets from buffertanks but it will give many ships a viable alternative especially in small/medium fights. Amongst many others I think this will specifically help the following ships: Tempest, Maelstrom, Rokh, Raven, Hyperion, Cyclone, Brutix, Myrmidon etc etc



I like where you are going with this however i Believe that your 50% number is WAY over the top. I'd much rather see the cap usage on these mods reduced and a possible small armor hp bonus added when fitting an active armor rep to a ship. I've not gotten a chance to significantly number crunch this concept however the addition of a static amount of armor based on an average of base armor levels of ships in each class could be a positive change. For example, a "Small Armor Rep" could increase armor by a static amount based on 10-15% of average frigate armor levels. This average could be calculated from both t1 and t2 hulls and would be further increased by active tanking bonuses resulting in 13.75%-20.625% of whatever CCP determines as the mean armor level per class.

Example #1 : Mean frigate armor hp determined to be 600 resulting in a static +60-90 raw armor hp being added for each SMAR fit to a ship. I'd imagine this would add a few hundred EHP to AF, the ideal active armor tanking frigs.

Example #2 : Mean Cruiser armor hp determined to be 2500 resulting in a static 250-375 raw armor hp for each MAR fitted to a ship. An example of a double rep Brutix at BC 5 (including 37.5% bonus) would be 687.5-1031 resulting in ehp gains of a few thousand. Nothing crazy but maybe enough to get people to mix up cookie cutter small scale fleet comps and setups, something this game desperately needs.

Btw these numbers are total Bull **** and just an example so please refrain from the temptation to flame based on the numbers alone. Flame the idea as a whole if you don't like it Pirate

The idea behind this is to essentially shrink the ehp gap between plated and active setups resulting in a shorter time frame to "break even". Obviously passive setups will have significantly more ehp however this change could lead to an increase in the effectiveness of active tanked ships in small gang pvp, the ideal niche for these types of setups.

-Jerick
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#7 - 2011-11-18 19:21:51 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
With a good hybrid fix in place for now even if CCP refuse to give us the last tweaks on hybrid ammo we can soon start looking into other areas of balancing. I've made a short list of things and ships I would think could get fixed in a simple way.

MECHANICS

Active tanking :
Active tanking has since the HitPoint patches been reserved for PvE or multibillion isk lowsec pirates with crystal sets and boosters.
I think it is a shame and I believe all active reps and shield boosters should give 50% more hitpoints pr cycle.
At the same time I think it is important to change crystal implants to give more shield hitpoints balancing them with slaves as well as preventing unbreakable shield tanks.

Get out, you're trolling.

If anything, that's SLAVES which have to give rep amount instead of promoting stupid EHP slugfests like they do now.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#8 - 2011-11-18 19:33:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
I believe a crystal implant gives around 52% extra hitpoint pr cycle on a shield booster and they are far from invincible... So basically all pilots gets a boost equal to a free permanent crystal set. And the armor tankers will get the same boost. I wouldn't mind the armor repairers getting a 33% cycle reduction with a fitting cap reduction as well.

I am serious - why should active tanking be reserved for the people riscing a multiple billion isk implants when so many ships are having an often unused bonus towards active repairing?

I don't mind changing the attributes on implants to something totally different but something has to be done towards getting active repairing viable in general pvp. And reserving it for rich people in hi-sec/low-sec won't benefit Eve much.

I've seena few of your movies but whatever experience you might have you are specializing in stuff that a majority of players in Eve can't afford or in any other way won't be able to enjoy.

Pinky
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#9 - 2011-11-18 20:26:05 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:
I believe a crystal implant gives around 52% extra hitpoint pr cycle on a shield booster and they are far from invincible... So basically all pilots gets a boost equal to a free permanent crystal set. And the armor tankers will get the same boost. I wouldn't mind the armor repairers getting a 33% cycle reduction with a fitting cap reduction as well.

And what's the point in making everyone tanking 52% better at no cost?

You know, Crystals are actually balanced pretty good by one's inability to use Snakes (or other pirate set) and by the use of that 6th slot (yep, it is very useful). Giving everyone a free boost plus keeping their ability to use something else just results in making EVE even more overtanked that it is now. Especially so if Crystals are indeed revamped to boost shields by 52%. FFS, aren't those Drakes already good enough for you?

Your entire rhetorics is the same stuff as this one: why tech2 ships are reserved for those willing to pull out isk? Why are supercaps?

Active tanking is lacking viability not because Crystals are expensive, but because plates and extenders are:

- free
- provide so much EHP
- don't use cap

I addressed it right here:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359781#post359781


"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Svennig
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2011-11-18 20:46:24 UTC
Assault Frigates. All of them, pretty much.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#11 - 2011-11-18 22:22:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
Extenders and plates are giving that much EHP because CCP wanted to make battles last longer... Unfortunately they didn't foresee this making active tanks a rarity. People use buffer tanks because they will usually have to survive for 3-6 minutes for their ships to benefit from active tanking. Active tanks really need an increase

Also reducing EHP doesn't really make much sense since the dps in battles has crept up quite a bit the last few years so a boost seems a good option automatically countered by many more players and the use of neutralizers.

Pinky
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#12 - 2011-11-19 00:16:13 UTC
I strongly agree with the T1 cruiser thing. They're the sort of thing I can see myself flying most, if they didn't suck- Not too expensive, and still might be a good buy if they can get some boosts. Now, I can get about 430 DPS out of an electron blaster Moa with the boosts to hybrids in Crucible, and it doesn't seem to be missing very many shots. But it's too slow. Immediately my mind then reconciles that the Moa would be of much better use in a small gang with tackle, so honestly it's probably not too bad off. Though things I'd love to see would be maybe 200-300 extra base shield points and a fifth med slot, like the Caracal has. Boosting grid and CPU on the T1 cruisers would be spectacular, too.

Speaking of the Caracal, this thing is a gangrenous fount of suck. It only excels in the niche role of anti-frigate (and probably L2s), and honestly, with Crucible, destroyers will do the former for far cheaper and probably also be able to rip up an AML caracal. I've never fit a HAM caracal before with anything resembling defence, and it also suffers from the crippling Caldari lack of speed. HML caracals fare much better, but still, for a ship that's supposed to operate at range I don't see how they can keep it if they're so slow. In this case you can justify not having tank because honestly you shouldn't be being hit. But still, there need to be more PvP viable missile ships, because looking from all of the "OMFG BRING BACK THE TORP NAGA CCP" the ignorant, 'I am too lazy to train guns' half of Caldari won't stop bawling their eyes out until they have equal ground as the Caldari that have either trained hybrids and will benefit somewhat from Crucible or crosstrained amarr/Minmatar. And that will only really be done by having Caldari missile boats that aren't total ass at PvP.

I don't have much experience with other T1 cruisers that aren't caldari/Gallente so I can't offer much opinion on Amarr/Minmatar, but I've heard that Omens have the tank of a wet cardboard box, whereas the Maller has the DPS of that very same wet cardboard box.
Silk75
Wildly Inappropriate
Wildly Inappropriate.
#13 - 2011-11-19 00:31:27 UTC
Eos drone bandwidth
Info warfare links
Black Ops jump range and fuel use
Dread turret tracking in Siege
Lili Lu
#14 - 2011-11-19 01:18:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Pinky Denmark wrote:

Active tanking :
all active reps and shield boosters should give 50% more hitpoints pr cycle. At the same time I think it is important to change crystal implants to give more shield hitpoints balancing them with slaves as well as preventing unbreakable shield tanks.
This might not change fleets from buffertanks
No. You can never create a strong enough active tank to overcome the effect of a large fleet shooting a primary. If you did it would be a totally out of balance tank that would just get used to make every pve site a total solo snooze. The game is supposed to be about interaction. Nothing wrong with buffer and logi. If you want active tanks then go to lowsec and look for honorable duals Lol

Pinky Denmark wrote:

Afterburners :
Very few people use the afterburner because the MWD is so dominating. Unless oversized I only see afterburners being used on dual prop setups or in HAC fleets getting bridged in on top of the enemy.. . .boosting AB speeds to make them a usefull alternative. . . or make the MWD eat your structure while using the MWD
Ok, afterburner speed could use a slight buff, but no eating of structure with a mwd Roll

Pinky Denmark wrote:

Rigs :
Armor rigs makes it difficult for the Gallente to do their job while shield rigs just make shield boats take more damage from bigger guns which rarely has any consequences.. . .change the armor rig penalties to reduce sensor strength or scan resolution or give the shield rigs a little worse penalty. Also the CCC rigs almost always is a better choice than cap reduction rigs for armor/shield because they affect the entire ship and not only part of it. . . .the bonus for the cap reduction rigs gives a bigger reduction or perhaps the ccc rigs gets a small reduction. . . a extra advantage to the Gallente ships when trying to get in blaster range.
Well, ok, rig %s could use some tweaking, and penalties revised. Not sure about your exact suggestions but they are not as bad as your suggestions above in the other two sections of your post.

Pinky Denmark wrote:

EWar drones :
only 1 type of ewar drones makes a difference on the battlefield: ECM drones.
The web drones only existing in a heavy variant are too slow and ineffecient to web anything and the other drones are not worth the lost dps either. CCP should look into medium web drones as well as change the ecm-drones. Even ec-300 drones don't have much power, but it is chance based and a few ships are able to put out many many jamming attempts. But the real problem with ecm drones is that a jam will keep you jammed for 20 seconds. Make the small ecm drones only jam you for 5 seconds, medium drones for 10 seconds and the heavy drones for 15 seconds.
Again, ok, worth considering these. But if you really want a serious look at this I suggest you grind numbers.

Titan tracking is being addressed iirc. Except for giving the large autos more falloff, which could sorta undo the neerf for Rags.

Pinky Denmark wrote:

SHIPS

Prophecy :
Forget the cap bonus. . .replace the bonus with . . Drone bonus, optimal bonus or...

Apocalypse :

Rokh :
As the highest tier battleship in the caldari line this ship dissapoints a lot. With the hybrid buff coming up ...
Optimal bonus is nice and all and works okay for BCs, but not really for battleships.
Suggestion 1 : replace optimal bonus with damage bonus and perhaps give the Hyperion a ROF bonus
Suggestion 2 : replace optimal bonus with damage bonus and take away a gunslot (still about 10% more dps)
Suggestion 3 : extra medslot on behalf of a lowslot or hi-slot

Raven :
This ship isn't actually that bad however for many reasons not used much in PvP. Tough fitting makes this ship rarely
use the last hi-slot anyway and could really use an extra medslot for tackle or extra tank. We all know how easily a Raven explodes even if it has a good tank. I would even be willing to give up a lowslot (less dps) for the ability to fit more tank or tackle. Keeping the current fitting attributes the Raven will have trouble with CPU so it will be difficult to abuse such a change.

Hurricane :
. . . it doesn't really lack any drawbacks. . .I hate to nerf things but I would look into removing the entire drone bay on this ship.

All T1 cruisers :
I think all T1 cruiser hulls should receive an extra 10-20% hitpoints on shield/armor depending on their race. The battlecruisers in Eve today is lurking over these once great ships like a heavy shadow when new players almost start with enough isk and skillpoints to skip cruisers immediately and it's a shame...
Perhaps with the upcoming destroyer buff the frigates need a similar boost?

Prophecy - Ok suggestions. This however could be done as a general overhaul of the tier system. Buffing all tier 1 BCs or nerfing all tier 2 BCs would be in order. As it stands now ther is little reason to fly tier 1, frig , cruiser, or bc
Apoc - is fine, it used to suck bad, it now has utility
Rokh - Best to wait and see what the Hybrid rebalance brings.
Raven - Is (like the Drake) the most heavily used pve ship. That it does not appear as often in pvp is not a problem really. It might be missiles need the tweak. Increase missile speed and reduce flight time accross the board. Might be enough to pull missile ships more often into pvp.
Hurricane - A nerf? are you crazy? If you nerf the cane then you'd better nerf the Drake. Actually I'm coming more to think the weapon systems are where the tweaking should come or on mods affecting the weapons. Maybe TEs need less falloff boost, and heavy missiles less base range. Removing the drone bay Roll
tika te
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2011-11-19 02:47:13 UTC  |  Edited by: tika te
without reading the whole thread:
q1: is there finaly some information about changed stats for some of the gallente boats like hyperion, deimos, eos/astarte??
q2: any info on assaut frig changes - did i miss sth here?

edited:

considering the AB vs. MWD discussion..
in eve the "effectiveness" of a ship is nearly entirely made on following points:
-buffertank
-dmg out
-speed

first two are quite self explaining..

speed ensures u can geat out of harms way fast - especuialy for buring out of bubbles and warp distruption range; u can dictate the fighting range.
the only arguments for an AB over mwd ist the imunity to the scrambler effect on mwd, lower cap usage/fitting requirements and lower signature radius. but in critical situation however mwd simply has far more advantages than disadvantages..
and since controlling the range also menas staying out of scrambler range and dominating a fight to a certain degree there are very little arguments for AB - in most cases fitting an ab against an opponent with mwd means loosing this fight. (there my be some exceptions like ab-armor-hacs or fast-orbiting-ab-tacklers...)
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2011-11-19 10:38:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Active Tanking
Agreed. We need options such as scripts to GREATLY increase the amount of armor/shield repaired with a corresponding increase in cap usage. Then active tanking can make a difference even when under heavy fire, just not for long. No realistic solution will make active tanking viable in large fleets, but as long as active tanking is more viable in smaller engagements that's fine.

Armor tankers also need an equivalent of crystal implants and shield tankers and equivalent to slave implants.

Ewar Drones
All of them besides ECM drones desperately need looking at.

Rigs
Speed penalties on armor rigs and plates don't compare in any way to the signature increase of shield rigs and extenders. Armor-centric ships are excluded from efficient fast gang warfare due to this factor alone. In addition, for blaster ships they speed penalties are desproportionally counterproductive.This area needs looking at. Changing armor plates and rigs to have a signature increase penalty would be more balanced.

T1 frigates and cruisers
They need buffs and rebalancing, plain and simple. The gap between T1 and T2 ships is a bit too large in this area. Also, certain ships just plain suck and have no role (Maller, Prophecy come to mind).
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#17 - 2011-11-20 12:39:42 UTC
Afaik CCP haven't really shared any thought of changes to individual ships yet as they are waiting for the hybrid change to get in place first... And yes it's a shame MWD is more important than AB in 99,9% of all situations!
Imrik86
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#18 - 2011-11-20 17:34:33 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:

Rigs :
Armor rigs makes it difficult for the Gallente to do their job while shield rigs just make shield boats take more damage from bigger guns which rarely has any consequences.


I have to disagree. Shield rigs + shield extenders (which is most common setup, you usually fit powergrid/cap rigs when active shield tanking) make you bloom like a xmas tree, and that's no small drawback. Not only it affects damage taken, it also affects time to lock, so you get primaried more. Also, for Caldari, negates the use of MWD if you are using any long range weapon. Since you'll be far away, the increase in speed won't be enough to overcome the tracking on most big guns, while the increased sig radius will just make the big guns hurt more.

Pinky Denmark wrote:

Rokh :
As the highest tier battleship in the caldari line this ship dissapoints a lot. With the hybrid buff coming up at least it will now have the dps to be a decent ratting ship, but for PvP it still lacks either a bonus for damage or a medslot to utilize the tanking potential while still being able to tackle an oponent.
Optimal bonus is nice and all and works okay for BCs, but not really for battleships.
Suggestion 1 : replace optimal bonus with damage bonus and perhaps give the Hyperion a ROF bonus
Suggestion 2 : replace optimal bonus with damage bonus and take away a gunslot (still about 10% more dps)
Suggestion 3 : extra medslot on behalf of a lowslot or hi-slot


The Rokh sucks manly because rails suck. After the patch rails will deal more damage and suck less cap, so an active tanking Rokh will be useful again. The slot layout is perfect as it is, if you think the Rokh should tackle anything you are using it wrong. Should it get any bonus, it should be an ECM one.

Pinky Denmark wrote:

Raven :
This ship isn't actually that bad however for many reasons not used much in PvP. Tough fitting makes this ship rarely
use the last hi-slot anyway and could really use an extra medslot for tackle or extra tank. We all know how easily a Raven explodes even if it has a good tank. I would even be willing to give up a lowslot (less dps) for the ability to fit more tank or tackle. Keeping the current fitting attributes the Raven will have trouble with CPU so it will be difficult to abuse such a change.


The Raven sucks because cruise missiles suck for PvP. If you try to fit it with torpedoes, then it's too slow and you have to give up tank to fit painters so your torpedoes can do any damage at all.

So it's more an issue with large missiles being unbalanced (specially compared to how well HM/HAM work).

Pinky Denmark wrote:

Hurricane :
Being the swiss army knife of Eve this boat is dangerous. Fast, able to use both shield and armor tank, dps like a small battleship, able to carry 2 neuts and easily kill anything it seems it doesn't really lack any drawbacks.
I hate to nerf things but I would look into removing the entire drone bay on this ship.


The Hurricane is pretty dangerous but I believe it's mainly because of the bonuses. It gets both a RoF and Damage bonuses, while featuring a plentiful of mid-slots and low-slots, with cpu and powegrid to spare. It's a ship with no compromises.

Pinky Denmark wrote:

All T1 cruisers :
I think all T1 cruiser hulls should receive an extra 10-20% hitpoints on shield/armor depending on their race. The battlecruisers in Eve today is lurking over these once great ships like a heavy shadow when new players almost start with enough isk and skillpoints to skip cruisers immediately and it's a shame...
Perhaps with the upcoming destroyer buff the frigates need a similar boost?


Agreed, most T1 cruisers serve no purpose other than PvE.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#19 - 2011-11-21 12:23:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
Im not suggesting the Rokh should tackle anything, however it should IMO be possible to fit propulsion and a point without sacrificing the little advantage of tank the Rokh has.
I agree that an extra medslot is far from the only viable option for making the Rokh a better choice in many situations. But the optimal bonus how usefull it can be in many situations is not enough to make the Rokh a fearfull oponent.

Hurricane - indeed no comprimise. You propose a reduced PG/CPU?

Pinky