These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

First post First post First post
Author
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#21 - 2015-09-11 17:23:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Thank Bob. The fleet cane is different than the t1 cane in a significant way. Range bonuses should be good enough for the longer range weapons and ok for shorter range weapons. I guess scram kiting blaster brutix is no longer a thing.

My fleet arty cane will be a force to be reckoned with now. Arthrillery 3 incoming.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#22 - 2015-09-11 17:23:36 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Destoya wrote:
This flat 12.5% drone velocity bonus on the Proph and Myrm is a little strange in my opinion. Was there any consideration made to it being something like 10% speed, 10% tracking? I have concerns that increasing the drone speed without increasing tracking as well will cause the drones to miss more often against small targets, and against heavier targets the drone speed bonus is hardly worth considering.

I know sentry drone tracking is something that you are pretty wary about giving out after the Domi and Ishtar but I hardly think a small flat bonus would break these two ships in the sentry role.


This bonus is the same one that the Algos, Dragoon and VNI get. It only applies to the drone's chase speed, not its orbit speed. This means the impact on tracking is minimal (unless we increase the speed too much, at which point the drones have trouble slowing down to enter their orbits).

In practice, this bonus is more useful for reducing travel time of your drones when sending them after far away targets, and less useful for helping them catch really fast moving targets.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Mane Frehm
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#23 - 2015-09-11 17:25:22 UTC
Don't forget to look at the Gnosis.

Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#24 - 2015-09-11 17:26:10 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#25 - 2015-09-11 17:28:29 UTC
Mane Frehm wrote:
Don't forget to look at the Gnosis.


A Gnosis with +25% optimal, falloff, and missile velocity and +12.5% drone MWD velocity?

OMG yes.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

Chessur
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#26 - 2015-09-11 17:28:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Chessur
I really like where these changes are going. However I do have one questions regarding the turret projection bonuses. For turret boats such as lasers, the falloff bonus of 25% if essentially useless. While on the other hand, the optimal bonus for AC using ships is also- complete useless. The only weapon system that somewhat benefits from a split range bonus would be hybrids. Would there be any consideration to just changing the bonuses on each ship? IE. 50% optimal on laser boats, 50% falloff bonus on AC ships?

Also, for the missile based ships, again HAM's and HMLs struggle so hard to apply damage. Cyclone and Drake are going to be feeling a little left out in their ability to apply their DPS to targets with out some type of application bonus. Any considerations on giving them one?
Yadaryon Vondawn
Vicanthya
#27 - 2015-09-11 17:29:22 UTC
Good changes!

Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


Could you explain why this is bad? A little reasoning might help understand your bold point
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#28 - 2015-09-11 17:32:57 UTC
Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


nah fam it's actually not

~

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#29 - 2015-09-11 17:33:38 UTC
I do have a slight reservation on the navy drake. It still has no High's for links or nos/neut. It is bonused for links but cant fit them without sacrificing dps, something all the other BCs dont have to consider. I dont mind the navy drake not having a tank bonus, as to be honest having good application and range can kill things quickly before harming you. Plus MMJD. So kiters are a non issue.

Would changing it to something like this be a possibility?

Navy Drake
5% RoF per level
5% explosion radius per lvl

25% bonus to missile velocity

Drop a launcher, frees up fitting and now you can add neut/nos or links as needed without sacrificing dps.
Esnaelc Sin'led
La Forge.
Toilet Paper.
#30 - 2015-09-11 17:34:03 UTC
With the current meta being Cruisers, this buff to BCs is more than wellcome.
Good Idea.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#31 - 2015-09-11 17:34:20 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

ercentage of all Navy Faction Combat BC jumps (gate+wormhole) by ship over the past 30 days
Drake Navy Issue 35.9%


Shocked

where is this place i can find those navy drakes?

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Capqu
Half Empty
#32 - 2015-09-11 17:35:33 UTC
Capqu wrote:
would you consider giving the cyclone +1 launcher?

it already has an arguably worse damage bonus than the drake, and an arguably worse tank bonus than the drake (even for local tanking) and has one less mid to boot

it really doesn't need the added disadvantage of -1 launcher, when its only bonus is being faster in a class not designed for speed


please respond
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2015-09-11 17:36:14 UTC
Home run.

+10000
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#34 - 2015-09-11 17:36:44 UTC
I like the kinetic only bonus and i think all caldari ships should have it (and minnie explo)!


However, the drake is a piece of garbage atm, and it will stay that way at the current rate. It got buffed, but a pile of **** with seasoning is still a pile of ****.


Also, the navy cane basicely lost dps.
Dukes Nukem
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2015-09-11 17:36:55 UTC
nothing about warp speed ? Sad
Kelsey Auditore
I'm Sorry Shoot What?
WE FORM V0LTA
#36 - 2015-09-11 17:37:21 UTC
Pls shorten the train of t2 battlecruisers.

90 days is kinda crazy just to fly a sleipnir which isn't really even used as a booster.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#37 - 2015-09-11 17:37:27 UTC
Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


As someone who has flown drakes solo extensively, this is a non issue. Stop being narrow minded.

I have killed numerous prenerf confessors with a drake using thermal missiles. Anything without a heavy kinetic resist will die quickly to the amount of dps able to be pumped out by that bonus. No, maybe you cant solo a deimos in a t1 drake. But the navy drake might be better. Cant expect 1 ship to handle every ship in the game. Unless you are an orthrus or gila.
Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
#38 - 2015-09-11 17:37:47 UTC
Could also consider an AB bonus across all BCs maybe.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2015-09-11 17:39:02 UTC
Am curious to what is coming for the command ships as well.

The extra role bonus the T1 have essentially close the gap on the much more SP intense command ships. Though I am willing to accept no change if it is due to a plan to wait until it is advantageous to boost on grid with a rebalance to reflect that...

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#40 - 2015-09-11 17:39:52 UTC
Dukes Nukem wrote:
nothing about warp speed ? Sad


Why do they need to look at warp speed? They are .3 slower than a cruiser... stop being petty.