open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Drake Nerf - W T F
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic

Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente
Sigma Special Tactics Group
Posted - 2010.12.04 08:12:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Killstealing
Originally by: Corndog Sandwich
the problem is more with the ferox, cyclone, gallente BCs, and tier 1 amarr BC

they really suck!

remind me again why to buy a cyclone when you can get a cane




I like Cyclones

Sad

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2010.12.04 10:26:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
This is some excellent analysis by Ulstan. One thing deserves to be emphasised:

The factors that make Drake & logistics blobs attractive will still exist regardless of any plausible Drake nerf. You could cut any of the following factors by 20% - lock range, HML volley, HML range or EHP - and the motivation for flying Drakes and logistics will still be there. Even if you remove the resist bonus - and what would you replace it with? - then the combination of good DPS at good range on a cheap, low-SP platform will still be extremely attractive.

There is no realistic Drake or HML nerf that will change this, and any attempt to impose one will not only fail to achieve its intended effect, but also have a catastrophic side-effect of unnecessarily nerfing the Drake in the small-gang/solo environments where it's balanced just fine.


I would be damn happy if CCP would remove resist bonus and replace it with RoF bonus. Pure awesome pwnage I say! Speaking about Drake here. It would be sort of like Caldari version of Brutix.

Would increase the ship popularity in smaller gangs while making it somewhat less popular in bigger gangs. Drake blobs would propably be replaced by Cerberus blobs though, as shield buffered mobile stuff is still needed bcos Battleship gangs are hit too hard by bombers.

Pipova
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:41:00 - [93]
 

I haven't read all four pages of the thread so sorry if
this has already been mentioned.

I am not really convinced that a drake blob (50+) is more dangerous
than any other blob. If we take as a given that there is a balance
issue with the drake in large numbers, i think that reducing its locking
range and maybe by a bit its inertia would fix everything.

+1 sensor booster = less tank
+1 nanofiber = less damage

solo, that many new players have invested in, remains unaffected.

I have never flown a drake or other missile spamming ship cause i find
them boring.

FIX HYBRID WEAPONS DAMN IT.

Fulkurth
Posted - 2010.12.04 14:15:00 - [94]
 

It has been pretty much said through the thread: If it isn't Drake blobs it'll be a different ship blobs.

Nerf the drake another ship takes its place, nerf the other ship and it just keeps going in a circle.

The questions are surely:

Do CCP want blob fights?
If not how are you going to Nerf blob fights but not ships?

To be honest though the thing that makes this game great, and terrible at the same time, is the encouragement of bigger and better fleets. CCP seem to encourage this themselves and as such the answer to the first question, you'd imagine, is CCP isn't really bothered people are "blobing." If they're not bothered about the blobing - why nerf it, or any other ship, merely because it's involved in a ton of blobs?

Fix the cause of the problem not the reaction of players to the problem.

Nuniki
Percussive Diplomacy
Posted - 2010.12.04 14:38:00 - [95]
 

Haha!

A great number of people DO!

Techno Panda
Posted - 2010.12.04 14:56:00 - [96]
 

I know how to fix this, give titans a Drake only DD, where it kills every drake on grid. :D

heheheh
Phoenix Club
Posted - 2010.12.04 15:15:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: Larton Dretta
. If you think that Drake DPS is by any reasonable measures lower than a Hurriane or a Brutix, then i'd love some of what you're smoking.


You cant be serious ?
Brutix and CAne will tear your poxy drake a new one.

Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.04 15:21:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Oh please. Everyone knows that damage delay makes a world of difference. It's the difference between having the time to broadcast for reps or warp out and not having said time by dying instantly. In the case of cruise missiles, its the difference between being completely useless and not being completely useless, cruise missiles heavily on the completely useless side.

No it doesn't, not in a 0.0 fleet fight. Your tackle is the bubbles (and the lag, heh). And the broadcasting for reps? Lag takes care of that. Lag for the broadcast to register, transmit to fleet, then lag for the guardian to activate the repper, and top with that repper only repairing at the end of the cycle (unlike the scimi shield reps on the Drakes). The delay on damage infliction is not mattering. In a lag free fight might it? Possibly, but your tackle is still the bubble, and unless you are at the edge of that bubble aligned to warp the missiles will still hit. It has been discussed in this thread that remote armor reps activating at the end of the cycle is and would continue to be a problem even if lag were removed from the equation. That should be looked at by CCP.

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Again, please. Drakes are the only Caldari ship that's PvP viable, so the caldari noobs days of dominance are short lived once he tries to venture into the HAC, BS, or capital realm where armor, lasers, projectiles, and slaves rule.
I've been reading this argument since i started playing in 2006 (except for the drake part). Could not those drake pilots form Cerb fleets. That would be quite awsome. Less tank, but more gank. I hardly think an equivalent implant set to slaves would be balanced. Do you? Unless you want to start giving armor some passive regen as well. The only reason armor rules is that Minmatar is not pushed enough toward shield tanking in the caps (or their caps are considered substandard, unglamorous in damage infliction).
Originally by: Kai Yuen
Also, CCP Chrontis was dead wrong when he said the Drake doesn't have to choose between tank and gank.
You have not supported your argument here.
Originally by: Kai Yuen
The hurricane can make an amazing tank along with better DPS than the Drake, but it's an armor tank.
how do you get an amazing tank on a ship with no tanking bonus? Sure you can slap on some 1600 plate or passive shield it, but in neither regard can it come close to a Drake's tank. And that amazing damage you speak of would be close range guns (no 70km projection) and the damage mods will compete with the tank if armor, and if the tank is shield it's pretty thin then.
Originally by: Kai Yuen
The problem is that they made all other tier 2 BCs armor tanks and the only one with shield in mind was the Drake.
True. It is yet another ship class that is not well represented with shield options. But this doesn't matter much as to why the Drake blob is taking over fleet pvp.
Originally by: Kai Yuen
The harbi is the same deal. As an armor tank it can tank and gank fairly effortlessly.
Gank "effortlessly"? Ok, maybe. But for tank, see the above about the Hurricane.
Originally by: Kai Yuen
Of course the Drake owns in the shield fleet. Everything else is armor. QQ.
The problem is not "owning in the shield field". The problem is owning the field. And QQ? Weak argumentation.
Originally by: Kai Yuen
Nerfing the Drake is just a childish reaction to an effect that isn't even the cause. The cause is absence of battleships in 0.0, MOMs, tier 1 BC suckage, and the economic efficiency of BCs vs HACs. The Drake fleet is the effect.
I can agree with some of this. Yes, the rise of the Drake is partly the result of other changes in the game, such as probing mechanics and the introduction of and changes to other ships. It is not true though that the Drake hasn't always been well above the other tier2 BCs (at least since the Myrm was so harshly nerfed). Many fixes have been discussed ITT and others. CCP's fix may get it right.Wink

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.12.04 16:22:00 - [99]
 

So I guess the REAL issue here is why should people who don't use drakes in blob warfare be punished?

Slappy Da'PP
Posted - 2010.12.04 19:20:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
So I guess the REAL issue here is why should people who don't use drakes in blob warfare be punished?


Because the uber l33t pvp whiners, I mean 0.0 inhabitants, first begin by saying the Drake is ****. Useless in pvp in fact. Then its power is discovered in a massive fleet of them with logistics support. Then it is determined that all those missiles are causing lag which leads to moar QQ by the l33tpro. And if you aren't a part of the in crowd of trolling QQ iwantztobeatallit'ssounfairifilosemyship nerfnerfnerfitnaow!!!!1111one peeps then you don't matter.

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.04 20:23:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Lili Lu
Originally by: Kai Yuen
The harbi is the same deal. As an armor tank it can tank and gank fairly effortlessly.
Gank "effortlessly"? Ok, maybe. But for tank, see the above about the Hurricane.

[Harbinger, Sniper Harb]
2xHeat Sink II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Adaptive Nano Plating II
1600mm Reinforced Crystalline Carbonide Plates I
Damage Control II

Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive
2x Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range
Y-S8 Hydrocarbon I Afterburners

7x Focused Medium Beam Laser II, Aurora M

3x Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

5x Warrior II's
5x EC-300's

or 5 EC-600's
----------------------------------------
70000EHP, 61km Opt with no Flight time, 220 Gun DPS, 251 if you replace the EANM with a Heatsink and it still has 60000EHP. Way less Sig then a Drake 265m and with the burner it gets 347m/s which bleed off missile Dmg. Relpace the EANM with another Adaptive Plate and remove the burner for a 3rd TC and you have a 67km Opt, a TE instead of that and it is 70km. And if the fight is closer then your optimal you can switch to tracking and hit smaller targets with the AB to bleed off Dmg. At 20km you get upwards of 400 DPS with IM Multi, 300 at 34km with IM UV. Non of the ranges counting falloff.

A Snipe fit that hits to 60-70km tanks hard with lesser sig and greater speed isn't bad considering missile flight time and acceleration.

Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.04 22:03:00 - [102]
 

Originally by: Alara IonStorm
a fitting . . . 70000EHP, 61km Opt with no Flight time, 220 Gun DPS, 251 if you replace the EANM with a Heatsink and it still has 60000EHP. Way less Sig then a Drake 265m and with the burner it gets 347m/s which bleed off missile Dmg. Relpace the EANM with another Adaptive Plate and remove the burner for a 3rd TC and you have a 67km Opt, a TE instead of that and it is 70km. And if the fight is closer then your optimal you can switch to tracking and hit smaller targets with the AB to bleed off Dmg. At 20km you get upwards of 400 DPS with IM Multi, 300 at 34km with IM UV. Non of the ranges counting falloff.

A Snipe fit that hits to 60-70km tanks hard with lesser sig and greater speed isn't bad considering missile flight time and acceleration.



Neutral No mwd means no survivability. AHACS can get away with an ab at ~500m/sec because they have a sig that is not taking full damage from heavy missiles and much less from bombs. But this is all stupid to respond to because this great Harby you posted is obviously leading the charts, and seen all over in blobs. Blobs of focused medium beam laser harbys everywhere Rolling Eyes

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.04 22:08:00 - [103]
 

Edited by: Alara IonStorm on 04/12/2010 22:09:05
Originally by: Lili Lu
Neutral No mwd means no survivability. AHACS can get away with an ab at ~500m/sec because they have a sig that is not taking full damage from heavy missiles and much less from bombs. But this is all stupid to respond to because this great Harby you posted is obviously leading the charts, and seen all over in blobs. Blobs of focused medium beam laser harbys everywhere Rolling Eyes

No what seemed to have been leading the charts and is still a close second now is the Zealot and take away the Drake at that is all that will be left.

I guess your idea of balence is fly Ammar and Nerf everything else.

Ulstan
Posted - 2010.12.04 23:27:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Cor Aidan
All I can say on the matter is that if ships are balanced, there would be equal recommendation and representation of a particular ship type.


And this is why Battlecruisers are one if the most balanced, if not the best balanced, class.

If you ask people "What frigate should I use to pvp?" They'll tell you to fly a rifter. Or a dramiel.
If you ask what destroyer, they'll tell you Thrasher.
If you ask what cruiser, they'll tell you Rupture. They'll never tell you moa or omen.
If you ask what battlecruiser, they'll ask you what you are trying to do with it, and then recommend the Hurricane in most situations, the harbinger and drake in others, and the myrmidon in a handful of circumstances. Each top tier BC is powerful and worthwhile in various roles.

So, looking at all this, how did we conclude that it's the battlecruiser class that has the most imbalance and needs to be the subject of some heavy nerfs?

Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.04 23:54:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Alara IonStorm
No what seemed to have been leading the charts and is still a close second now is the Zealot and take away the Drake at that is all that will be left.

I guess your idea of balence is fly Ammar and Nerf everything else.



Laughing Where did I ever say Amarr should lead. Hell for most of my eve time I've flown Minmatar. I don't fly the Zealot, although I can, but can't stand the lack of dronebay on the ship. I also have two other accounts that fly Gallente and Caldari, neither of which fly Amarr (unless you want to count the Prorator).

I don't like fotm, which has been of late Angel ships and Amarr for pvp until Drakes finally started taking over. Angel ships are obviously op. They need an adjustment. However, they are also very expensive. So we do not have monoculture fleets of Angel ships blobbing out 0.0. We do have an annoying number of them in solo and small gang.

But this is about total numbers. I would not want Zealots online any more than I want Drakes online. For example, back when Amarr was in the suck and many things were done to pull it out (most indirect btw), I spoke out against reducing the base em armor resist from 60% to 50%. I'm still convinced that 55% would have been a smarter smaller step that would have served the game better. So no, I'm not an amarr chauvanist. I suppose you can't understand looking at the game from an overall perspective, because you are obviously stuck as a Caldari chauvanist. It seems you are projecting your own mode of viewing the game.

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.05 00:05:00 - [106]
 

Edited by: Alara IonStorm on 05/12/2010 00:11:58
Originally by: Lili Lu
But this is about total numbers. I would not want Zealots online any more than I want Drakes online. For example, back when Amarr was in the suck and many things were done to pull it out (most indirect btw), I spoke out against reducing the base em armor resist from 60% to 50%. I'm still convinced that 55% would have been a smarter smaller step that would have served the game better. So no, I'm not an amarr chauvanist. I suppose you can't understand looking at the game from an overall perspective, because you are obviously stuck as a Caldari chauvanist. It seems you are projecting your own mode of viewing the game.

And here is where the assumptions of what I fly in game come in. I fly mostly Minmatar, a bit of Caldari and am training Amarr by the way. Rolling Eyes

Etheir way you being short sighted and calling for a nerf that would put Zealots as kings of the fleet with no viable counter is foolish. I suppose you can't understand looking at the game from an overall perspective. Angel ships have nothing to do with this topic currently, you want to talk about small gang imbalece start a new thread on it but this is about Drakes in large fleets.

So my origional point still stands, after a Drake nerf it would leave the Zealot as the undisputed champion of large fleets, the Drake falls to Battleship, the Zealot does not. so the drake is needed to counter them unless you have a better solution.

Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.05 00:32:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Alara IonStorm
So my origional point still stands, after a drake nerf it would be Zealot as the undisputed champion of large fleets, the drake falls to Battleship, the Zealot does not. so the drake is needed to counter them unless you have a better solution.

I brought up angel ships to demonstrate that fotm occurs in multiple contexts in the game, but that they are not cheap tech I ships serving as the backbone of entire fleets.

The Drake fleet does not now, but should fall to Battleships, as does any fleet of BCs that aren't Drakes at this time. That is why there are so many Drakes being flown afterall. AHACs could conceivably reemerge as the fleet type of choice after the Drake nerf whatever form it takes. However, notice that we are talking BS(ship class), AHACs(ship class), Drake(whoops not a ship class but an specific ship). Doesn't that tell you something.

And, if you are so concerned about Zealots then simply load up on EM and thermal resists, because, you can. The Zealot only does those two damage types. A Drake is not so limited, and even foregoing the kinetic bonus it does enough damage in a blob to kill everything else, at a fraction of the price. Fleets that try to load kinetic resists learn that to their detriment.

The AHAC fleets I've flown in were great mixes of Muninn, Ishtar, Proteus, Loki, Legion, Fleet Stabber, Fleet Omen, Fleet Vexor, and not just Zealots. Any opposing fleet would not have success simply loading em and thermal resists. Admittedly Caldari was left out, well because CCP has not given them a ship that can armor tank. They have not given Amarr and Gallente much with which to shield tank either, although to a lesser extent.

I would be very happy if CCP loosened up the tanking options. And especially encouraged more shield tanking at the larger ship sizes. But that is as you say material for another thread. This one is about Drakes being far and away the most flown ship in the game. A trend which is increasing as well. You tell me is that good for the game?

Ulstan
Posted - 2010.12.05 04:42:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Lili Lu
I would not want Zealots online any more than I want Drakes online.


If you nerf drakes so that they are unplayable (which is what it would take for shield logistics fleets with drakes to no longer be worth flying) then I think you will indeed see zealots online.

What will have changed? you'll still have fleets of all the same type of ship backed up by logistics. All that will change is the name of the ship. Oh and you'll have ruined a perfectly good battlecruiser :D

Originally by: Lili Lu

I brought up angel ships to demonstrate that fotm occurs in multiple contexts in the game, but that they are not cheap tech I ships serving as the backbone of entire fleets.


There is nothing wrong with cheap tech I ships serving as the backbone of fleets. Indeed, they *should* be the backbone of fleets, because the backbone of fleets should be battleships, and only the tech I versions are worth flying.

Why don't we see battleship fleets? Ah, now that's the *real* question.

Also note that basically cost wise, all T1 ships have miniscule differences thanks to insurance. The end difference in cost between a tech II fitted shield rigged drake is miniscule compared to say, a scorpion or dominix. Or even a typhoon. It's a couple million.

Quote:
The Drake fleet does not now, but should fall to Battleships


It does. If you were to take a fleet of ravens using cruise missiles backed up with shield logistics, they would effortlessly destroy the drakes, even in heavy lag.

Why don't you see such fleets? Exactly.

Amarr ships backed up by armor logistics would destroy them in relatively lag free environments. Why don't you see these fleets?

Quote:
AHACs could conceivably reemerge as the fleet type of choice after the Drake nerf whatever form it takes.


How, 'conceivably'? That was like everything people were flying before drakes came along, it seems.

Quote:

However, notice that we are talking BS(ship class), AHACs(ship class), Drake(whoops not a ship class but an specific ship). Doesn't that tell you something.


Wrong. We're talking BS, AHACS, and SBC (Shield Battle cruisers - ship class).

It's not OUR fault CCP only made one viable shield battlecruiser. It's not that the drake is overpowered, it's that shield logistics work far better in lag than armor logistics, the game is laggy, and the drake is the only shield BC worth a damn

CanI haveyourstuff
Posted - 2010.12.05 08:25:00 - [109]
 

Edited by: CanI haveyourstuff on 05/12/2010 08:25:00
blob here.. blob there.. blob everywhere...
quit blaming drake!



why was pvp so fun back in nano days? because everyone flew vagas and other fast ships..

why? because it was hard to tackle them and they could gtfo.. they can even today! but not as much...

and WHY? because of warp disruptors and webs...

why again? because those modules suck ass!




CCP only has to nerf warp disruptors/scrams to 50% per chance or make warp core stabs have no penalty other than taking up one low slot!!! and giving 50% chance per cycle for enemy disruptor/scram to not work!

this change would skyrocket solo/small gang pvp into skyes so fast that you wouldnt believe your eyes!

and eve would be again PVP GAME!! atm its not.. it just aint atm.

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.12.05 09:37:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: Lili Lu

No it doesn't, not in a 0.0 fleet fight. Your tackle is the bubbles (and the lag, heh). And the broadcasting for reps? Lag takes care of that. Lag for the broadcast to register, transmit to fleet, then lag for the guardian to activate the repper, and top with that repper only repairing at the end of the cycle (unlike the scimi shield reps on the Drakes). The delay on damage infliction is not mattering. It has been discussed in this thread that remote armor reps activating at the end of the cycle is and would continue to be a problem even if lag were removed from the equation. That should be looked at by CCP.



Yes, it does, it makes a MASSIVE difference since it's the diffence between being instantly alphaed and having the time to get reps or warp. You can't argue otherwise, no matter how biased you are against the Drake. Everyone knows that the missile delay makes worlds of difference, ESPECIALLY in 0.0, where the distances between fleets are larger. Your excuse "Lag fixes that" is a petty, desperate excuse that only applies where there's 500+ in local, which isn't always, or even often, the case.

Originally by: Lili Lu

Could not those drake pilots form Cerb fleets. That would be quite awsome. Less tank, but more gank. I hardly think an equivalent implant set to slaves would be balanced. Do you? The only reason armor rules is that Minmatar is not pushed enough toward shield tanking in the caps (or their caps are considered substandard, unglamorous in damage infliction).



The Cerb? HAHAHAHAHAHA. You mean the expensive nano drake with no armor tanking abilities and a flight time delay that makes it USELESS to a sniper HAC fleet? THAT cerb? Hell no, using that in any HAC fleet, sniper OR armor. And slaves are so OP because they work on caps. Defending those is just lunacy.

Originally by: Lili Lu

You have not supported your argument here.



Pretty sure I did, you quoted it.

Originally by: Lili Lu

how do you get an amazing tank on a ship with no tanking bonus? Sure you can slap on some 1600 plate or passive shield it, but in neither regard can it come close to a Drake's tank.



Actually as an armor tank it's more than formidable because its buffer is large and its sig radius is low, as they are with all minnie ships. It has just as many tank slots as the drake does, only shy of the bonus.

Originally by: Lili Lu

And that amazing damage you speak of would be close range guns (no 70km projection) and the damage mods will compete with the tank if armor, and if the tank is shield it's pretty thin then.



35km is hardly what I would call "close range" when it comes to battlecruisers, especially given that Minmatar outclass every other race in speed, even armor tanked. Again, range doesn't always play to the Drake's strength due to the damage delay.

Originally by: Lili Lu

True. It is yet another ship class that is not well represented with shield options. But this doesn't matter much as to why the Drake blob is taking over fleet pvp.



Actually it's one of the main reasons that matters. Why fly another shield ship in a shield fleet when only 1 option exists?

Originally by: Lili Lu

Gank "effortlessly"? Ok, maybe. But for tank, see the above about the Hurricane.
The problem is not "owning in the shield field". The problem is owning the field. And QQ? Weak argumentation.



Yes, QQ weak argument like every one you've spewed thus far. Drake's don't even always own the field, not like Angel ships do.

Originally by: Lili Lu

I can agree with some of this. Yes, the rise of the Drake is partly the result of other changes in the game, such as probing mechanics and the introduction of and changes to other ships. It is not true though that the Drake hasn't always been well above the other tier2 BCs.



The Drake hasn't changed, so whining about it owning other t2 BCs is just silly. The Drake's rise to power came because other ships became useless. No other reason.

Marak Mocam
Posted - 2010.12.05 14:06:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Mme Pinkerton
Originally by: Black Dranzer
Originally by: Cruise Withaker
I don't get it! If the Drake is so UNFAIR, why the hell does everyone not train it up? Since when did everyone in Eve grow a conscience and uber sense of sportsmanship! Shocked
Uh, dude? A great number of people do train it up. It's one of the most flown ships in the game. It may actually be the most flown ship in the game (outside of shuttles and rookie ships) if my memory of the recent economic report is right.

your memory does not serve you right - most flown ship is the Hulk (which is quiet amazing if you consider its SP requirements), Drake is second.


There are 6 mining barge hulls in the game - 3 T1 barges, 3 T2 exhumers. There are how many combat ship hull choices? Just in Battlecruisers you have 8 T1's and 8 T2's -- 16 vs 6 -- and none are as clearly "the best" as the Hulk.

Another point: Top 20's (lower left table in the link)

Show me the hulks popping over 365,000 killmail showings as killers -- The Drake shows this and has more than 3x the KM showings of the NEXT most popular ship on the list.

Yeah, I'd go with the Drake being the most popular combat ship in the game right now -- far and beyond any other ship being used and those are killmail stats so not even PvE showings.


Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.05 14:22:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Yes, it does, it makes a MASSIVE difference since it's the diffence between being instantly alphaed and having the time to get reps or warp. You can't argue otherwise, no matter how biased you are against the Drake. Everyone knows that the missile delay makes worlds of difference, ESPECIALLY in 0.0, where the distances between fleets are larger. Your excuse "Lag fixes that" is a petty, desperate excuse that only applies where there's 500+ in local, which isn't always, or even often, the case.
Ok so all the ships and pilots flying in or dying to Drake blobs are just bad. "Everyone" knows thisRolling Eyes

Originally by: Kai Yuen
The Cerb? HAHAHAHAHAHA. You mean the expensive nano drake with no armor tanking abilities and a flight time delay that makes it USELESS to a sniper HAC fleet? THAT cerb? Hell no, using that in any HAC fleet, sniper OR armor. And slaves are so OP because they work on caps. Defending those is just lunacy.
Oh so everyone else, who doesn't fly a Drake, should have to fly expensive ships? But it's not ok to expect Caldari pilots to fly an expensive ship as well? And if the missiles work in a Drake fleet would they not work in a Cerb fleet?

Originally by: Lili Lu
You have not supported your argument here.
Originally by: Kai Yuen
Pretty sure I did, you quoted it.

Kai, you wrote: "Also, CCP Chrontis was dead wrong when he said the Drake doesn't have to choose between tank and gank." And then did not explain this statement. So, pretty sure you did not support your argument and I sure did not quote any statement of yours that demonstrated the Drake is as burdened with tank and gank mod conflicts as other ships.

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Actually as an armor tank it's more than formidable because its buffer is large and its sig radius is low, as they are with all minnie ships. It has just as many tank slots as the drake does, only shy of the bonus.
Again, no resist bonus, and wow look at that the plates and resist mods will conflict with TEs and Gyrostabs. Again, this is why we see 300 plated Hurricanes massed for battle and beating similarly sized BS fleets.Laughing

Originally by: Kai Yuen
35km is hardly what I would call "close range" when it comes to battlecruisers, especially given that Minmatar outclass every other race in speed, even armor tanked. Again, range doesn't always play to the Drake's strength due to the damage delay.
I read this and I wonder again whether you have any experience with fleet battles in 0.0, and whether I am just wasting my time engaging in this exchange with you.

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Why fly another shield ship in a shield fleet when only 1 option exists?
This may be the only sentence of yours on which I can agree. Design wise there is an overload on the numbers of armor ships in the distribution of eve ships. This does need to be addressed by CCP and I wish they would. If Rokhs, Ravens, Maels, could be joined by Tempests there might be more shield BS fleets employed. To a lesser extent BCs could be pushed slot wise toward shield. However, most BCs are used for smaller gang roaming for dps and actually it is more common to see a shield buffer cane, brutix, myrm, or even harby. It is only the Drake that vaults ahead of the other BCs into the fleet backbone role. Which, again, is partly why we are having this discussion on the forums. The other part being that it is winning, over BSs, in battles and raw numbers in the game.

Originally by: Kai Yuen
Yes, QQ weak argument like every one you've spewed thus far. Drake's don't even always own the field, not like Angel ships do. The Drake hasn't changed, so whining about it owning other t2 BCs is just silly.
As they say, U mad?Razz Doesn't look like you read my comments on other changes in the game. And, Angel ships own smaller engagements, and I don't defend them anyway. I think i'll respond more to Ulstan. He presents better arguments, and gets less mad and irrational.Smile

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2010.12.05 14:34:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Ulstan


Why don't we see battleship fleets? Ah, now that's the *real* question.

Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.05 14:58:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
If you nerf drakes so that they are unplayable . . . then I think you will indeed see zealots online. What will have changed? you'll still have fleets of all the same type of ship backed up by logistics. . . Oh and you'll have ruined a perfectly good battlecruiser :D
I am somewhat concerned about this. But I would not see it becoming Zealots alone. Opposing fleets could easily tank against Zealot damage. It is a ship that has no damage options, unlike the Drake, which is using that flexibility to great effect. We could see AHACs again as the preeminent fleet type. However, if that would occur I would find it less distressing to the game because it would be a ship class, not a particular ship. A simultaneous BS buff of some kind might even the playing field between the HAC class and the BS class. Again, neither of these are are single ships.

Originally by: Ulstan
There is nothing wrong with cheap tech I ships serving as the backbone of fleets. Indeed, they *should* be the backbone of fleets, because the backbone of fleets should be battleships, and only the tech I versions are worth flying.
Why don't we see battleship fleets? Ah, now that's the *real* question. Also note that basically cost wise, all T1 ships have miniscule differences thanks to insurance. The end difference in cost between a tech II fitted shield rigged drake is miniscule compared to say, a scorpion or dominix. It's a couple million.
Insurance is not what it used to be. And, I admittedly have not crunched the numbers but I doubt there is only a couple million separating the loss of a fitted drake and a fitted BS. This is simply due to the differing cost of rigs, which aren't insurable, irrespective of the cost of the mods and the insurance payout against cost of the ship.

Originally by: Ulstan
It does. If you were to take a fleet of ravens using cruise missiles backed up with shield logistics, they would effortlessly destroy the drakes, even in heavy lag. Why don't you see such fleets? Exactly. Amarr ships backed up by armor logistics would destroy them in relatively lag free environments.
Not sure where you're going with this. Ravens are harder to skill into for one thing. It does not take as much for anyone to skill into a Drake. As to other BSs, it is far easier to herd an alliance of pilots into an armor BS fleet as they have more choices. For shield BSs there is the Rokh, Raven, and Mael only, unless one were to attempt to shoehorn the Hyperion, Domi, and Tempest into them with their 5 mids. Much easier to shoehorn the other direction into armor.

Originally by: Ulstan
How, 'conceivably'? That was like everything people were flying before drakes came along, it seems.
AHACs were emerging as the preeminent fleet type, I agree. My alliance was involved in discussions as to how to counter them. Irronically, I think I was the first in the alliance thread to suggest DrakesLaughing. Little did I know how successful that would be. Actually, AHACs wipe Drake fleets up to a certain size, if flown with the right makeup of ships. But then you reach a tipping point where the AHACs fail to have enough buffer. And add lag and armor rr operating at the end of the cycle . . . This does not happen with BSs v AHACs as the BSs have will always have sig tanking to overcome on the AHACs, and of course the battlefield probing and range problems.

Originally by: Ulstan
Wrong. We're talking BS, AHACS, and SBC (Shield Battle cruisers - ship class). It's not OUR fault CCP only made one viable shield battlecruiser. It's not that the drake is overpowered, it's that shield logistics work far better in lag than armor logistics, the game is laggy, and the drake is the only shield BC worth a damn
Sorry, they are not large mixed shield BC fleets. They are Drake fleets with a few obstinate or scrub pilots who have not trained a Drake. And those other BCs in those fleets are primaried and die quickly. (Argh, stupid character limitugh)

July Shine
Posted - 2010.12.05 16:11:00 - [115]
 

Originally by: Cruise Withaker
I don't get it! If the Drake is so UNFAIR, why the hell does everyone not train it up? Since when did everyone in Eve grow a conscience and uber sense of sportsmanship! Shocked


First of all you are a noob.
Now: everyone is actually training for them, or have trained it already, hell some corps/alliances have it as a requisite and run mandatory drakes ops. WTF!

Having an unbalanced ship and asking everyone to train for it is N O T a solution.

GTFO and fly crap ;)

Call187
Posted - 2010.12.05 16:41:00 - [116]
 

A fully fitted drake costs only 50m thanks to cheap medium extender rigs. Medium is cheap. Shield is cheap.

50m minus 14m of insurance is 36m

Moreover Battleships fully fitted costs 160m+ Unless you fly raven/rokh. Large is expensive. Trimarks is expensive. Big guns, and mods are expensive.

170m minus 30m of insurance is 140m

140m = 36m * 4 approximately. 4 times the cost.

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.12.05 17:39:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: Lili Lu
Ok so all the ships and pilots flying in or dying to Drake blobs are just bad. "Everyone" knows thisRolling Eyes



Exactly. That and your argument is based on lag, which is an external factor. Quick, nerf the drake because of lag. Nice logic Rolling Eyes.

Originally by: Lili Lu

Oh so everyone else, who doesn't fly a Drake, should have to fly expensive ships? But it's not ok to expect Caldari pilots to fly an expensive ship as well? And if the missiles work in a Drake fleet would they not work in a Cerb fleet?



A) plenty of Canes, shield harbis and myrms find their way into the shield fleet so your argument is moot.
B) At least other pilots HAVE the option of flying the expensive ships, where the Cerb is useless. I already told you why, scroll up if you've forgotten.

Originally by: Lili Lu

Kai, you wrote: "Also, CCP Chrontis was dead wrong when he said the Drake doesn't have to choose between tank and gank." And then did not explain this statement. So, pretty sure you did not support your argument and I sure did not quote any statement of yours that demonstrated the Drake is as burdened with tank and gank mod conflicts as other ships.



Actually I did. You quoted it.

Originally by: Lili Lu

Again, no resist bonus, and wow look at that the plates and resist mods will conflict with TEs and Gyrostabs. Again, this is why we see 300 plated Hurricanes massed for battle and beating similarly sized BS fleets.Laughing


So all ships are not made with the exact same stats, yet strangely the Harb and Hurricane both made formidable armor buffers. And what BS fleets? I see no BS fleets. Oh wait, there aren't any because BS fail, which is why drakes are popularLaughing. Your arguments continue to be underwhelming.

Originally by: Lili Lu
I read this and I wonder again whether you have any experience with fleet battles in 0.0, and whether I am just wasting my time engaging in this exchange with you.



I read this and I wonder again whether you have any experience with fleet battles in 0.0, and whether I am just wasting my time engaging in this exchange with you.

Originally by: Lili Lu
This may be the only sentence of yours on which I can agree. Design wise there is an overload on the numbers of armor ships in the distribution of eve ships. This does need to be addressed by CCP and I wish they would. If Rokhs, Ravens, Maels, could be joined by Tempests there might be more shield BS fleets employed.



Forcing the tempest to shield fit would only ninja nerf the tempest. Shield BSs aren't dead, they never existed.

Originally by: Lili Lu

To a lesser extent BCs could be pushed slot wise toward shield. However, most BCs are used for smaller gang roaming for dps and actually it is more common to see a shield buffer cane, brutix, myrm, or even harby. It is only the Drake that vaults ahead of the other BCs into the fleet backbone role. Which, again, is partly why we are having this discussion on the forums. The other part being that it is winning, over BSs, in battles and raw numbers in the game.



Cause BSs just aren't that good anymore. With MOMs, armor HACs, and economics it just makes more sense to fly BCs. They're reliable, cheap, and quick to train for. Again, the Drake is the sole propriator of the tier 2 shield BC role. That isn't the Drake's fault. Nerfing it would only allow another ship to take its place. I seriously doubt you'd see any real variance until they actually decide to make another shield BC and fix BSs.

Originally by: Lili Lu

As they say, U mad?Razz Doesn't look like you read my comments on other changes in the game.



UmadbroRazz?

Originally by: Lili Lu

And, Angel ships own smaller engagements, and I don't defend them anyway. I think i'll respond more to Ulstan. He presents better arguments, and gets less mad and irrational.Smile


I think i'll respond more to Ulstan. He presents better arguments, and gets less mad and irrational... and he's not mad broSmile

Cipher Jones
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.12.05 17:52:00 - [118]
 

@marak read the QEN. More canes get kills than drakes.

Yet nerf the drake is the issue @hand.

Lili Lu
Posted - 2010.12.05 18:42:00 - [119]
 

Edited by: Lili Lu on 05/12/2010 18:46:10
Originally by: Cipher Jones
@marak read the QEN. More canes get kills than drakes.

Yet nerf the drake is the issue @hand.


No. You need to re-read it. It's final blows (probably due to the high volley nature of arty and the high rof nature of ac), and it's a marginal difference.

You need to look at again at the link he posted, the ship that appears on the most killmails and how far ahead of the other ships it is. That is the Drake and that is why nerf the Drake is the issue being discussed.

Kai Yuen
Posted - 2010.12.05 20:27:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Cipher Jones
@marak read the QEN. More canes get kills than drakes.

Yet nerf the drake is the issue @hand.


More Drakes appear on the killmail and more hurricanes collect the actual mail. This is easily explainable.

Observe: Hurricanes hit harder and more common in small gangs, thus more likely to cash in on the final blow. Drake fleets number in the 20s-30s at least, sometimes 60+ and they don't alpha things, so there's plenty of time for everyone to ninja on the mail, thus when drake fleets get a kill EVERYONE gets on it, even if it's just a poor solo who happened to make a wrong turn. That doesn't mean the Drake is overpowered. That's a huge leap in conclusions when there are so many scenarios which only indicate that Drakes travel in larger packs than Hurricanes.

So what? It takes more Drakes to get something done and it takes less Hurricanes to form a good fleet. 60+ ppl on 1 km vs 5 ppl on 5kms. That doesn't look like OPness to me, in fact it COULD indicate that the Drake is in fact underpowered since it takes so many to form an effective fleet. Either conclusion is premature given that the only data collected shows how many ships appear on killmails and how many ships collect them. Nothing can be said for which ship actually performs better.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only