open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Amarr Mk II
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (12)

Author Topic

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:46:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 11/12/2006 14:27:33
In the vein of the Khanid Mk. II thread, I am going to take a break from whining about amarran issues and do a comprehensive redesign of the Amarran set, as well as slight tweaks to lasers to make this possible. As well, I wont be examining the Khanid ships in this post, though without the need for a laser cap use bonus, they would need a bit of changes too.[It should be noted, that I had nothing to do with the Khanid Mk II. thread]

Philosophy

The main problem with amarran ships is not a lack of coherent design strategy, but a lack of implementation of that design strategy. The overall ideas are sound, but the execution, in combination with the execution of the other races ships leave Amarran vessles lacking any sort of distinction between them and their Minmatar and Gallente counterparts.

So, lets examine the philosophy behind primary Amarran ships and see where they go wrong.

Rule 1: Thou Shalt Armor Tank

Amarran ships have no problems metting this requirement. This is good. Amarrans should armor tank. If anything they should have even less shields than do do now, not that it really matters.

Rule 2: Thou Shalt be CPU limited

Amarran vessles have big hulking Power Cores that Give them big hulking capacitors, which produce a ton of heat, which make Amarran vessles computers run slower. Currently, Amarran vessles are both CPU and Power grid limited. There should never be an issue with fitting the largest guns on an amarran ship due to powergrid. The main culprit here is the fitting requirements of lasers, which are very high on both CPU and powergrid.

Rule 3: Thou Shalt Not be PG Limited

Amarr Ships use Lasers, Lasers are entire energy based. Amarr ships ought to be, by the Amarran design philosophy, little more than armor plated nuclear reactors with lasers sticking out of the sides and rockets on the back. Because of this the fitting problems should come from CPU and no PG. The unsued section of mods "resistance plating" that have no cpu use and little powergrid use are what amarr should have to stick in its low slots when there are fitting issues, they shouldnt have to downgrade weapons, or downgrade propulsion/repping mods. This is a main problem in ammaran vessles, and many need to be re-examined with PG use in consideration

Rule 4: Thou Shalt Have a Large Capacitor

Capacitor is an advantage for Amarr, even after laser cap use is figured into the equation Amarran vessles should have capacitor regeneration better than blaster ships[though worse than AC using ships]. This doesnt just mean a larger capacitor, it means one that recharges faster, by at least 5%. Our capacitors shouldnt nessesarily be that much larger than competing vessels, but they need to have similar regeneration times with 5% to 10% larger max capacity.

Rule 5: Thou Shalt "Pew Pew"

All Amarran Vessles ought to have a bonus, direct, or indirect, to laser usage. This should not be a capacitor use bonus[that will be reduced on lasers accross the board, which will fix another problem], though it does not have to be a damage bonus. Good Bonus types include: Optimal Range, Falloff[though laser falloff is pitiful], Tracking, and Signature Radius. This means that instead of only ships having a capacitor bonus being able to effectivly use lasers, all unbonused ships can use lasers, and Amarran ships that ought to have a laser advantage, still attain that laser advantage without increasing their damage.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:47:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 11/12/2006 01:52:18
Rule 6: Thou Shalt Not be Mid Slot Gimped

The utility of medium slots is such that, ships cannot operate without at least a modicum of near requisite modules, these include propulsion modules, webing modules, disrupting modules, and cap injecting modules. Mid slot gimped ships, and the inability to choose ships not mid slot gimped is a huge issue in the amarran design.


Rule 7: Thou Shalt not have More high Slots than Turrets, well, one might, but not on a primary laser using vessel

Amarran ships are laser boats when they dont fit lasers, they ought to suffer. They should be high slot limited instead of mid slot. This gives Amarrans the "laser boat" feel and design without wasting slots[allowing those slots to be used in the lows and mids] and giving them a real advantage in filling the "laser boat" role without increasing their damage, that advantage is an effective increase in the low and/or mid slots of a ship.

The Weapons

There are a number of problems with the implementation of Lasers in the game and their effects on Amarran vessles. The three major ones are fitting requirements, damage on the lower teir weapons, and capacitor use. Lasers are not unique in their high fitting requirements, hybrids and Artillery Cannons also have high fitting requirements. However, lasers are unique in the damage that those those weapons do, and the ability that they have to downsize their weapons.

Downsizing lasers reults in a much larger DPS drop for lasers than it does for any other weapon system. The downgrade from Heavy Neutron Blasters to Heavy Electron Blasters is only 14.2%, this is the downsize from an "oversized weapon" to a the smallest weapon in the category. The difference between the Heavy Neutrons and Heavy Ions Blasters is 6.6% and the difference between the Ions and Electrons is 7.14%. These numbers are skewed to the outer ends as the effects of reloading are not factored in, which affects the larger weapons with smaller magazines more than the larger magazined weapons decreasing the DoT differential between the weapons even more. The Difference between Heavy Pulse Lasers and Focused Medium Pulse Lasers is 15.7%. Larger than the difference between the "oversized" Neutrons and the smallest blasters[There is also a smaller powergrid use difference between the HPs and FMPs than the Neutrons and the Ions]. In order to be comperable, FMP's, or any energy turret that, when compared to its non oversized larger brother must only loose, at the most, 7% damage.

The other thing that needs to be done for energy turrets is examine their powergrid uses with the powergrids of ships designed to use them, and balance them accordingly. Medium Beams [I.E. The largest small beams, the naming mechanics are very convoluted] are basically impossible to fit with AWU 5 on any firgate or destroyer sized ship, even if you fill the lows full of RCU's.

And finnaly capacitor use. The Cap use on lasers requires Amarran pilots to have the ship skill at 4 to be able to use any ship in the line up effectivly with lasers, anything less and the capacitor use of lasers is so severe as to require excessive fitting compromises to any ships[A perfect example of this is the "Bleeder" setup for the Punisher, which runs a full 3 CPR's in the lows and a NOS on top]. As such, capacitor use on lasers needs to be halved. This allows Ammaran vessles to be usefull without the ship skill at 4. As explained above in rule 5, this means we are free to give Amarran vessels real laser bonuses[which do not have to be damage bonuses]

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:47:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 11/12/2006 01:52:33
The Ships

The New Crucifier

Slots: 2/3/3 (Same)
Missiles: 0 (Same)
Turrets: 2 (Same)
Drones: 5 m^3 (Same)

Shield: 274 (Same)
Armor: 375 (Same)
Hull: 329 (Same)

Frigate Skill Bonus: 7.5% Small laser tracking and 5% bonus to tracking disruptor effectiveness per skill level

The perfect bonus to a tracking disrupting ship is to run a tracking bonus. It protects you from your type of EW and advances your advantage when used.

Rule 1: Check (more Armor and mids taken up by EW)
Rule 2: Uncheck (215 CPU is tons, even with 40 CPU tracking disruptors)
Rule 3: Uncheck (25 PG is not enough for a mid propulsion mod, 2 lasers and small repper)
Rule 4: Uncheck (Needs a boost to 275 capacitor to fit this rule)
Rule 5: Check (2 highs and 2 turrets + tracking bonus that complements the EW bonus)
Rule 6: Check (3 mids! Plenty)
Rule 7: Check (no extra highs)

The New Executioner

Slots: 2/2/2 (Same)
Missiles: 0 (Same)
Turrets: 2 (Same)
Drones: 0 (Same)

Shield: 235(Same)
Armor: 305(Same)
Hull: 274(Same)

Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% Small Energy Turret Optimal Range and 5% Small Energy turret Damage(Same) per skill Level

It orbits fast and shoots lasers, just like an Amarran light battle frigate ought to do. The extra range plays to the strenghs of pulse lasers, which are all you can really fit on this ship anyway.

Rule 1: Check(more armor than shield)
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: The Executioner has 20% larger capacitor compared to its Gallente counterparts[whom you would expect to have the second largest capacitor], however, this does not generate an actual increase in recharge rate, simply a larger capacitor. The size should be lowered to by 9 to 13% and the regen time should be cut by 20%[Resulting in a 5-10% cap size bonus with the same recharge rate as the competitors]
Rule 5: Check(optimal bonus and a damage bonus, what more could you ask for?)
Rule 6: Check(2 mids, plenty for a light frig)
Rule 7: Check(2 guns, 2 highs)

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:48:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 02/04/2007 23:38:39
The New New Punisher

Slots: 3/3/4 (-1 High, +1 Mid)
Missiles: 0 (same)
Turrets: 3 (Same)
Drones: 0 (Same)

Shield: 391(same)
Armor: 469(same)
Hull: 391(same)

Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% reduction in Energy Weapon Rig penalty per level and 5% bonus to all amor resistances(Same) per level.

A punisher definitly worth flying, able to fit many differnt roles with the 3 mids, and a bonus that may shore up some of the many holes in the ship[once rig prices become as low as they ought to be] without being overpowered. This gives players a reason to fit lasers on their punisher instead of running with the typically stronger Autocannons[in both damage vs armor and capacitor use] by keeping the options of a laser user in line with the options of a autocannon user.

Rule 1: Check(more armor than shield and more low slots than mid slots)
Rule 2: Check(115 CPU for 3 guns, 3 mids, and 4 lows)
Rule 3: Check(45 is tons for 3 guns, propulsion, and a repper)
Rule 4: The Punisher has the same relationship as the Executioner to its competitors. The same steps should be made to rectify the situation.
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check(3 mids, plenty for a frigate)
Rule 7: Check(3 guns, 3 highs)

The New Coercer

Slots: 8/1/4(Same)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 8(Same)
Drones: 0(Same)

Shield: 625(Same)
Armor: 782 (Same)
Hull: 730(Same)

Destroyer Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Small Energy Turret tracking speed(Same) and 10% bonus in Scan Resolution and Locking Range per Level.

Penalty: -25% rate of fire for all turrets(Same)
Bonus: 50% bonus to optimal range for small energy turrets(Same)

This is the exception to the rule for the mid slots. There arent really enough slots to go around on any of the Destroyers, and this limits things. As such, the bonus the Coercer gets makes up for its lack of low slots by providing the typical one module bonus that would go in the mid slot, this time for a sensor booster.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Probably too CPU limited
Rule 3: Much too PG limted
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: The Exception
Rule 7: Check

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:48:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 02/04/2007 23:40:44
The New Omen

Slots: 4/3/6 (-1 High, +1 low)
Missiles: 0 (-1 launcher)
Turrets: 4 (Same)
Drones: 15m^3 (Same)

Shield: 1173 (Same)
Armor: 1563 (Same)
Hull: 1563 (Same)

Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Medium Laser Optimal Range and a 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret Rate of Fire (Same) per level

Only a bit more Gank than the maller. But importantly, where the gank comes from, the range bonus allows the Omen to use its speed and size advantage over the maller. The drone bay retains its flexibility. Now there is a real reason to choose the Omen over the Maller, whereas before, in very few situations with highly skilled characters[more likly to be in a BC anyway, which the situations supported well] would the Omen ever be used.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Needs a slight PG improvement, fitting is extreemly tight in the PG area.
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check(Optimal and Damage)
Rule 6: Check(3 mids)
Rule 7: Check(4 highs, 4 guns)

The New New Maller

Slots: 5/4/6 (-1 High, +1 Mid)
Missiles: 0 (Same)
Turrets: 5 (Same)
Drones: 0 m^3 (Same)

Shield: 1368
Armor: 1875
Hull: 1719

Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% reduction in Energy Weapon Rig penalty per level and a 5% bonus to Armor Resistances(Same) per Level

The same great Maller Tank and a reason to use lasers as fitting options are increased. The new maller gets in and mixes it up, and gets a bonus to lasers that can be used in a myriad of ways to fit that role. The 4 mids help the maller stay competitive as a heavy tackler. The extra mid might be a bit too much though, 4 mids is a good amount for an armor tanking cruiser, it depends on how important that high was. If that is the case, remove one of the lows to make up for it.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Needs a slight PG improvement.
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:49:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 31/03/2007 09:12:15
The New Prophecy

Slots: 6/3/7 (-1 high, +1 low)
Missiles: 0 (-1)
Turrets: 5 (Same)
Drones: 25m^3 (Same)

Shield: 3419 (Same)
Armor: 4883 (Same)
Hull: 4395 (Same)

Skill Bonus: 5% Medium laser Damage per level, 5% Armor Resistances(Same) per Level.

This is the one ship I didnt follow my pervious recommendation of not changing the capacitor bonus to a damage bonus, Gallente, Minmatar, and Caldari all get ships in their BC lineup that both tank and gank, and most will do it much better than the Prophecy even in this setup with their current, as well with the loss of the high, it suffers even more[About 17% DPS] for losing that high to a gang mod or NOS. Why a Brutix should get a tanking bonus, a ganking bonus, seven guns, and a larger drone bay than the Prophecy? Is the 5% resistance bonus compared to a 7.5% rep bonus that strong that it offsets an extra turret of more damaging weapons with a 5%/lvl damage bonus, and medium instead of light drones?

Rule 1: Check(Lots of armor, a resist bonus and 7 lows, definitly an armor tanker)
Rule 2: Check(low on CPU)
Rule 3: Check(tons of PG)
Rule 4: Needs +5% Capacitor with no change in recharge time
Rule 5: Check(mmmm, damage bonus)
Rule 6: Check(3 mids)
Rule 7: Check(6 guns, 6 highs)

The New New Harbinger

Slots: 8/4/6 (Same)
Missiles: 0 (Same)
Turrets: 8(+1)
Drones: 50m^3 (Same)

Shield: 3156(Same)
Armor: 5469(Same)
Hull: 4688(Same)

Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 10% reduction in energy weapon rig penalty and 5% Bonus to Medium Laser Damage(Same) per level

The optimal bonus was overpowered, and so it had to go. With this new bonus, reducing the penalties of fitting energy weapon rigs, you have the option of fitting energy weapon rigs and varying the setup making the ship slightly unpredictable. There is the option to trade PG for CPU at a reasonable rate, the option to add more damage or more range or tracking. Or reduce cap use even farther.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Very limited on CPU, with 8 guns could probably use a tad more
Rule 3: With 8 guns it will need a PG improvement if its going to fit Heavy Beam II's accross the top at all[Which should just fit with AWU 4 and ENG 5 to fit 1 PG mods in the mids and lows]
Rule 4: Needs +5% Capacitor
Rule 5: Check(Damage and Optimal, always a plus, and guns, lots of guns)
Rule 6: Check(4 mids woo!)
Rule 7: Check(8 highs, 8 guns)

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:49:00 - [7]
 

The New Crusader

Slots: 4/2/4(Same)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 4(Same)
Drones: 0(Same)

Shield: 246(Same)
Armor: 597(Same)
Hull: 597(Same)

Amarr Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% Bonus to Small Energy Turret Optimal Range and 5% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage(Same) per level

Interceptors Skill Bonus: 5% reduction in Signature Radius(Same) and 7.5% bonus to Small Energy Turret Tracking Speed(Same) per level

Tech 2 Variants should inherient the bonuses from their previous iteration, which inspires the current bonuses. The Crusader needs no other changes

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: +5% capacitor
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check


The New Retribution

Slots: 4/2/5 (-1 high, +1 mid)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 4(Same)
Drones: 0(Same)

Shield: 316(Same)
Armor: 1019(Same)
Hull:1019(Same)

Amarr Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% increase in All Armor Resistances per level, 15% bonus to Shield and Armor Explosive resistance and 10% bonus to Shield and Armor Kinetic resistance(Same) per level

Assault Ships Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Small Energy Turret optimal range(Same) and 5% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage(Same) per level

The Tech 2 Varians should inherient the bonuses from their previous iteration, the choices I had were between giving the ship a tracking or tanking bonus, i figured the tanking bonus was the more defining feature of the Punisher. A second damage bonus could further distinguish this from the Punisher or the damage on the Crusader, though I am not sure if that would be warranted.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Needs more PG
Rule 4: +5% capacitor
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:50:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 31/03/2007 08:27:25
The New New Zealot

Slots: 4/4/7 (-1 high, +1 mid)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 4(Same)
Drones: 0(Same)

Shield: 984(Same)
Armor: 2250(Same)
Hull: 1688(Same)

Amarr Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret optimal range and 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret rate of fire(Same) per level

Heavy Assault Ship Skill Bonus: 5% Bonus to Capacitor size and 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage(Same) per level.

There are a number of different ways I could have gone with this, but i thought that instead of another turret bonus, the Zealot could have a ship bonus instead of another laser bonus. Other options include tracking, more Optimal, signature radius, or more capacitor. I went with Velocity originally, but due to problems arrising with speed and due to vagabond overlap, ive changed this to capacitor size.

The second best option is likly a 5% signature radius reduction, it gives the same effect at 33% more speed[against turrets] and makes some missiles hurt less, but without running into the issues of giving the longest ranged short range ship a much larger speed advantage than it already has.


Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check

The New Absolution

Slots: 7/3/7(Same)
Missiles: 0(-1)
Turrets: 6(Same)
Drones: 25 m^3(Same)

Shield: 3363(Same)
Armor: 4805(Same)
Hull: 4324(Same)

Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage and 5% bonus to all armor resistances(Same) per level

Command Ships Skill Bonus: 7.5% Bonus to tracking and 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret rate of fire(Same) per level

This is the one ship that does not have a full complement of lasers on the top for its slots. This was done as the Absolution did not need a reduction in damage when fitting a gang module, which happens for the teir 1 BC's. It does the same damage as the Harbinger at Command Ships 5, though at a lesser range and with much better tank. This was intentional. The Damage Bonus was moved from the Command Ships skill to the Battlecruiser skill to reflect the changes to the Prophecy.


Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Not Quite

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:50:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 31/03/2007 08:21:28
The New Armageddon

Slots: 7/4/8(-1 high, +1 mid)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 7(Same)
Drones: 125 m^3(Same)

Shield: 5469(Same)
Armor: 6641(Same)
Hull: 6211(Same)

Special Ability: 7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret tracking and 5% Large Energy Turret rate of fire(Same) per level.

The Gank battleships for Amarr cant really sustain more damage, but a negating of the large drawbacks of lasers is an imporant part of any laser boat. Other options I considered were 10% bonus to Gold Inlay shineyness per level, and 10% bonus to size per level, just so Amarr, with their ships consisting mainly of flying phalluses and ships that look like roosters would have a real "E-Peen boost". The Thorax would also have to get this boost.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check

The New New Apocalypse

In light of the recent "role change" for the apoc promised, here is an example of what that might look like.

Slots: 6/6/6
Missiles: 4(+2)
Turrets: 4(-4)
Drones: 200m^3(Same)

Shield: 6211(Same)
Armor :7500(Same)
Hull: 6641(Same)

Special Ability: 10% bonus to Drone Hit Points and Damage and 10% bonus to tracking disruptor optimal range per level

The New New Apoc becomes a design in the vein of the Arbitrator. Armor tanking, split weapons, drone bonus. The second ewar cruiser relies on drones for damage, but is unable to field multipule flights like the dominix and due to the sophisticated electronics has issues fitting powergrid heavy modules such as nosferatu. The odd design allows the ship to persue a shield tank as well if it decides to give up its ewar specialty and fit for full gank in a manner similar to the thypoon. Except with more lows needed to be dedicated to fitting mods and no damage bonus on the weapons.

Problems may arrise in fleet situations where an apoc can TD multipule ships indefinitly and bring them below its TD optimal. If such problems exist or transpire, then consider changing the TD optimal bonus to a strength or falloff bonus instead.

Rules: All thrown out the window.

CPU needs to be enough to support propulsion, injector and 4 tracking disruptors with a tank and missile on top. Powergird needs low so as to limit weapon choices to cruise or downsized lasers when fitting a tank.

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:51:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 31/03/2007 09:17:23
The New New Abaddon

Slots: 8/4/7(Same)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 8(Same)
Drones: 100m^3(+25 cubes)

Shield: 7000(Same)
Armor: 8500(Same)
Hull: 8000(Same)

Special Ability: 10% reduction in energy weapon rig penalty and 10% armor hit points per level.

We have the gank in the Geddon, and the fleet in the Apoc, so I figured why not turn the Abaddon into a big Navy Augoror. Ridiculously high armor hit points. With BS 5 and no Plates this thing will have some 16000 armor and every 1600 Tungsten will yield 7875 HP. Other options include the ever popular "Big Arbitrator", which, i have to admit, i like, but that has been assigned to the Apoc.

With the same rig bonus that the Harbinger has, the Apoc is able to fit a number of differnt ways to fill a number of different roles. Damage, or range open up slots for other options, energy cap use makes a tachyon setup sustainable for fleet ops while the prodigious powergrid allows for it to fit its full contingent of weapons.

The larger drone bay increases its damage to compensate for the lack of a damage bonus.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check


The New Augoror Navy Issue

Slots: 5/3/7 (-1 High)
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 5(Same)
Drones: 15 M^3(Same)

Shield: 2050(Same)
Armor: 2813(Same)
Hull: 2579(Same)

Special ability: 5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret Damage and 10% bonus to Armor Hitpoints(Same) per level.

The Navy Augoror really isnt that much better than the Maller, it has one extra low slot and a load more HP, partially offset by the Mallers Resistance bonus. It is however, a proper Amarran Vessel, but the damage boost i felt was nessesary to take it into true faction quality. In exchange, it looses a high slot

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:52:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 11/12/2006 01:53:59
The New Amarr Navy Slicer

Slots: 3/3/5 [-1 high, +1 mid]
Missiles: 0(Same)
Turrets: 3(Same)
Drones: 0(Same)

Shield: 586(Same)
Armor: 704(Same)
Hull: 586(Same)

Amarr Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% reduction in Small Energy Turret Optimal Range and 5% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage(Same) per level

Its was a big Executioner, it still is a big executioner.

Rule 1: Check
Rule 2: Check
Rule 3: Check
Rule 4: [See Executioner]
Rule 5: Check
Rule 6: Check
Rule 7: Check


Other ships

Other faction ships which are typed for lasers have a "50% reduction in laser capacitor use", which can be removed due to the general cap reduction for lasers.

Conclusion

I tried to redesign the Amarran laser lineup without increasing damage in most places while still designing towards the basic "pew pew" design. I am concerned about the optimal bonuses on the Amarran ships being a bit strong, but in general, not that strong, except with the Apoc, which, if my changes went through would also have to be balanced by giving the Minnies and Gallente a long range boat. PG and CPU on most of the boats would have to be rebalanced in order to get the desired fitting limitations achieved and capacitor size and regen rate.

You are now free to tear these suggestions apart.

Aeaus
The Black Rabbits
The Gurlstas Associates
Posted - 2006.12.11 01:59:00 - [12]
 

90% of reponses will be :

Shut up you whiners, we gallente have it bad. OR
You have the Armageddon and the Curse, STFU.

Rolling Eyes

Cerpn Taxt
Minmatar
LDK
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:02:00 - [13]
 

sweet jesus that's a lot of words.

and in response....that's what you get for oppressing my people Razz

Polydectes
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:12:00 - [14]
 

Very well thought out, and entertaining to read. I agree with most of your points, I would have liked you to talk a bit about Amarr being the 'cap warfare' race too, with use of NOS/neuts. However, instead of a cap bonus to lasers, I would like to see 10% bonus to shinyness.

Dillius Archania
Amarr
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:13:00 - [15]
 

/applaud

Tisanta
Amarr
Stargazer Exploration Company
Transmission Lost
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:13:00 - [16]
 

MORE SHINEY!

Aeaus
The Black Rabbits
The Gurlstas Associates
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:13:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Polydectes
Very well thought out, and entertaining to read. I agree with most of your points, I would have liked you to talk a bit about Amarr being the 'cap warfare' race too, with use of NOS/neuts. However, instead of a cap bonus to lasers, I would like to see 10% bonus to shinyness.


I would love that bonus for my Navy Apocalypse Embarassed

Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 02:14:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 11/12/2006 02:22:53
Originally by: Polydectes
Very well thought out, and entertaining to read. I agree with most of your points, I would have liked you to talk a bit about Amarr being the 'cap warfare' race too, with use of NOS/neuts. However, instead of a cap bonus to lasers, I would like to see 10% bonus to shinyness.


I was considering giving that to the Armageddon, or a size bonus to "e-peen"[that being the actual ship], but i figured those would require actual coding changes instead of simple number flipping around and thus be unlikly to be implemented.

ed: I didnt discuss the "Cap warfare" side of Amarr because i feel that that side is already very strong and doesnt really need tweaking. A general EW swtich from turret disrupting to cap warfare might be interesting, and might go well with the Amarran philosophy and upcoming NOS nerf. However, i think that EW is in need of a serious overhaul as it is, and would examine the EW mechanics seperately [For instance, ECM needs to reduce max number of targets by a number(counterable by autotargets in the highs to boost max targets), and not simply reduce max targets to zero, then you can go back to the "always work if stacking above sensor strength" rule and get rid of the random junk]

DiuxDium
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:02:00 - [19]
 

....****ing Awesome.... That's all one can say. Well thought out, more of this, and less of the QQ and we might have a decent forum! Very Happy

I really hope the Dev's take this into consideration. Though the 10% armor increase per level on the Abaddon seems WAY to much. Make it 5% and I like it.

Daos Leghki
Paxton Industries
-Mostly Harmless-
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:05:00 - [20]
 

Wow.....just....wow, this thread addresses all the reasons I left Amarr and wend over to Minmatar. /applaude

Blind Man
Caldari
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:14:00 - [21]
 

great post Shocked

Felix Dzerzhinsky
Caldari
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:17:00 - [22]
 

I support this thread, especially the redesigns on the Battleships. . .we are fleet ships, and we should have competing or better fleet combat ships available to us (the Amarr). To miss this very important aspect of Amarr combat strat is to make the race gimped.


Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:19:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: DiuxDium
....****ing Awesome.... That's all one can say. Well thought out, more of this, and less of the QQ and we might have a decent forum! Very Happy

I really hope the Dev's take this into consideration. Though the 10% armor increase per level on the Abaddon seems WAY to much. Make it 5% and I like it.


I went with 10% because that is the Augoror/Navy Augoror bonus[That faction Cruiser gets 5200 HP at max skills with no mods and 7800 armor per 1600 tungsten]. The bonus seems like a lot, but when you compare it to a 5% resistance bonus, it isnt as hot. 5% Reistances is 33% hit points, and 33% repair amount, the hit point bonus is just a hit point bonus. It will last longer under high damage situations, but less as the damage peters off.

All in all, the current tank bonus on the Abaddon is probably only a slight bit weaker than the proposed tank bonus.

Udyr Vulpayne
Amarr
PIE Inc.
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:22:00 - [24]
 

op contains a lot of errors (like the number of launchers available on certain ships or the possibility to fit med beams) and the solutions presented for the most part seem to ignore ingame reality.



Goumindong
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:26:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Goumindong on 11/12/2006 03:27:00
Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne
op contains a lot of errors (like the number of launchers available on certain ships or the possibility to fit med beams) and the solutions presented for the most part seem to ignore ingame reality.





In my rampant Copy/paste I incorrectly labeled the Prophecy and Apoc as having 0 launchers, that has been fixed, it now indicates that it would lose 1 or 2 launcher slots for each respective ship.

ed: Also would you mind elaborating? So i can take the suggestions and run with them, creating a better fix.

Azerrad InExile
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:29:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Udyr Vulpayne
for the most part seem to ignore ingame reality.


Its what Amarr does best...

Cosmo Raata
T-Cells
Moar Tears
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:31:00 - [27]
 

Absolution stays with 6 turrets and harbinger gets 8??? What are you smoking? How about we just get rid of the absolution completely.

DiuxDium
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:32:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: DiuxDium
....****ing Awesome.... That's all one can say. Well thought out, more of this, and less of the QQ and we might have a decent forum! Very Happy

I really hope the Dev's take this into consideration. Though the 10% armor increase per level on the Abaddon seems WAY to much. Make it 5% and I like it.


I went with 10% because that is the Augoror/Navy Augoror bonus[That faction Cruiser gets 5200 HP at max skills with no mods and 7800 armor per 1600 tungsten]. The bonus seems like a lot, but when you compare it to a 5% resistance bonus, it isnt as hot. 5% Reistances is 33% hit points, and 33% repair amount, the hit point bonus is just a hit point bonus. It will last longer under high damage situations, but less as the damage peters off.

All in all, the current tank bonus on the Abaddon is probably only a slight bit weaker than the proposed tank bonus.



I'd like the math behind 50% HP Armor = 25% resistant Bonus. Actually. Make that, 25% resitance bonus > 50% Armor Boost.

Also, bare in mind your "50% Boost" would by the wording stack with armor plates. This allows for tanks in the 50-60k range given the amount of low-slots on Amaar ships. That's WAY to much.

Cosmo Raata
T-Cells
Moar Tears
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:32:00 - [29]
 

Absolution stays with 6 turrets and harbinger gets 8??? What are you smoking? How about we just get rid of the absolution completely.

Brother Tycho
Amarr
Posted - 2006.12.11 03:40:00 - [30]
 

Best amarr fix thread ive seen CCP could at least sate these ideas and put them on the test server.

I can hear the cries now as people start to die to the pew pew.

Giveing the ships laser bonuses to things other than dmg is while halfing there cap use is genius.

Cant wait to try out the new oman would be a worthwile pvp cruiser.

Ok a couple of mistakes were pionted out but nothing major and this sure beets all the stupid kin/exp cristal threads and everything looks the be easy to code into the game.

The 8 turret harbinger makes sence, with 7 turrets fitted you have one at the fron on the right hand side all alone and i hate that kind of thing.

Maybe theres space for a couple of the ships for a 7.5% per lvl rep boost or it could stay a purely Gallent kinda thing.

I will say that the tracking bonuses on the maller would make it a very usefull PvE ship at piont blank hitting cruiser sized targets can be a bit of a issue.


Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (12)

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