open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked A BIG EVE CRY
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

Author Topic

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 12:51:00 - [61]
 

Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 05/05/2007 12:57:44
Originally by: Spoony
Who won? the awnser tells you that passive tanking does not need to be nerfed, the geddon may have to have sat there for a while shooting it, but did the drake come anywhere near to killing the geddon?

I think not, pure and simple as, this is an example of what eve ship fitting is:

you can tank and you can shoot, but to tank better your dps goes down, to increase dps your tank suffers.

Look at the dps of a drake 7 heavy missile launchers with only 5% bonus to kinetic ROF (per lvl), if it wants to increase its dps it has to go for heavy assault missile launchers, and my freinds guess what? It cant tank as well!

The ship is balanced, passive tanking is balanced.


The Drakes DPS is not bad with no Blastic controls. Missile DPS is naturally lower and cannot be compared in the same way.

And if your looking at that video BTW that geddon has only 1 repper withno hardners. A drake would eat that quite fast.

If this passive shield tank was maybe done on the Scorpion VS Geddon I would understand to a point.

But I am sorry a mega ganked geddon like in the video should ANNIHILATE a drake with a passive tank and destroy a Uber active tanked one in say a min. Ok so some people say no. Fair enough. Given give the geddon (USS ALABAMA) another trick to do. Oh but wait? It only has 3 mids and no cpu (no chance of EW) No cpu also means no chance of anything but ganking. Whats the use if it can't even gank ships below its class?

Flash Landsraad
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
Posted - 2007.05.05 12:55:00 - [62]
 

Pretty ****ing ridiculous tbh.

Gabriel Karade
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2007.05.05 13:08:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: xHalcyonx
Originally by: Jim McGregor

I hear myrmidon can kill some battleships.


Replace some with 'all' and you have it correct.
Against a decent Blasterthron it's nothing more than a glorified speed-bump.

Masakari God
Posted - 2007.05.05 15:43:00 - [64]
 

First and for most I would like to get my anger out (people who are ****ed that they donít have skills to kill a passive tanked bc just need to shut up and train the skills needed to kill said bc). Now that thatís out of the way :).

The drake is balanced to the same way a myrmidon is. These are new (NEW) Battle cruisers. The battle cruiser is intended primarily for ship-to-ship action and its weaponry is heavily slanted towards taking on enemy warships, preferably from ambush. They evolved from armored cruisers as new technology made it possible to build bigger ships. The main difference was their uniform main armament, compared to armored cruisers which had large and intermediate sized guns. That is the definition of a battle cruiser for those whom want to argue (look it up).

Hence the ability to be able to tank a Battleship class. The sole purpose though it has been used for other things both in our Real Life (where CCP got there ideas on balancing in this game and in the Game universe). The way CCP balanced everything is to its class and then the class as a whole to the next class up, giving ship of a cruiser class the ability to tank and deal damage as well as have a chance of tanking the next class up. Mind that the pilot needs have the skills for said actions to be possible. Just as a noob pilot flying a thorax has no chance of winning a battle between a pilot flying Thorax of with one year of skills trained.

Now all that being said, if a Battle cruiser taken into battle has the ability to tank a Battleship it is one of two things or BOTH. The pilot of the battle cruiser has spent many hours in the training of the skills required for a good tank, be it passive or active, or the Battleship pilot does not have sufficient skills to kill the Battle cruiser. That does not qualify as an unbalance in the game. As far as that bc's ability to take down the Battleship, in the case of a (Drake Topic on hand ), there is no way a drake can kill a Battleship alone if the Battleship pilot has decent tanking skills trained and fitted. if the Battle cruiser pilot has been able to kill a Battleship pilot Alone then that battleship pilot needs to look at his/her self and re-evaluate there SKILLS/ and or SHIP SET-UP.

The Drake setup is just fine leave it alone! And as said before if you cant kill it then donít bother trying. More then likely unless your skills suck for tanking it will not be much of a bother since it's DPS sucks because of the passive tank.Cool

*******************************************************************
It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog.
Mark Twain
*******************************************************************

MissileRus
Posted - 2007.05.05 17:58:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: JamnOne
My personal Opinion...leave the BC alone and fix the BS.

There problem solved. Then you will have your Frigates, your Cruisers, your Battlecruisers and Battleships. Now, if a cruiser can tank a BS then something is truly wrong and you need to fix the cruiser.


id agree to that too.. battleships are pretty weak now a days, easy to avoid with smaller ships only a threat to other BS's, battlecruiser is a threat to everything below it, and even things above it.

i thought CCP wanted no solopwnmobiles, Battlecruisers are exactly that.. difference between small/med weapons counter their ship sizes is smaller then the difference with large weapons.

any BC pilot can avoid BS damage if smart, so in a real fight a passive drake with scrambler buddy would easely pwn that geddon since the drake wont be just stuck there with 0 trans and 43 meters range...
now a Cruiser pwning a BC with 1 buddy scrambling is another thing.. only threat to BCs with scrambler buddy is drones, witch they blow up extremely fast.

so imo boost battleships Laughing because now their not balanced with the other ship classes if you take above example. it makes perfect sence to me atleast!
BC's are solopwn mobiles, i doubt CCP will nerf small/medium weapon difference and change multible ship classes to balance it that way so easiest is to just boost the BS's a bit more.
their kings of the hills, but can be taken down quite easely while "above mid" class ships can take out the kings with 1 buddy while being able to take out most smaller generaly easely solo.
BS's should have no problem killing BC's imo, even if they have a scrambling/web buddy, add a tracking disrupter to that and it doesnt realy matter who pilots the BS or what uber faction fittings it has.

BC's have the widest range for killing stuff, Frigs have the smallest with BS's close to them. this is general fittings ofc! a BS can surely change their field and fit small guns but it would still be limited in range of its killing tree.

BC's dont need to change fittings generaly to something wierd to be able to kill the greatest range in the killing tree. imo.. ugh

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 18:48:00 - [66]
 

Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 05/05/2007 18:53:58
Originally by: Masakari God
First and for most I would like to get my anger out (people who are ****ed that they donít have skills to kill a passive tanked bc just need to shut up and train the skills needed to kill said bc). Now that thatís out of the way :).

The drake is balanced to the same way a myrmidon is. These are new (NEW) Battle cruisers. The battle cruiser is intended primarily for ship-to-ship action and its weaponry is heavily slanted towards taking on enemy warships, preferably from ambush. They evolved from armored cruisers as new technology made it possible to build bigger ships. The main difference was their uniform main armament, compared to armored cruisers which had large and intermediate sized guns. That is the definition of a battle cruiser for those whom want to argue (look it up).

Hence the ability to be able to tank a Battleship class. The sole purpose though it has been used for other things both in our Real Life (where CCP got there ideas on balancing in this game and in the Game universe). The way CCP balanced everything is to its class and then the class as a whole to the next class up, giving ship of a cruiser class the ability to tank and deal damage as well as have a chance of tanking the next class up. Mind that the pilot needs have the skills for said actions to be possible. Just as a noob pilot flying a thorax has no chance of winning a battle between a pilot flying Thorax of with one year of skills trained.

Now all that being said, if a Battle cruiser taken into battle has the ability to tank a Battleship it is one of two things or BOTH. The pilot of the battle cruiser has spent many hours in the training of the skills required for a good tank, be it passive or active, or the Battleship pilot does not have sufficient skills to kill the Battle cruiser. That does not qualify as an unbalance in the game. As far as that bc's ability to take down the Battleship, in the case of a (Drake Topic on hand ), there is no way a drake can kill a Battleship alone if the Battleship pilot has decent tanking skills trained and fitted. if the Battle cruiser pilot has been able to kill a Battleship pilot Alone then that battleship pilot needs to look at his/her self and re-evaluate there SKILLS/ and or SHIP SET-UP.

The Drake setup is just fine leave it alone! And as said before if you cant kill it then donít bother trying. More then likely unless your skills suck for tanking it will not be much of a bother since it's DPS sucks because of the passive tank.Cool




Are you insane? Did you watch the video?

Did that geddon pilot look n00b? Or like he did not have the skills? He had mega pulse specialisation level 5 FFS! Thats a like 30 day skill to a dead end for only 2% more damge. He had 38million sp. That means this summer he will have been playing eve for maybe 3.5yrs? I have just under 30m and I thought I had blasterthron skills. That guy was truely maxed. There is nothing I MEAN nothing he could have done more. Yet he still took an age to break that DRAKE tank. That drake had Only Battlecriuser level 2!!!! Do you understand that? Imagine if that Drake had in shields and battlecriuser skill what the geddon has in just laser specs... He would have not got through that tank. lets not forget it was a geddon too EM/Thermal damage, he should have melted that drake with just BC level 2 with 2 Invun fields on. (no EM hardener) Now imagine just how rubbish a autopest would have done or a megathron.

Oh, and No battlecriuser in history has ever engauged a Battleship willingly. So I don't see why in eve a T1 BC should be able to tank a GANKED one. A classic example is the sharnhourst and gneisenau both pocket battleships (Very heavy battlecriusers) germany sent them to raid a convoy so the british navy just deployed the HMS Melyia (I think thats the name) a battleship. They had to leave the atlantic as they could not do jack with it around.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 18:52:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 05/05/2007 23:02:37
Originally by: MissileRus
Originally by: JamnOne
My personal Opinion...leave the BC alone and fix the BS.

There problem solved. Then you will have your Frigates, your Cruisers, your Battlecruisers and Battleships. Now, if a cruiser can tank a BS then something is truly wrong and you need to fix the cruiser.


id agree to that too.. battleships are pretty weak now a days, easy to avoid with smaller ships only a threat to other BS's, battlecruiser is a threat to everything below it, and even things above it.

i thought CCP wanted no solopwnmobiles, Battlecruisers are exactly that.. difference between small/med weapons counter their ship sizes is smaller then the difference with large weapons.

any BC pilot can avoid BS damage if smart, so in a real fight a passive drake with scrambler buddy would easely pwn that geddon since the drake wont be just stuck there with 0 trans and 43 meters range...
now a Cruiser pwning a BC with 1 buddy scrambling is another thing.. only threat to BCs with scrambler buddy is drones, witch they blow up extremely fast.

so imo boost battleships Laughing because now their not balanced with the other ship classes if you take above example. it makes perfect sence to me atleast!
BC's are solopwn mobiles, i doubt CCP will nerf small/medium weapon difference and change multible ship classes to balance it that way so easiest is to just boost the BS's a bit more.
their kings of the hills, but can be taken down quite easely while "above mid" class ships can take out the kings with 1 buddy while being able to take out most smaller generaly easely solo.
BS's should have no problem killing BC's imo, even if they have a scrambling/web buddy, add a tracking disrupter to that and it doesnt realy matter who pilots the BS or what uber faction fittings it has.

BC's have the widest range for killing stuff, Frigs have the smallest with BS's close to them. this is general fittings ofc! a BS can surely change their field and fit small guns but it would still be limited in range of its killing tree.

BC's dont need to change fittings generaly to something wierd to be able to kill the greatest range in the killing tree. imo.. ugh


Yes I see your point and you do raise intresting ones. I can't see ccp wanting to boost say battleships as they are long standing and ruffly balanced ships. It makes more sense to adjust the NEW offending ship than to mess with every ship around it in class just so you can passive shield tank all day guilt free.

The drake and myrm are too many leauges above Criusers to even consider leaving them unchanged with there shield tanks and change the battleships instead.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 19:09:00 - [68]
 

I am guessing that we don't want an amarr ship that is incapble of SPEED, EW, Out transversal, Out tanking, Out NOSing (geddon has no cpu) to be able to gank ships below its class. So what is its use? Really.

I am guessing if I left this post I would get the usual reply ;

"Geddons are a amazing fleet ship thats what they are for!"

So the entire amarr race and the Gun focused Gallante ships are all for other fleets.

So lets just remove 50% gameplay.

Only a few people have agreed with me compared to the larger number of people who disagree so either the people who agree need to post and let CCP know or I must accept that I am wrong (would not be the first time) and find a new game.

Possible Blasterthron pilot for sale.....see ebay soon....

Nian Banks
Minmatar
Berserkers of Aesir
Posted - 2007.05.05 19:47:00 - [69]
 

Two threads of the same complaint about tanking so this is a copy paste reply...




Ok here's the thing you guys who are complaining seem to have forgotten.

There were two design philosophies for battlecruisers, the british and the german versions.

Now lets compare three main points for WWI BC's and EVE's.

BRITISH GERMAN EVE
High Speed X X X
BS Guns X
BS Armour X X


Now do we notice something? Yes that's right the EVE battlecruiser is more in line with the german vessels. Germany made their battlecruisers fast by keeping smaller cruiser sized guns but increased the armour to withstand battleship guns. On the other end the british had battleship sized guns but cruiser sized armour. Both these designed allowed for reduced weights and so the increased speed.

So a battlecruiser that can withstand a battleships firepower is more than reasonable. Infact its expected, if not. Then the battlecruiser needs large guns. Now another sticking point is that the battlecruisers hitpoints are still less than a battleships. So if we are going for nautical definitions then instead of nerfing the Drake, its hitpoints actually need to be increased.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 20:13:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Nian Banks
Two threads of the same complaint about tanking so this is a copy paste reply...




Ok here's the thing you guys who are complaining seem to have forgotten.

There were two design philosophies for battlecruisers, the british and the german versions.

Now lets compare three main points for WWI BC's and EVE's.

BRITISH GERMAN EVE
High Speed X X X
BS Guns X
BS Armour X X


Now do we notice something? Yes that's right the EVE battlecruiser is more in line with the german vessels. Germany made their battlecruisers fast by keeping smaller cruiser sized guns but increased the armour to withstand battleship guns. On the other end the british had battleship sized guns but cruiser sized armour. Both these designed allowed for reduced weights and so the increased speed.

So a battlecruiser that can withstand a battleships firepower is more than reasonable. Infact its expected, if not. Then the battlecruiser needs large guns. Now another sticking point is that the battlecruisers hitpoints are still less than a battleships. So if we are going for nautical definitions then instead of nerfing the Drake, its hitpoints actually need to be increased.


Its armor is uprated compared to a standard criuser. yes. Your missing the simplist of points NO BATTCRIUSER EVER could withstand multiple salvos from a battleship and that goes for even the toughest heaviest battlecriusers ever. Sharnhourst was longer even than some american BS. Infact they are called pocket battleships rather than Heavy criusers they packet such a punch. Even the sharnhourst and her sister ship had to RUN away from the HMS malaya and radio its position to U-Boats because in a surface engaugement they would prove no good.

Now in eve terms. In eve ships can rep so this should translate as no battlecriuser T1 anway, should be able to outlast a Battleship setup to deal massive damage forever. The geddon before capital ships is the 2nd most damaging ship in eve capable of over 1000dps easily. Its a one trick poney that has risks to its uses. it should be able to gank Battlcriusers FULL STOP. To be honest I would not mind the tank so much if it used cap and thus did not last forever. (hence I have not picked on the nighthawk) But to be able to passivly shrug off a Geddons EM/THERMAL thunderstorm of damage is well in amarr terms unholy.


Matiaj
Posted - 2007.05.05 21:53:00 - [71]
 

Edited by: Matiaj on 05/05/2007 21:52:05

Originally by: Tibrius Archer
The geddon before capital ships is the 2nd most damaging ship in eve capable of over 1000dps easily. Its a one trick poney that has risks to its uses. it should be able to gank Battlcriusers FULL STOP.

Battlecruisers are the 2nd largest non-capital combat ships. The passive drake or myrm is a one trick poney that dedicates all his med, low, and rig slots to tanking. It should be able to tank any non-capital ship FULL STOP.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Igualmentedos
Caldari
Posted - 2007.05.05 22:30:00 - [72]
 

Originally by: Tibrius Archer
I am guessing that we don't want an amarr ship that is incapble of SPEED, EW, Out transversal, Out tanking, Out NOSing (geddon has no cpu) to be able to gank ships below its class. So what is its use? Really.

I am guessing if I left this post I would get the usual reply ;

"Geddons are a amazing fleet ship thats what they are for!"

So the entire amarr race and the Gun focused Gallante ships are all for other fleets.

So lets just remove 50% gameplay.

Only a few people have agreed with me compared to the larger number of people who disagree so either the people who agree need to post and let CCP know or I must accept that I am wrong (would not be the first time) and find a new game.

Possible Blasterthron pilot for sale.....see ebay soon....


Wow. What's this!? A Caldari ship that actually can hold its own against a Gallente ship!?!? OMG it must be NERFED quick or we're all gonna die! How could they give Caldari a GOOD ship?

Seriously if you don't like the game, leave. Nobody cares to hear you complain about how Caldari actually has a good ship for ONCE.

Igualmentedos
Caldari
Posted - 2007.05.05 22:30:00 - [73]
 

Originally by: Matiaj
Edited by: Matiaj on 05/05/2007 21:52:05

Originally by: Tibrius Archer
The geddon before capital ships is the 2nd most damaging ship in eve capable of over 1000dps easily. Its a one trick poney that has risks to its uses. it should be able to gank Battlcriusers FULL STOP.

Battlecruisers are the 2nd largest non-capital combat ships. The passive drake or myrm is a one trick poney that dedicates all his med, low, and rig slots to tanking. It should be able to tank any non-capital ship FULL STOP.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


Finally. Common sense.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:00:00 - [74]
 

Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 05/05/2007 22:57:20

Originally by: Igualmentedos

Wow. What's this!? A Caldari ship that actually can hold its own against a Gallente ship!?!? OMG it must be NERFED quick or we're all gonna die! How could they give Caldari a GOOD ship?

Seriously if you don't like the game, leave. Nobody cares to hear you complain about how Caldari actually has a good ship for ONCE.


Your 100% right. I am 100% wrong. The shield recharge on the drake/myrm is fine.
Really, I am not posting because I want a balanced game, I am complaining because I want the Gallante to win all the time You exposed my deep concetment because racially I am Gallante IRL you see. Eve is not a game but very real.

Also my secondary reason for posting is because I am lamer,I don't have the skills. And Drakes ****d me when I was a child.

Seriously, lets just put this topic to bed now its clear that some people cannot take the time to attempt to show by sighting mathematical evidence or logical comparison there view point in forum debate so lets leave it at that.

I remember the days when people showed analytically in DPS vs Range graphs that showed that pulse lasers and their crystals were broken. Seems the days of such good debate are over.

Seems people like blatent nubs like Igualmentedos run the show now.

To the Devs; sort out shield recharge. End off.

Riddick Valer
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:20:00 - [75]
 

The real reasons a lot of people whine about passive tanked drakes

1) They can't kill it easily. If their setup kills everything else, it should be able to kill passive-tanks also. It doesn't work like that. Different setups have different strengths. A Passive tanked drake's strength is its complete dedication to tanking damage.

2) Immune to nos. Too many people have come to depend on nos in their pvp setups. When they hit a ship that doesn't power their own cap, something must be wrong. Nos isn't an i-win button. Passive-tanks are the counter to it. Deal with it.

Reasons why people will never complain about the drake

1) A passive tanked drake killed them. Unless you're an idiot, you can tank the dps of a passive drake. I run 7 t2 heavies with near maxed missile skills, and my dps still sucks.

What to do if you aren't setup to fight passive tanks:
Scramble it and call friends. Don't bother webbing. It can't go that fast anyway.
Or. Kill all his friends, loot their wrecks, and laugh at him because he contributed nothing to his gang.


Summary: The drake tanks like a BS, ganks like a cruiser, and flies like a pregnant whale.

Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:22:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Tibrius Archer

I remember the days when people showed analytically in DPS vs Range graphs that showed that pulse lasers and their crystals were broken. Seems the days of such good debate are over.



You show one video of a BB having an issue killing a drake. You claim its unbalanced. We know nothing about either ship or pilot and cannot base "its overpowered" on ONE video. What were the fittings on both ships? BC level 2? What other skills? Level 5 with the guns? What other skills? Seriously, ONE instance is hardly "proof" when we have different experiences and different views of what is "balanced".

We have hundreds of killboards showing Drakes being killed by multiple types and sizes of ships. We claim it isn't overpowered based on that and the fact we fly them and lose them. We have hundreds of killboards showing that those drakes don't score huge numbers of kills, showing the weakness of the ship.

Which do we have to go by? Our personal experiences of getting drakes blown out from under us and blowing them out from under others? Real-game experiences show more than charts and graphs? Or one person's rant about not being able to gank one, even though the person DID kill it?

As for threatening to quit over ONE perceived imbalance when NOTHING in this game is fair, bye bye. Stupid arguement, only makes you look like a spoiled teenager and destroys any arguement you might have had. Rolling Eyes

Spacer John
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:22:00 - [77]
 

Oh I see. Nobody graphed out their response to your mathematical argument that passive shield tanking is overpowered? Oh wait, I dont remember your chart detailing the unbalanced ratio between tankable damage vs outputted damage that numerically proves that shield tanked Drakes are superior to Geddons. Get a grip, you made an emotionally charged argument that something needed to be nerfed. People didn't agree with you and expressed why they felt you were wrong. Then you get mad and cop out saying the "opposition" didn't prove their point to your satisfaction (obviously because their maturity level cant match what was once seen on these boards) and therefore will just let the whole argument die.

There are too many variables in open EVE PVP to graphically prove most things one way or another. To most people's experience Drakes dont pose enough of a threat to deserve a nerf. Graph me up a tankable dps + output dps = X pts. chart of all ships. Wont prove anything, but Id be interested to see where the Drake ranks compared to the Geddon and other ships. Do that and maybe Ill attempt to draw up some graphs of my own.

Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:26:00 - [78]
 

Originally by: riddick Valer

Summary: The drake tanks like a BS, ganks like a cruiser, and flies like a pregnant whale.

Quoted for truth Cool

It just isn't a fun ship to fly, its a bread-n-butter mission runner to make ISK semi-afk.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:40:00 - [79]
 

Originally by: Anaalys Fluuterby
Originally by: Tibrius Archer

I remember the days when people showed analytically in DPS vs Range graphs that showed that pulse lasers and their crystals were broken. Seems the days of such good debate are over.



You show one video of a BB having an issue killing a drake. You claim its unbalanced. We know nothing about either ship or pilot and cannot base "its overpowered" on ONE video. What were the fittings on both ships? BC level 2? What other skills? Level 5 with the guns? What other skills? Seriously, ONE instance is hardly "proof" when we have different experiences and different views of what is "balanced".

We have hundreds of killboards showing Drakes being killed by multiple types and sizes of ships. We claim it isn't overpowered based on that and the fact we fly them and lose them. We have hundreds of killboards showing that those drakes don't score huge numbers of kills, showing the weakness of the ship.

Which do we have to go by? Our personal experiences of getting drakes blown out from under us and blowing them out from under others? Real-game experiences show more than charts and graphs? Or one person's rant about not being able to gank one, even though the person DID kill it?

As for threatening to quit over ONE perceived imbalance when NOTHING in this game is fair, bye bye. Stupid arguement, only makes you look like a spoiled teenager and destroys any arguement you might have had. Rolling Eyes


Must have watched the video with an eye shut as he showed all the skills and and fits with thye required detail to backup my point. Granted he did not show me how well he can mine for fly Minmatar frieghters but I did not need to see that for my argument.

Central Scrutinizer
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:47:00 - [80]
 

I wonder if anyone actually watched the movie.

It took roughly 30 seconds for the geddon to break the tank. Drake would have died in another 10.

Get the **** over it, buddy.

Spacer John
Posted - 2007.05.05 23:58:00 - [81]
 

After reading that last post I went back to see if the video was finally done downloading. This whole thread, I assumed it took the Geddon 5 minutes or more to break the Drakes tank. For people that dont feel like taking the time to wait for all 60MB to download, the Drake sits there unable to do much of anything, and the Geddon annihilates it in about 30-40 seconds. Sorry Tibrius, your argument went from bad to silly. The message posted at the end of the video is "Do Not Mess with a Geddon". How it got turned into a nerf Drake thread is beyond me.

Valandril
Caldari
Ex-Mortis
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:00:00 - [82]
 

Imo only problem with passive tanks is that there is no counter for them, for full active tank with injectors, rechargers and heavy resists you bring nossing.
For passive u can't bring dps, u can't bring nossing just there is no counter. It is getting even more funny when passive setup fit 1-2neutras *.*

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:00:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: riddick Valer
The real reasons a lot of people whine about passive tanked drakes

1) They can't kill it easily. If their setup kills everything else, it should be able to kill passive-tanks also. It doesn't work like that. Different setups have different strengths. A Passive tanked drake's strength is its complete dedication to tanking damage.

2) Immune to nos. Too many people have come to depend on nos in their pvp setups. When they hit a ship that doesn't power their own cap, something must be wrong. Nos isn't an i-win button. Passive-tanks are the counter to it. Deal with it.

Reasons why people will never complain about the drake

1) A passive tanked drake killed them. Unless you're an idiot, you can tank the dps of a passive drake. I run 7 t2 heavies with near maxed missile skills, and my dps still sucks.

What to do if you aren't setup to fight passive tanks:
Scramble it and call friends. Don't bother webbing. It can't go that fast anyway.
Or. Kill all his friends, loot their wrecks, and laugh at him because he contributed nothing to his gang.


Summary: The drake tanks like a BS, ganks like a cruiser, and flies like a pregnant whale.


See this is the thing. You mention different setups have different stregnths. There are WHOLE races dedicated to doing damage in eve each with whole ships in many classes that are not designed to be clever but to just gank e.g MEGATHRON, GEDDON etc.... If we are gonna make ships that can tank any other ship even ships above it in class and skill we are going to have to do something about these whole other now useless races.

Further more if we are to have passive shield tanks as a defence to NOS rather than fixing NOS then we against need to sort out the other races. The gallante and armar for the most part have mainly low slots with smaller shields are they to be left without a NOS defence, eh? Your whole arguments about the Drake being able to have such a tank when all its slots are dedicated to tanking works the other way round too. That geddon used all slots for Ganking and was not very effective considering there awesome skills it had compared to the alts poor mission runing skills. Not even the BC level 3.

I agree with you on what you say about NOS though. I know some people who would not kill a thing, they depend on NOS and there crap drone skills to do all the wining for them.

I would also like to say that a passive drake could still in DPS terms kill any T1 criuser pilot of comparable skill no matter what he fits. Considering it would take a small blob of T1 criusers to take out such a drake with a passive shield tank i have to reject the argument that the DPS on a drake is useless.


Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:06:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Spacer John
After reading that last post I went back to see if the video was finally done downloading. This whole thread, I assumed it took the Geddon 5 minutes or more to break the Drakes tank. For people that dont feel like taking the time to wait for all 60MB to download, the Drake sits there unable to do much of anything, and the Geddon annihilates it in about 30-40 seconds. Sorry Tibrius, your argument went from bad to silly. The message posted at the end of the video is "Do Not Mess with a Geddon". How it got turned into a nerf Drake thread is beyond me.


Your missing the point. That was his n00bish 4m sp alt in the drake with ropey as hell skills. Against a 38m SP geddon. Non-n00b drakes have been quoted to tank nearly 1500hp/s that would make the drake unkillerable by any geddon. Now imagine your not a geddon and don't do shield melting EM/THERMAL damage with your guns. How then would you have a hope? What would a Raven do with only 750dps MAX? What would a Autopest do? Infact what would some carriers do... I know the gallante one does 1800+ Dps but what about the others...

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:10:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Valandril
Imo only problem with passive tanks is that there is no counter for them, for full active tank with injectors, rechargers and heavy resists you bring nossing.
For passive u can't bring dps, u can't bring nossing just there is no counter. It is getting even more funny when passive setup fit 1-2neutras *.*


If it tanked less then maybe fine even though it would be another critcal blow to every 3/4 mid slot ship out there that HAS no chance but to armour tank and thus never have the option of lasting for ever for free.

I remember reading a dev blog ages ago about them not wanting to creating any 1v1 pearma tanks in EvE so I reckon it will get adjusted soon enough.

Spacer John
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:25:00 - [86]
 

No your missing the point. Your wide SP gap argument is flawed. The drake had all the skills for Tech2 tank gear. The Geddon had the skills for tech2 gank gear. You cannot say 5mil SP vs 38mil SP because honestly the lvl 5 skill is still the same 2 or 5 % increase of all other levels and cost 5-6 times the SP for it. It takes EXPONENTIONALLY more SP for the same small increase of previous levels.

256000 SP for Rockets lvl 5 will only give me a 5% dmg increase over 45000 SP for Rockets lvl 1+2+3+4. Taking that example 256000/45000 (Rocket lvl 5/Rocket lvl 4)= 5.5/1 ratio for %5 effectiveness increase

38000000/5000000 (SP ratio of characters that you claim should mean something in your argument)= 7.5/1 ratio. Skill gain in EVE is not linear, so please stop trying to fool people with fallable arguments.

The Drake had BC lvl 2, but his other shield skills were lvl 4. The Geddon had his skills 1 level above. And he ripped through the Drake anyway. The Drake tank bar inched up once during the fight, the Geddon didnt battle it down, it just wiped it out like it should. The Drake had a full t2 tank setup with rigs. Higher BC level would help, but not make or break your argument.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:27:00 - [87]
 

Originally by: Spacer John
Oh I see. Nobody graphed out their response to your mathematical argument that passive shield tanking is overpowered? Oh wait, I dont remember your chart detailing the unbalanced ratio between tankable damage vs outputted damage that numerically proves that shield tanked Drakes are superior to Geddons. Get a grip, you made an emotionally charged argument that something needed to be nerfed. People didn't agree with you and expressed why they felt you were wrong. Then you get mad and cop out saying the "opposition" didn't prove their point to your satisfaction (obviously because their maturity level cant match what was once seen on these boards) and therefore will just let the whole argument die.

There are too many variables in open EVE PVP to graphically prove most things one way or another. To most people's experience Drakes dont pose enough of a threat to deserve a nerf. Graph me up a tankable dps + output dps = X pts. chart of all ships. Wont prove anything, but Id be interested to see where the Drake ranks compared to the Geddon and other ships. Do that and maybe Ill attempt to draw up some graphs of my own.


You can't prove things, too many varibles? What? eh? I suppose old style multispecs of death were balanced. At least with them more than one or two ships in eve could do that party trick. If people want a lowish DPS class of ship in the game that can TANK anything there should be a new ship group like "Bait ship" And each race should recive a ship that can NOS proof tank crazy damage.

Just because drakes don't pose enough threat to be nerfed to you that does not mean they should be left. If that was the case we would still have a thorax that could launch 8 heavy drones and chew through any other criuser easy peasy. Cause they never posed a threat to my mega...

I really started this thread for more info on this sort of passive tank so I too would be intrested in seeing some sort of graph showing the drake ranked in a DPS tanking chart. If the 1500hp/s figure is accurate then I would imagine just below dual tech 2 XL boost scorpion with full halo set is it? with the other 6 slots filled with hardeners. That I would not mind at all because the scorpion is a Battleship and it is using cap to do it. Malstrom should be up there too prehaps.

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:43:00 - [88]
 

Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 06/05/2007 00:42:14
Originally by: Spacer John
No your missing the point. Your wide SP gap argument is flawed. The drake had all the skills for Tech2 tank gear. The Geddon had the skills for tech2 gank gear. You cannot say 5mil SP vs 38mil SP because honestly the lvl 5 skill is still the same 2 or 5 % increase of all other levels and cost 5-6 times the SP for it. It takes EXPONENTIONALLY more SP for the same small increase of previous levels.

256000 SP for Rockets lvl 5 will only give me a 5% dmg increase over 45000 SP for Rockets lvl 1+2+3+4. Taking that example 256000/45000 (Rocket lvl 5/Rocket lvl 4)= 5.5/1 ratio for %5 effectiveness increase

38000000/5000000 (SP ratio of characters that you claim should mean something in your argument)= 7.5/1 ratio. Skill gain in EVE is not linear, so please stop trying to fool people with fallable arguments.

The Drake had BC lvl 2, but his other shield skills were lvl 4. The Geddon had his skills 1 level above. And he ripped through the Drake anyway. The Drake tank bar inched up once during the fight, the Geddon didnt battle it down, it just wiped it out like it should. The Drake had a full t2 tank setup with rigs. Higher BC level would help, but not make or break your argument.


This is what I want. Your spot on with skill ofc I understood this when arguing. But we are talking gank skill in a ship that is the class above the Drake. Its GANK considering it is a dumb amarr gank ship should be far better than the drakes tank it bearly was in that video.

The 5% from level 5 that the drake was missing was in shield managment and shield operation. So thats recharge and shield ammount. At a crude glance it seems that its only 10% off max but when you factor in how these %'s stack once applied to each other then the ship it becomes huge. Then that 5% becomes monsterous at 33% shield strength. That drake is not quite only slightly worse than MAX recharge recharge as you would try and fool people with your fallable arguement.

Though props as you are arguing my points not just refusing to understand and saying brain dead things.

Basically the question comes down to this. Can the passive drake with MAXED skills and 2 invunrability fields out tank the whole gank battleship lineup in eve. Answer is pretty much yes. And is this ok? so far the answer to that is yes.

Dark Kavar
Caldari
Aionios Diadochi
Dark Matter Coalition
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:43:00 - [89]
 

Originally by: Tibrius Archer
Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 04/05/2007 23:14:50
Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 04/05/2007 23:14:24
Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 04/05/2007 23:12:52


Ok If you look at the original POST there is a link to a video of a proven maxed geddon with conflag barely breaking the tank of n00bish Drake. Given that a MAXED raven is what 750dps? Max and that the ganked geddon must be putting out 1300 dps + assuming ogre'2s and given that the Drake had only BC level 2 so not much resistances. I guessed the figure 2 maxed ravens. To be honest I have not run the numbers, but in that configuration the drake(with a more realistically skilled player) is not far off out lasting 2 maxed ravens.


Either your story is a load of bull or that drake was tanked specificly for thermal and em

Tibrius Archer
Dragon Highlords
Dies Irae.
Posted - 2007.05.06 00:48:00 - [90]
 

Originally by: Dark Kavar
Originally by: Tibrius Archer
Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 04/05/2007 23:14:50
Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 04/05/2007 23:14:24
Edited by: Tibrius Archer on 04/05/2007 23:12:52


Ok If you look at the original POST there is a link to a video of a proven maxed geddon with conflag barely breaking the tank of n00bish Drake. Given that a MAXED raven is what 750dps? Max and that the ganked geddon must be putting out 1300 dps + assuming ogre'2s and given that the Drake had only BC level 2 so not much resistances. I guessed the figure 2 maxed ravens. To be honest I have not run the numbers, but in that configuration the drake(with a more realistically skilled player) is not far off out lasting 2 maxed ravens.


Either your story is a load of bull or that drake was tanked specificly for thermal and em


Sorry clarify? Whats bull? what do you meanQuestion


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

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