open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Tech II ships coming in Trinity, new Dev Blog by Fendahl
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (18)

Author Topic

Sylper Illysten
Caldari
Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.10.24 05:24:00 - [331]
 

Edited by: Sylper Illysten on 24/10/2007 05:57:50
So what does a Golem do against defender missile spam in missions? Let's not mention the lousy grid and I have no idea how an explosion velocity bonus is meant to be useful, let alone a target painter bonus. Did someone just pick the bonus out of a hat? Looks like the Raven and CNR remain the PvE ships of choice. Marauders aren't even close to being what mission runners want/need, well Caldari mission runners anyway.

Jazmyne Lee
Posted - 2007.10.24 05:35:00 - [332]
 

what the hell are you thinking the Panther has no missile slots. what a wasted ship. and who does missions in a tempist. you got them backwould. thanks for nuthing new ships usless for pve players. sorry i am little upset.


Jazmyne Lee
Posted - 2007.10.24 06:04:00 - [333]
 

typhoon is best fitted with armor tank taking up all lower slots and recharges in mid slots. then 4x t2 cruise missile lunchers 4x 1400mm t2 guns and 5x t2 heavy drones giving the typhoon great fire power for missions and still keeping a great tank and great speed. with armor resist rigs this ship can hold 80%+ resist on all types and run the large armor repair none stop great for missions can even walk away from the computer if ya need a coffee.

Ok onto the Panther what a crapy design. NO missiles makes it usless. leave the 4 missile ports and the ship will be half good.

i trained 1400mm as the last on my list of stuff and i hate fitting them cos they miss so often with out me taking from my tank to fix this. In saying that why the hell did you put a ship in for mission runners that has to use guns. So Dum, Then every mission runner that trained missiles and drones so they did not have to stress every time they jumped into a mission ware the rats are right on top of you will have to change how they like to play.

sounds like NO one at CCP play missions..

Caribardi
Minmatar
Posted - 2007.10.24 06:09:00 - [334]
 

I got tired of digging through the mess, but allow me to say the golem with 4 missiles per volley versus defenders is going to be a lame mission ship. If you could apply the damage bonus also to the HP of the missiles that might be acceptable.

I also think you should re-think things a bit. It appears the t2 BS will not have better DPS than the more common types of faction BS. This is not consistent with the smaller hulls. Considering the price tag on a golem will be similar to the CNR, it seems like the CNR may be the better choice with it's 1 and 1/3 launcher advantage even if you overlook the defender missile fiasco. Some of the bonuses seem gimmicky and are of questionable value.

Morkus Rex
Solar Spice and Liquors Company
Posted - 2007.10.24 06:45:00 - [335]
 

Well, I see no reason to go back flying Amarr BS.
Actually I'm happy I started training Gallente, the Kronos looks awesome Cool

Disco Flint
The Flaming Sideburn's
Posted - 2007.10.24 06:50:00 - [336]
 

Edited by: Disco Flint on 24/10/2007 06:50:05
Originally by: Sylper Illysten
Edited by: Sylper Illysten on 24/10/2007 05:57:50
So what does a Golem do against defender missile spam in missions? Let's not mention the lousy grid and I have no idea how an explosion velocity bonus is meant to be useful, let alone a target painter bonus. Did someone just pick the bonus out of a hat? Looks like the Raven and CNR remain the PvE ships of choice. Marauders aren't even close to being what mission runners want/need, well Caldari mission runners anyway.


Well the painter bonus 'could' be nice, what it does on a Caldari ship however I don't know. The explosion velocity bonus is useless though, didn't Caldari use to have a ship with one? And then it was deemed so useful so it got changed? I think it was black, T2... something with N...

The Golem bonuses would make more sense both from balancing and from considering existing ships' bonuses like this:
* 10% bonus to BS class missile velocity per Caldari BS level
* 5% reduction to BS class missile launcher rate of fire per Caldari BS level
* 5% bonus to shield resistances per Marauder level
* 5% bonus to BS class missile explosion radius per Marauder level
* Role bonus: 100% bonus to BS class missile damage
* Role bonus: 100% bonus to range and velocity of tractor beams

Swap around between BS and Marauder skills I don't care. But this ship would actually be a step up from a standard Raven rather than a 'meh'. The resistance bonus should go on the Paladin as well.

Well, the Kronos looks great at least and the Vagur seems ok. The Paladin... there's so many things wrong with it I don't know where to start... And I still don't get what a tractor beam bonus would bring me on a combat vessel. If I run missions or plexes, I swap to a cormorant when I'm done and do the looting in 2-5 minutes. If I go ratting... well, why would anyone rat anywhere with a 800mil ship when a 5m cruiser or even 100m BS can get the job done all the same?

Blaino
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:41:00 - [337]
 

Can someone point me to the thread with the upcoming changes to missiles? I must have missed that one. I currently use torps in missions and I'm wondering exactly what changes are coming.

Phyrron
Gallente
Evoke.
Ev0ke
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:43:00 - [338]
 

Nice ships, nice ideas, good concept!... but why not new forms for new ships?

Mioelnir
Minmatar
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:47:00 - [339]
 

Because tech 2 ships are modified versions of tech 1 ships and therefor get a modified hull and not a new hull.

Phyrron
Gallente
Evoke.
Ev0ke
Posted - 2007.10.24 07:59:00 - [340]
 

ok, these ships are "so called" TechII. But realy that are special force ships with complete new areas of application.

Mamarto
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:00:00 - [341]
 

Edited by: Mamarto on 24/10/2007 08:00:13
Originally by: Solant
Originally by: Carniflex
Golem does less dps than CNR :/ as CNR has RoF bonus and 7 launchers while Golem has 8 'effective' turrets.


I'd love to know why you figured it would have more dps than the CNR. If it did, CNR's would be effectively useless in the game.

Clue delivered.


You mean like how the Navy Mega, Fleet Tempest and Navy Apoc are all outperformed by the tier 3 BS?

Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:30:00 - [342]
 

Originally by: Vitaki
Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro
None of the new ships will ever be totally unprofitable to invent; people will just have to expect to pay a premium for the ones that are not so much in demand, or possibly ask someone to build them to order.
What, your wrong here. The datacore prices could push things up high enough that unless your inventing one of the best ships, the crap ships will have to be the same cost, but if no one will buy at that price for a pos your going to loose money when you try to sell it.


There won't be any BPO holders, so people who invent them won't be under any external pressure to sell at a loss. I expect that people will sell them at an equivalent profit per unit to what they'd get with the more profitable ships. Sales would probably be a lot slower, but there wouldn't be as much competition either.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2007.10.24 08:33:00 - [343]
 

Originally by: FireFoxx80

Originally by: Trojanman190
Ill agree, the ecm issue is lame, makes these ships useless for fighting the guristas. But think about ratters. I think this ship is the new secret best friend to a ratter. That tractor beam bonus is sweet, and the tracking and range bonuses mean you can use high damage ammo at a much longer range. The extra high slots mean you will certainly have a cloak in there, you might even be able to fit a stab [its ratting, there is nothing wrong with this]. Sure, mission runners will dig this, but ratters will like it too. And as I said, these ships will FAIL against guristas.

Yup, you reinforce my point. These ships, with their tractor beam bonus, slightly higher racial resists, damage bonuses, and ability to fit more tank/assistance modules; is just a boost to mission runners.



Repeating it every second post will not make it true.

Marauders have very little interest for missions runners.

Kronos - Ever tried running a mission in a megathron? Sad. With this new ship CCP has reduced even more the possibility to adapt the damage to the enemy (no missile launchers).

Golem - defender missiles as already stated.

I have not enough experience with minmatar and amarr to comment, but I suspect there are simila issues.

Those ship are made for ratters, where you will use them on the "natural" target, for example Kronos on Serpentis where its damage tipe work well.

Probaly, with the better tracking, resists and webber bonus they will be a good addition to gatecamps, even with the sensor weakness.

But I see little interest for mission running.

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:12:00 - [344]
 

Originally by: d026
Edited by: d026 on 23/10/2007 23:51:16

i just ran some numbers trough eft:

golem dps (missiles only + 4 x dg bcu): 698
golem dps (+drones): 929

cnr dps (missiles only + 4 x dg bcu): 815 dps
cnr dps (+ drones and 425mm II): 1009 dps


why in hell should anyone change to the golem? noobs who dont have the isk for a gist booster and desperately need 8 mids (lol)?

golem = complete fail ! also volley damage is not that impressive considering you don't get a rof bonus..

edit/ this is with with old launcher stats and torps




It will actually be worse considering the change to torps making them useless for pve. With cruise missiles a normal T1 raven will do more dps considering cruise missiles are much more vulnerable to defender missiles.

Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
Emptiness.
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:12:00 - [345]
 

Due to the last few days dev blogs i can ask CCP. Please get back your old balance and ship design team. The new weirdo ideas are too much wowish for this game.

PLease use your brain and TRY TRYE rationalize a bit how in hell the paladin can be considered anythign but a joke? Wil repaet. WEB bonus and 50 km range guns DO NOT MIX!

At end you made 4 ships that are bad for PVP and BAd for PVE. Incredble. Astoneshing.


The tractor beam bonus is the cour pf the grace that makes everythign look liek a joke.

A salvaging bonus would be much better, more sense, would match with t the "roleplaywise" description of the ship , to stay deep in enemy line syou collect stuff.

Perry
Amarr
The X-Trading Company
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:16:00 - [346]
 

Edited by: Perry on 24/10/2007 09:18:49
Edited by: Perry on 24/10/2007 09:17:33
How about this: Instead of creating Solo Mission running Battleships, we add some multiplayer Battleships? You know, MMO should stand for something... Lets have a look at the Paladin: In its current shape, its obsolete from the let go. Web bonus is the antithesis to Pulse Lasers, rep bonus is gallente, Tracking is meh and cap bonus just lol. So how about a constructive suggestions?

What do we need?
-High price
-A bit more damage then Tech 1
-More durabilty then Tech 1
-A special Role to support the MMO aspect

What do we have?
-High price

How to add the missing aspects?
-We replace cap bonus by 25% damage bonus
-We add durabilty by giving it 5% resists per Marauder level
-We change the role bonus to gang warfare.

Result:
Paladin MKII
- 4 Turrets
-BS Bonus -10% capuse of lasers
-BS Bonus +5% damage per level (
-MR Bonus +5% to all armor resists per level
-MR Bonus +7,5% tracking per level
-ROLE Bonus: +100% Damage
-ROLE Bonus: -99% reduction of cpu use of Warfare Modules

There we go, something worth flying. In a team. By the way, what happened to the role change of the Crapocalypse?

Nukeaon
Caldari
The Ethereal Stars
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:18:00 - [347]
 

ZOMG LIEK NREF TEH PALADINS!!!!!11111

lol, nice update, looking forward to all these ships, especially the Golem Very Happy

Sadrigla
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:43:00 - [348]
 

Edited by: Sadrigla on 24/10/2007 09:44:04
Edited by: Sadrigla on 24/10/2007 09:43:21
I may have missed something, but wasn't it stated previously that there would be 20 new Tech 2 ships? Now we have 16, what happened to the last 4?

As for these four new classes, can't wait to see them in action.
And I think it's about time something like the marauder class was introduced, riddiculous and efficient if used properly.

And I don't think that every ship class has to be balanced between the races. Take tier 3 BS for instance, the Rokh is awsome, while the Hyperion is a slightly modified Megathron (read as: Hyperions is a waste of ISK). Some races should excel at some ship classes. Fleets should be balanced between races not ships between ship classes.
[Note: I'm not saying that marauders are perfect as they are, CCP will have to see how they actually work in game and start balancing from there].

Bottom line: good move CCP, lets see how it plays out (and where are the last 4 ships?).

Esmenet
Gallente
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:47:00 - [349]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul


Repeating it every second post will not make it true.

Marauders have very little interest for missions runners.




I think the marauders are more intended for ratting and exploration than missioning.

Shigawahhhhh
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2007.10.24 09:59:00 - [350]
 

Just a quick reply to all the people I have seen asking (sorry if this has already been said) log onto sis there already there.
However since I have some of them written out here ya go.
energy grid V, Advanced weapon upgrade V, BS V, spaceship command V for the Marauders
Black ops you need BS V, Blackops 1 (which require cloaking IV and jump drive calibration IV) and spaceship command V for the blackops

Ethidium Bromide
Amarr
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2007.10.24 10:17:00 - [351]
 

Edited by: Ethidium Bromide on 24/10/2007 10:28:03
Originally by: Perry
Edited by: Perry on 24/10/2007 09:18:49
Edited by: Perry on 24/10/2007 09:17:33
How about this: Instead of creating Solo Mission running Battleships, we add some multiplayer Battleships? You know, MMO should stand for something... Lets have a look at the Paladin: In its current shape, its obsolete from the let go. Web bonus is the antithesis to Pulse Lasers, rep bonus is gallente, Tracking is meh and cap bonus just lol. So how about a constructive suggestions?

What do we need?
-High price
-A bit more damage then Tech 1
-More durabilty then Tech 1
-A special Role to support the MMO aspect

What do we have?
-High price

How to add the missing aspects?
-We replace cap bonus by 25% damage bonus
-We add durabilty by giving it 5% resists per Marauder level
-We change the role bonus to gang warfare.

Result:
Paladin MKII
- 4 Turrets
-BS Bonus -10% capuse of lasers
-BS Bonus +5% damage per level (
-MR Bonus +5% to all armor resists per level
-MR Bonus +7,5% tracking per level
-ROLE Bonus: +100% Damage
-ROLE Bonus: -99% reduction of cpu use of Warfare Modules

There we go, something worth flying. In a team. By the way, what happened to the role change of the Crapocalypse?


we don't need ANOTHER ship with that bonus come one!
the tractor beam bonus is fine for mission runners, you don't have to fit them you know? remote armor reppers?

EDIT: although i would gladly take this before the 'We don't hate Amarr we just like a good laugh! X from CCP' Paladin enters the game this way.

Urfin
Amarr
Posted - 2007.10.24 10:38:00 - [352]
 

Edited by: Urfin on 24/10/2007 10:38:25
As an Amarr player since beta who also trained Caldari - can I have all my racial skillpoints back, like right now?!

The marauders are an insult - an overpowered Kronos, an interesting Vargur... Fits right in with the trend of Gallente getting it all, with Minmatar a close second, Caldari getting nice but useless and Amarr - plain crap.

Golem - worse than a CNR, just barely better than a stock Raven, and useless in missions because of defenders. Top notch design.

Paladin - ooooh baby do we Amarr players dig this one. We do so love the same kind of useless at 10x the price, oh yeah. NICE role change - from worst BS to worst AND horribly expensive BS. A PERSISTENT game, hurray.

This is a CASCADING, EPIC FAIL at keeping the game even superficially balanced. Half of your racial content DOES NOT WORK on par with the other half. Great job, congratulations.

Here's a suggestion - how about you shoot the people responsible for this and just take the myriad of quite similar and rational suggestions from the forums instead. It is glaringly obvious that they are right and you are wrong.

Fixing what doesn't work should be a priority over adding NEW stuff that still doesn't work, no? Especially since fixing these design flaws takes WAY less manhours.

Aidelon
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:18:00 - [353]
 

Excellent news.

However, one change to the dev blog is needed: Carriers can indeed fight off many foes, but are completely ineffective against well put together Nano ships/gangs. Fighters do not have the velocity to keep up with the speedy ships, and are thus ineffective.

Hulu Bulu
Gallente
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:44:00 - [354]
 

The final models will use the current Tech I hull, but with different textures and shaders to reflect the designs of their developers (as listed below).

****ing lazy asses, draw some ships ffs...how lazy are you?

Hulu Bulu
Gallente
Posted - 2007.10.24 11:46:00 - [355]
 

Edited by: Hulu Bulu on 24/10/2007 11:45:56
sry double

Saladin
Minmatar
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2007.10.24 12:37:00 - [356]
 

I have to admit I was excited about black ops battleships until I read the bonuses carefully and realized it can't use covert ops cloaking device. Time to cancel training cloaking 5.

Jade Fontaine
Trident Future Technologies
Sylph Alliance
Posted - 2007.10.24 12:39:00 - [357]
 

Please give the Vargur at least enough Powergrid to fit 4 1200mm T2 Artis (incl. AWU5 and Engineering 5), that would be about 1000MW extra. With a gimped powergrid like this I see nothing that justifies spending 5x the price of the Maelstorm on this ship, as the Maelstorm fits 8x1400mm T2 without much problems.

Saladin
Minmatar
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2007.10.24 13:15:00 - [358]
 

Originally by: Achuramale
Just realized something really weird.

Black Ops require Cloaking 5 and what's the benefit of Cloaking skill per level: 10% reduced targetting delay, and lets what see what bonus ships all have: no targetting delay from fitting cloaks...I mean I hated the idea of having to train cloaking 5 and this certainly doesn't help one bit.

So basically this loooong skill these ships require is completely useless for them expect for lvl3 which allows them to fit best possible cloaks that can be fitted on these ships. Please reduce the cloaking req to lvl 4 max and add some new skill that isn't almost completely useless as req if needed.


QFT - Its like the anchoring skill. You need to train it up, but you get no benifit from it what so ever. Not even a reduction in anchoring time.

Perry
Amarr
The X-Trading Company
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2007.10.24 13:27:00 - [359]
 

I see some core problems here. First, the parole of "Tech 2 BS must not be solo pwn!". Well, why? Look at Vagabond, Ishtar, Sacrilege. Cheap and Solopwn. Tech 2 BS will be omg expensive and very difficult to get, definetly more difficult then buying a Machariel for 600m in Jita. So why the Pre-Nerf? It drags three new ships into the mud and makes one (guess which one) clearly superior, but still junk for the isk. Conclusion1: Tech 2 Battleships must be "good". So give them proper Bonus and stats. Im thinking correct racial Bonus here!

Problem two is the Marauder Role. It smells. Strongly. A solo Mission running Battleship is a no-go in a mmorpg. Conclusion2: Think about it and change the Bonus to reflect group work and not afk-lvl4. We waste a whole new Shipclass, in fact the most anticipated Shipclass, to Isk farmers. Thats a No-go, too.

Third, the Paladin is crap and you know it. But you cant change Apoc to missiles and make a Khanid Paladin, because that would screw turret users too much. Im a turret user myself. And i understand this problem very well. But in favor of Game Design, i beg you to change the Apoc and make it useable, to get a proper T2 Apoc done! Conclusion3: Change the Apocalypse to a Hybrid Ship like the Arbitrator, with many possible fittings but no clear master role. Then improve that to get a good Paladin. Give it Turrets and Missiles, but not full armament. Something like 6 Turrets and 3 Launchers plus Heavy Drones like Geddon, but overall more fragile and tricky, with med slots. Then build Paladin. Just do it and watch Evo-go up in exstase...

Suggested Apocalypse MKII:
7 HI > 6x Dual Heavy Pulse Laser II / 1x Siege Missile Launcher II
5 ME > 100mn MWD II / Warp Disruptor II / Stasis Webifier / Heavy Capacitor Booster II / Tracking Disruptor II
7 LO > LAR II / 1600mm Plate II / DC2 / Explosive / Kinetic / Heat Sink II / Heat Sink II
150m³ Dronebay > 125mb BW: 5x Preator II (lol) 5x Acolyte (lol²)
BS Bonus1 > -10% cap use of large energy turrets
BS Bonus 2 > +7,5% tracking of large energy turrets
Damage per second: 642

Then tweak hitpoints, mass and speed to reflect balance needs. There you go, good skirmish BS and easy to upgrade to T2, because T2 is not useless. Rolling Eyes


Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2007.10.24 13:50:00 - [360]
 

^^^ golden domi ;p


Pages: first : previous : ... 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 ... : last (18)

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