open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked The new Eos: an Astarte with less grid, and the DPS of a Thorax.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic

Jasai Kameron
Hakata Group
Blade.
Posted - 2007.11.10 11:24:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: Zendoc
What I don't understand is... Why everyone is complaining about it being a bad solo ship. Not one of the fittings I have seen posted in this thread has been a fleet command setup. I haven't seen a single fitting incorporate gang warfare links. And those of you saying the infowar link modules are useless are just dumb, EW is extremely useful to fleets, I have no idea why you think that's a good argument. And I will state it again, you don't have to fit only info war mods, I fit seige warfare mods on my claymore without getting the seige warfare bonus.

And I'll say what I've said again. If you don't want to fit info war mods on the Eos, you're better flyng something else.

As for me being dumb, let me try to explain it in a simple argument. Let's say I can either fit a mod to boost armor resistances or a mod to boost the effectiveness of EW mods. Now, let's say I'm in a fleet of, I don't know, 50 ships. How many of those are typically jamming ships? 10? And which ships are generally primaried in a fleet battle? EW?

Okay, so if I fit my info war link, one fifth of my fleet are more effective, but only for as long as they survive and, with weak tanks and being primaried, they will die quickly. Once that happens, and for the rest of the fight, my extremely expensive ship, with skills, is doing absolutely nothing on the battlefield.

What if I had fit the armor resist mod? Well, it would boost the survivability of every single ship in my fleet, including the EW ships. They will take longer to die. Heck, every ship on the battlefield will take longer to die and that will last for the whole of the battle. Not only that, but I also boost my own tank with these rigs.

Can you now see the argument behind infowar mods being weak?

Another reason they were weak is that one of them boosted sensor strength, which achieved absolutely nothing when dampeners were flavour of the month. 'course, that looks like being fixed now, which is good, but it's another reason why thoughtful posters viewed the EW links as weak.

Not because they were dumb.

Bentula
Posted - 2007.11.10 11:43:00 - [92]
 

Edited by: Bentula on 10/11/2007 11:49:41
Originally by: Ogul
Originally by: Bentula

What i, as a eos pilot who never used the warfare links cause i didnt ever need them, dont understand is why people dont just switch to astarte like i do? Its not that much worse than current eos in combat and the warfare links being kinda specialised isnt exactly news.


Some people like drone boats.


A droneboat without a damage or hitpoint bonus to drones ...

It was like a big ishkur, problem being it wasnt supposed to be a big ishkur. It was the odd man out in its whole class, and something like that never lasts, and you may quote me on that when i go defending the FoTY i fly.

Originally by: Jasai Kameron

And I'll say what I've said again. If you don't want to fit info war mods on the Eos, you're better flyng something else.

As for me being dumb, let me try to explain it in a simple argument. Let's say I can either fit a mod to boost armor resistances or a mod to boost the effectiveness of EW mods. Now, let's say I'm in a fleet of, I don't know, 50 ships. How many of those are typically jamming ships? 10? And which ships are generally primaried in a fleet battle? EW?

Okay, so if I fit my info war link, one fifth of my fleet are more effective, but only for as long as they survive and, with weak tanks and being primaried, they will die quickly. Once that happens, and for the rest of the fight, my extremely expensive ship, with skills, is doing absolutely nothing on the battlefield.

What if I had fit the armor resist mod? Well, it would boost the survivability of every single ship in my fleet, including the EW ships. They will take longer to die. Heck, every ship on the battlefield will take longer to die and that will last for the whole of the battle. Not only that, but I also boost my own tank with these rigs.

Can you now see the argument behind infowar mods being weak?

Another reason they were weak is that one of them boosted sensor strength, which achieved absolutely nothing when dampeners were flavour of the month. 'course, that looks like being fixed now, which is good, but it's another reason why thoughtful posters viewed the EW links as weak.

Not because they were dumb.



Lots of words to say that EW and thus boosting it doesnt belong to big fleets. Not all ships are equally good in all situations, my curse sucks in fleets too and i dont mean that literally.

Bottomline is, if you dont need info warfarelinks in your gangs, dont fly the eos. I was recently in a 30man gang fight where our enemy had like EW on like 80% of their ships, there where 10 recons(gallente and caldari) there alone. Ill bet they appreciated the eos boni.


Jasai Kameron
Hakata Group
Blade.
Posted - 2007.11.10 11:51:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: Bentula
It was like a big ishkur, problem being it wasnt supposed to be a big ishkur. It was the odd man out in its whole class, and something like that never lasts, and you may quote me on that when i go defending the FoTY i fly.

I don't follow you. Both the Vulture and the Damnation are built around their factions secondary damage type (rails and missiles, respectively), so how would the Eos be the odd one out if it were built around drones?

Zendoc
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.11.10 11:56:00 - [94]
 

Edited by: Zendoc on 10/11/2007 11:59:26
Edited by: Zendoc on 10/11/2007 11:58:41
Originally by: Jasai Kameron
Originally by: Zendoc
What I don't understand is... Why everyone is complaining about it being a bad solo ship. Not one of the fittings I have seen posted in this thread has been a fleet command setup. I haven't seen a single fitting incorporate gang warfare links. And those of you saying the infowar link modules are useless are just dumb, EW is extremely useful to fleets, I have no idea why you think that's a good argument. And I will state it again, you don't have to fit only info war mods, I fit seige warfare mods on my claymore without getting the seige warfare bonus.

And I'll say what I've said again. If you don't want to fit info war mods on the Eos, you're better flyng something else.

As for me being dumb, let me try to explain it in a simple argument. Let's say I can either fit a mod to boost armor resistances or a mod to boost the effectiveness of EW mods. Now, let's say I'm in a fleet of, I don't know, 50 ships. How many of those are typically jamming ships? 10? And which ships are generally primaried in a fleet battle? EW?

Okay, so if I fit my info war link, one fifth of my fleet are more effective, but only for as long as they survive and, with weak tanks and being primaried, they will die quickly. Once that happens, and for the rest of the fight, my extremely expensive ship, with skills, is doing absolutely nothing on the battlefield.

What if I had fit the armor resist mod? Well, it would boost the survivability of every single ship in my fleet, including the EW ships. They will take longer to die. Heck, every ship on the battlefield will take longer to die and that will last for the whole of the battle. Not only that, but I also boost my own tank with these rigs.

Can you now see the argument behind infowar mods being weak?

Another reason they were weak is that one of them boosted sensor strength, which achieved absolutely nothing when dampeners were flavour of the month. 'course, that looks like being fixed now, which is good, but it's another reason why thoughtful posters viewed the EW links as weak.

Not because they were dumb.



And you've obviously missed my point over and over again. I fly minmatar command ships. My ships get bonuses from skirmish warfare mods, but I often fit at least 1 seige mod on my ship. You are not limited to only infowar mods, and infact, you can fit 3 mods on your ship. By your same argument you could say the claymore is just as ineffective as the eos. Its a bad argument. No one is limiting you to infowar mods, but they serve their role as well, and none of the other command ships can serve that roll like the eos can. You're ship is just like the rest of ours.

I will go back to my original point, most of the people whining about this nerf just want their incredibly overpowered gankship back, a role the eos, a fleet command, was never meant to play. Those who have accepted it as not being a a solo gank ship for some reason feel it should be the best fleet command. Why? As I said before you have the best of some other ships, you don't need the best of every ship. The Eos is more than adequate for fleet support. End of story.

Jasai Kameron
Hakata Group
Blade.
Posted - 2007.11.10 12:05:00 - [95]
 

Edited by: Jasai Kameron on 10/11/2007 12:05:43
Originally by: Zendoc
And you've obviously missed my point over and over again. I fly minmatar command ships. My ships get bonuses from skirmish warfare mods, but I often fit at least 1 seige mod on my ship. You are not limited to only infowar mods, and infact, you can fit 3 mods on your ship. By your same argument you could say the sleipnir is just as ineffective as the eos. Its a bad argument. No one is limiting you to infowar mods, but they serve their roll as well, and none of the other command ships can serve that roll like the eos can. You're ship is just like the rest of ours.

Well, one of your points has been that infowar links aren't weak, and asking us why we think they are, so I've answered that question. I actually do think skirmish warfare mods would be weak if they didn't get a 50% bonus over the other three types.

Yes, I can fit non infowar links to my Eos, you're quite right. But if infowar mods are the weakest of the four links, then the Eos has the weakest bonus of all four ships. And if I don't fit infowar then it becomes no bonus at all.

Yes, none of the other four ships can fill the infowar role as well as the Eos. That's exactly my point. The Eos either has to be second best at armor/shield boosting, or be best at the worst bonuses. Not much of a choice, you see?

Originally by: Bentula
Lots of words to say that EW and thus boosting it doesnt belong to big fleets. Not all ships are equally good in all situations, my curse sucks in fleets too and i dont mean that literally.

EW doesn't belong to 50 man fleets? Are you sure?

Infowar links are effective in some situations. My point is that in more situations the other mods are more useful.

Added to all this, the Eos also wastes a second bonus on its drone bay. No other Fleet Command has two pointless bonuses.

Zendoc
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.11.10 12:23:00 - [96]
 

Edited by: Zendoc on 10/11/2007 12:37:24
Edited by: Zendoc on 10/11/2007 12:35:33

Every fleet I have ever been has always had a EW platoon. They're pretty invaluable asset to your fleet in fact. I mean... you can instantly remove several players from the battlefield, even if just temporarily. That's more than enough to be the turning variable in a battle. A smart FC knows this.

Now, I can see your point as to saying, not all ships use EW so therefore not all ships will benefit, but all ships will benefit however from a speed increase, but not really... How do snipers benefit from an increase in speed? Really.. in a fleet battle how does anything? its laggy and chaotic. In a small gang, speed is awesome, but equally effective in a small gang is EW.

Obviously, the best 2 are the armor and seige warfare links, but even then, you can only really count on maybe 50% of the people in your gang benefitting from these mods as well. So really no command ship bonus is amazing. They're only as good as the situation.

You can say then, the problem is not really the Eos, the problem is the way people approach fleet combat. As organized as it is, its still disorganized. And so no one fleet command ship's bonus is going to really be all that effective. And once again... think about the bonus it actually gives.

A warfare link module gives a base of 2% boost. The bonus you get from your ship is 3% per level of that 2% boost. So at level 4 command ship, is 2.24% boost. Now when you stack this with all the other skills that increase the effectiveness of warfare link modules, that 12% to the module is a little more significant, but not by that much.


Lets even do the math real quick.
The average warfare link mod has a base boost of 2%
With the specialist skill which is required to use that mod at level 5 it increases to 10% (100%boost of effectiveness per level)
With the warfare link specialist skill at level 5, thats an extra 50% on that 10% bringing your total to 15%
Now say you've trained command ships to level 5, thats a 15% of that 15% bonus. Bringing your total bonus to 17.25%

The difference you are talking about here is 2.25% out of perfect skills. That's nothing. The strength of the Eos, as with all fleet commands, is the fact that they can use 3 different modules that bost effectiveness of at least 15%. That 2.25% is almost not noticeable.

*edit* I'm not sure if that math is correct, but I am pretty sure that's how it works. If its not, then I think my flaw might be in the stacking of warfare link specialist and the specified link specialist skills.

Bentula
Posted - 2007.11.10 12:41:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: Jasai Kameron
Originally by: Bentula
It was like a big ishkur, problem being it wasnt supposed to be a big ishkur. It was the odd man out in its whole class, and something like that never lasts, and you may quote me on that when i go defending the FoTY i fly.

I don't follow you. Both the Vulture and the Damnation are built around their factions secondary damage type (rails and missiles, respectively), so how would the Eos be the odd one out if it were built around drones?


But it still IS based around drones. It wasnt the odd man out cause of its drones, it was the odd man out because of its combination of heavy drones and 7 turrets. It got all the oomph of the brutix, and then they went and gave it the dronebay to field several waves of heavy drones.

That doesnt sound like a gang support ship, that sounds like a dedicated combat vessel. If you take a look at real droneboats you see that they always loose turrets compared to gunboats. The eos had was this strange mix of a t2 gunboat without dual damage boni and a t2 droneboat without the drone damage boni.

Originally by: Jasai Kameron

Originally by: Bentula
Lots of words to say that EW and thus boosting it doesnt belong to big fleets. Not all ships are equally good in all situations, my curse sucks in fleets too and i dont mean that literally.

EW doesn't belong to 50 man fleets? Are you sure?

Infowar links are effective in some situations. My point is that in more situations the other mods are more useful.

Added to all this, the Eos also wastes a second bonus on its drone bay. No other Fleet Command has two pointless bonuses.


Well you laid out how boni that benefit all fleetmembers are better than boni that affect only a few. I would say it depends on the ships in your fleet. Then again, 50 man means 5 squadcommander, 1 wingcommander and the fleetcommand. What is stopping you from placing the important boni givers further up in the chain and less important ones lets say in a squadcommander position?

Damnation might be better than eos in a fleet, but damnation + eos are definitly better than 2xdamnation.

Jasai Kameron
Hakata Group
Blade.
Posted - 2007.11.10 12:43:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Zendoc
Every fleet I have ever been has always had a EW platoon. They're pretty invaluable asset to your fleet in fact. I mean... you can instantly remove several players from the battlefield, even if just temporarily. That's more than enough to be the turning variable in a battle. A smart FC knows this.

Yes, I agree.

Originally by: Zendoc
Now, I can see your point as to saying, not all ships use EW so therefore not all ships will benefit, but all ships will benefit however from a speed increase, but not really... How do snipers benefit from an increase in speed? Really.. in a fleet battle how does anything? its laggy and chaotic. In a small gang, speed is awesome, but equally effective in a small gang is EW.

Obviously, the best 2 are the armor and seige warfare links, but even then, you can only really count on maybe 50% of the people in your gang benefitting from these mods as well. So really no command ship bonus is amazing. They're only as good as the situation.

Yep, completely agree. As you say, skirmish warfare mods are relatively specialised towards medium gangs. I assume that's why they are 50% better than the other types. And yes, armor/siege are the best. But infowar seem to be at the bottom of the heap unless you are fighting a battle with an unusually high proportion of EW ships. And doesn't get the 50% bonus that the skirmish mods get.

Originally by: Zendoc
A warfare link module gives a base of 2% boost. The bonus you get from your ship is 3% per level of that 2% boost. So at level 4 command ship, is 2.24% boost. Now when you stack this with all the other skills that increase the effectiveness of warfare link modules, that 12% to the module is a little more significant, but not by that much.

It will be more significant by 12%. Take it or leave it.

You're right though. I don't think the difference is a gamebreaker. I simply think the Eos is underpowered compared to the other ships of its class. Of course, I don't think its as broken as the pilgrim or the apoc, where there's simply no point in flying them. But overnerfing ships just gives them more work to do in the end.

I'd be happy with infowar mods getting a small bonus and the drone bay bonus moved to effectiveness of logistic drones or something like that.

Zendoc
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2007.11.10 12:58:00 - [99]
 

See its not though, because not only does it give those gang bonuses, but it also has more firepower and more drones than any of the other fleet commands. I don't think that's underpowered at all. And again when i said 12%, thats 12% of a 2% bonus, so really .24% before stacking.

Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2007.11.10 13:23:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Zendoc
See its not though, because not only does it give those gang bonuses, but it also has more firepower and more drones than any of the other fleet commands. I don't think that's underpowered at all. And again when i said 12%, thats 12% of a 2% bonus, so really .24% before stacking.


At level 4 skills, a specialized command ship will give 11.2% bonuses while another will do 10%. In my opionion, that difference isn't worth much, but then there are people who will swear that training weapon specialization skills or surgical strike/warhead upgrades to 5 (comparable percentage of benefits) are worth the skilltime.

Concerning "more firepower and drones" than other fleet commands...

That's simply not correct in gang/fleet situations. It's the combination of (ultra) close range weaponry that is blasters + drones and the ability to tackle (because if you have to be inside webbing range to do damage you might as well fit tackling mods) that made the Eos a good solo ship.

In small gangs or fleets, the Eos cannot apply its "superior firepower", which reduces it to be the ship of choice for pilots who can't fly anything else.

Jasai Kameron
Hakata Group
Blade.
Posted - 2007.11.10 13:39:00 - [101]
 

Edited by: Jasai Kameron on 10/11/2007 13:40:10
Edited by: Jasai Kameron on 10/11/2007 13:39:46
Originally by: Zendoc
See its not though, because not only does it give those gang bonuses, but it also has more firepower and more drones than any of the other fleet commands. I don't think that's underpowered at all. And again when i said 12%, thats 12% of a 2% bonus, so really .24% before stacking.

Yes, before a huge amount of stacking. There's one skill that improves by 100% per level. At the end of the day, if, for example, your gang mod is giving a 20% bonus, then it will now give a 22.4% bonus. If that seems nothing to you, then fair enough. To me it looks like a 12% increase in the effectiveness of a module that can positively affect 100s of ships. So I'll keep calling it a 12% increase if that's all right with you.

Aye, more dps and more drones. But both the Vulture and Damnation can shoot further and have better tanks. The Claymore's faster and has better tracking. *shrugs* We could argue around and around about the difference between Gallente and the other races.

Originally by: Bentual
But it still IS based around drones.

Is it? Why? Because it can fly 5 unbonused Hammerheads? Is the Thorax based around drones, too? What about the Harbinger?

Or is it the ability to fit 3 unbonused Ogres? I know that every time I see a Tempest, I think, "arghh, there's a specialised drone ship coming to get me!".

Don't get me wrong. Eos was overpowered. But they could have fixed it in a sensible manner, rather than keeping the bonus to drone bay size after nerfing the bandwidth. That gives some limited pseudo flexibility, but in general is just a pointless bonus now.

Def Antares
Posted - 2007.11.10 13:40:00 - [102]
 

The new EOS sucks totally and I am very disappointet by this complete overnerf which once again takes versatility and variety out of EVE.

DarK
STK Scientific
Posted - 2007.11.10 13:50:00 - [103]
 

Vulture is pretty ****!



Wrayeth
EdgeGamers
Situation: Normal
Posted - 2007.11.10 14:09:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: Ogul
That's hilarious.

The range difference between a Nighthawk and a Thorax is what? Around 80 km? Laughing


80km makes no difference if you don't get a chance to utilize it. 80km is too short a range for fleet engagements, and smaller engagements almost always happen within 20-30km. As a result, your point is null and void.

Moreover, I wasn't just talking about a heavy missile nighthawk - I was talking about a HAM setup as well (20km range). A gank-fitted thorax cruiser with blasters can just about match the DPS of my gank-fitted nighthawk field command with HAMs. That would be perfectly fine if the nighthawk had full damage type-switching capabilities and if it didn't require TWO tech II reactor controls to fit (one would be just fine). However, this is not the case.


Quote:
Are you going to complain that a close range gank Thorax can outdamage you fleet sniper battleship next?


Rolling Eyes

Alei
Spartan Industries
Cruel Intentions
Posted - 2007.11.10 14:35:00 - [105]
 

Oh, didnt you get the memo? gallente are being nerf'd Laughing

Great being Amarr, isn't it

Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2007.11.10 15:15:00 - [106]
 

Originally by: Wrayeth
Originally by: Ogul
That's hilarious.

The range difference between a Nighthawk and a Thorax is what? Around 80 km? Laughing


80km makes no difference if you don't get a chance to utilize it. 80km is too short a range for fleet engagements, and smaller engagements almost always happen within 20-30km. As a result, your point is null and void.

Moreover, I wasn't just talking about a heavy missile nighthawk - I was talking about a HAM setup as well (20km range). A gank-fitted thorax cruiser with blasters can just about match the DPS of my gank-fitted nighthawk field command with HAMs. That would be perfectly fine if the nighthawk had full damage type-switching capabilities and if it didn't require TWO tech II reactor controls to fit (one would be just fine). However, this is not the case.



It's not my point that is null and void, it's the dps comparison. If you want to fly a Nighthawk like a Thorax you are doing something wrong, and that isn't either ship's fault.

No offence intended, but I think you are simply wrong about what the Nighthawk is supposed to do:

Being a field command ship does not mean being a "close range gank ship" (well, for Gallente it does). Missiles suck at close range, always have, always will. (Maybe the new torpedoes will change that.)

The Nighthawk is not about raw dps (look at the ship bonuses), but about doing damage to small targets at medium range.

The issue that (in my opinion) it is not worth its current market value is a different story though...

Wrayeth
EdgeGamers
Situation: Normal
Posted - 2007.11.10 15:25:00 - [107]
 

Edited by: Wrayeth on 10/11/2007 15:59:32
Originally by: Ogul
Being a field command ship does not mean being a "close range gank ship" (well, for Gallente it does).


It means actually being USEFUL as a combat ship and not just a fleet support ship. A heavy missile nighthawk contributes next to nothing as a combat ship. ugh

Quote:
Missiles suck at close range, always have, always will. (Maybe the new torpedoes will change that.)


Actually, torps have been pretty decent at close range for some time now, though not great, and so have HAMs (the latter would be much better if the nighthawk wasn't straightjacketed into using kinetic).

Quote:
The Nighthawk is not about raw dps (look at the ship bonuses), but about doing damage to small targets at medium range.


Except for the fact that it is not capable of doing so. A nighthawk's missiles will hit a MWDing interceptor for 0.1 damage each, if they hit at all. Moreover, medium range engagements pretty much never happen these days - a MWD-fitted anything can close quickly enough to turn "medium-range engagement" into "close-range gank".

As for the nighthawk's ship bonuses, I find it telling that it has both a damage and a rate of fire bonus while not sporting a missile flight time or velocity bonus. YMMV.

Xequecal
Posted - 2007.11.10 15:43:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: SN3263827
Originally by: Xequecal
Fit 3x gang mods and sit in space doing pathetic DPS just like the other three fleet commands.
While enjoying the weakest tank of all the other fleet commands.


Worse than the Claymore? BS. 6-slot tank vs. 5-slot tank on the Claymore, (MWD is required for all PvP setups, period.) and the Eos has better racial resists.

enymphia
Ore Mongers
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2007.11.10 15:52:00 - [109]
 

Edited by: enymphia on 10/11/2007 16:09:27
the new eos change ****s the astarte prices :P now i dont wanna fly either of them lol Confused

enymphia
Ore Mongers
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2007.11.10 15:53:00 - [110]
 

Edited by: enymphia on 10/11/2007 16:09:15
dubble post uups!

Waxau
Muppet Ninja's
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
Posted - 2007.11.10 16:04:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Not compared to a Brutix or the current Eos, or any of the fleet command ships. It's a cruiser ffs. And T1 at that.


Ok im quoting that for one reason. Your Eos deals the dps of a thorax right?

My vulture deals the dps of a Ferox.

The ferox deals less dps than a thorax.

We arent whining.

Ogul
Caldari
ZiTek Deepspace Explorations
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2007.11.10 16:05:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: Ogul on 10/11/2007 16:05:49
Originally by: Wrayeth

It means actually being USEFUL as a combat ship and not just a fleet support ship. A heavy missile nighthawk contributes next to nothing as a combat ship. ugh



In that case, a HAM nighthawk contributes 25% more of nothing and at less range.

Originally by: Wrayeth

Actually, torps have been pretty decent at close range for some time now, though not great, and so have HAMs (the latter would be much better if the nighthawk wasn't straightjacketed into using kinetic).


If HAMs are pretty decent, why do you complain about too little damage on the Nighthawk?

Originally by: Wrayeth

Except for the fact that it is not capable of doing so. A nighthawk's missiles will hit a MWDing interceptor for 0.1 damage each, if they hit at all. Moreover, medium range engagements pretty much never happen these days - a MWD-fitted anything can close quickly enough to turn "medium-range engagement" into "close-range gank".

As for the nighthawk's ship bonuses, I find it telling that it has both a damage and a rate of fire bonus. YMMV.


Interceptors are not small ships in the classical sense, and you have to be very lucky to kill them while they are not webbed - and that goes for any ship.

MWD-fitted ships closing distance to "close-range gank" are not doing any damage, thus reducing their dps in small gang scenarios.

ciapek
Amarr
Reikoku
IT Alliance
Posted - 2007.11.10 17:17:00 - [113]
 

after ccp wich CHANGE eos ( not nerf) he will loose 1 med, gain 1 low and loose 2 turret ( drones 5 meds or 5 large dps +/-100 dps)

so comparing to damnation ?

put 1600 plate on eos and same good tank - almost same resists same amount of armor BUT sill eos have repair bonus !!!!!

outdamage damnation ( with same tank setup) by 80%

wtf r u whinning about ? get damnation and than feel pain - f..... whiners

Rastigan
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2007.11.10 17:40:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: Waxau

Ok im quoting that for one reason. Your Eos deals the dps of a thorax right?
My vulture deals the dps of a Ferox.
The ferox deals less dps than a thorax.
We arent whining.


The Vulture (my favorite fleet CS to fly btw) can also hit people at 200 kilometers,

RAW EFT DPS isnt everything, its when you can apply the full DPS that kills ships...

Zyol
Gallente
Starlight Horizons Corporation
Posted - 2007.11.10 17:47:00 - [115]
 

Again, without focusing solo on the DPS, can I fit a shield boosting and armor boosting warlink on the EOS for support?

I do not care about DPS, thats what my gangmates are doing.

Wrayeth
EdgeGamers
Situation: Normal
Posted - 2007.11.10 18:26:00 - [116]
 

Edited by: Wrayeth on 10/11/2007 18:26:28
Originally by: Ogul
In that case, a HAM nighthawk contributes 25% more of nothing and at less range.

If HAMs are pretty decent, why do you complain about too little damage on the Nighthawk?


The damage would be sufficient if the 25% damage bonus wasn't just to kinetic. This would allow the nighthawk to make up for relatively low DPS with the ability to shoot the target's weakest resist (i.e. actually USE the factor that's supposed to balance low missile DPS) without losing a huge chunk of its base damage output in the process. The only other change to make the nighthawk a good ship is to increase its powergrid so it only needs one RCU II to fit a HAM setup instead of two.

Quote:
Interceptors are not small ships in the classical sense, and you have to be very lucky to kill them while they are not webbed - and that goes for any ship.


Okay. What about tech 1 frigates and destroyers? A rifter easily goes fast enough to take absolutely NO damage from missiles, for instance, even on those occasions where it can't simply outrun them. Hell, there are cruisers that go fast enough to take pretty much no damage from heavy missiles.

Quote:
MWD-fitted ships closing distance to "close-range gank" are not doing any damage, thus reducing their dps in small gang scenarios


True. However, when the DPS that's shooting at them while they close range isn't anywhere near enough to even touch their tank (i.e. heavy missile nighthawk), it doesn't really matter. To use an example, my faction-fitted machariel (armor tanked, not speed tanked, though it does 2146m/s with only a gist X-type mwd and no other speed mods) has single-rep tanked t2-kitted sniper battleships long enough to close the 200km range to get a scramble on them (why people don't expect a machariel to fit a 30km scrambler I'll never know). When I got into range of them I was still fully combat effective and pretty much at full armor because their DPS wasn't that great and my tank was just that good.

The same applies to the nighthawk and its crap DPS with heavy missiles - it simply will not break most tanks, so the time spent closing range against one doesn't matter all that much.

Def Antares
Posted - 2007.11.10 20:10:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: ciapek
after ccp wich CHANGE eos ( not nerf) he will loose 1 med, gain 1 low and loose 2 turret ( drones 5 meds or 5 large dps +/-100 dps)

so comparing to damnation ?

put 1600 plate on eos and same good tank - almost same resists same amount of armor BUT sill eos have repair bonus !!!!!

outdamage damnation ( with same tank setup) by 80%

wtf r u whinning about ? get damnation and than feel pain - f..... whiners


Laughing

Kai Lae
Gallente
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.10 23:26:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Zendoc

I will go back to my original point, most of the people whining about this nerf just want their incredibly overpowered gankship back, a role the eos, a fleet command, was never meant to play. Those who have accepted it as not being a a solo gank ship for some reason feel it should be the best fleet command.



Originally by: Zendoc


A warfare link module gives a base of 2% boost. The bonus you get from your ship is 3% per level of that 2% boost. So at level 4 command ship, is 2.24% boost. Now when you stack this with all the other skills that increase the effectiveness of warfare link modules, that 12% to the module is a little more significant, but not by that much.


Lets even do the math real quick.
The average warfare link mod has a base boost of 2%
With the specialist skill which is required to use that mod at level 5 it increases to 10% (100%boost of effectiveness per level)
With the warfare link specialist skill at level 5, thats an extra 50% on that 10% bringing your total to 15%
Now say you've trained command ships to level 5, thats a 15% of that 15% bonus. Bringing your total bonus to 17.25%

The difference you are talking about here is 2.25% out of perfect skills. That's nothing. The strength of the Eos, as with all fleet commands, is the fact that they can use 3 different modules that bost effectiveness of at least 15%. That 2.25% is almost not noticeable.



Actually the objection is that the ship used to be pretty miserable as a gang boosting platform, but as a out and out combat ship, it was pretty good, and therefore the ship itself was useful. Now the combat abilities have been nerfed, but it's still quite poor as a gang boosting ship. This is what the complaint is.

Personally, I'm one of the fruitcakes that likes the gang boosting role (I have info warfare spec 5). However, I'm forced to admit the Eos is not very good at it for a variety of reasons. First off, and dirty secret No 1. is - ALL FLEET COMMANDS are actually bad at gang boosting. The mathematics you use above is correct. With max skills, there is a 2.25% difference in the amount of boosting that a fleet command recieves using it's "preferred" modules over a garden variety T1 BC, such as the myrmidon. This difference as you have stated is basically so minor that it's not very noticable. While someone else has pointed out that this is what you get for instance by training warhead upgrades to 5 or similar skills, what is not taken into account is the following details:

Training time for warhead upgrades 5, med blaster spec 5 etc - about 25-30 days. If you want to go for broke, large spec skills take about 40 days. This is only the time between level 4 to 5 and does not count training before this.

Training time to achieve the above listed gang ability (17.25%) breaks down like this. Warfare spec skill (only 1 of the 4 mind you) 25-30 days. Warfare link specialist about 30-35 days. Command ships 5 - about 40 days. Again, this is only from L4 to L5 and does not take into account the multiple other skills you need to train up to even learn these skills.

Results is that for guns it takes about a month to gain that extra 2%. For command skills, that last 2.25% takes 3 to 3.5 months. That friends is broken, badly. The amount of time invested is far outweighed by the fact that what you get in return is laughable. If you want to just compare T1 BC capability vs fleet command ships, you still have to train command ships 5, which about 40 days to get that difference. Why bother? Instead you can fit a myrmidon w/ a few command processors and stick the gang mods in the (unbonused) high slots, and do just about as good as a job. What about mindlinks? Well, what about them indeed, because if you need an implant to gain a acceptable level of performance I'd claim that whatever the implant is boosting does not work very well and you should try something else. The simple fact is that the command ship bonus is laughable (continued)

Kai Lae
Gallente
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.10 23:27:00 - [119]
 

and that they are failures at their designed role. This is why you see so many setups trying to squeeze more and more DPS out of them because everyone knows this, even if they somehow manage to ignore the pink elephant in the room that says "borked fleet command ships". The shooty shooty role is popular and the boosting is not, so there's hardly any complaining about it and the situation just continues.

The other issue about why this is the case is the gang mods themselves, in that how they work. First, they suck up huge amounts of cap while running; use more than 3 and you'll need to pretty much dedicate your ship to only running these mods. Second, stacking is a problem. The modules that are affected by stacking (those that add resistances) act as a T1 EANM placed on either the shields or armor. In practice, if the gang has their ships tanked, which is likely, than this is likely to be either the third or 4th module and the overall effect of this module is likely to be quite low. The only exceptions are, oddly, ships that are not tanked - such as nanofits. This helps push the speed problem in eve, which is not something that I think is intended. Third, warping causes them to shut off, which encourages the command ship sitting in a static spot. The result is that the first and third problem encourages command link using pilots to sit at a SS while others actually fight (usually a POS), which is not fun. This again means the role is unpopular.

What however does the above have to do with the Eos in specific, since it's apparent that this is a class related issue, and not confined to the Eos itself? Ah, but the Eos has the extra bonus in that the gang mods it's supposed to use have the least overall usefulness to the gang itself. The gang mods the Eos uses boost EW effectiveness, or boost sensor strength against jamming. This means that 2 out of 3 mods are only of value if you have jamming ships in gang. With regards to small, roaming gangs, you are unlikely to have more than 1 or 2 of these in gang with you due to gang size. This means the modules can only assist 2 or so players out of, say 12 or so. However, if you use a different command ship, you can get modules that will improve all 12 in gang instead of just 2. This is basically a no brainer. What about large gangs, with jamming wings? Even in fleet combat situations you don't see this ship used either. Reason is that with players constantly coming and going (which is typical) arranging all jammers into the same wing/squad is a logistical nightmare in the current gang system that many leaders simply don't want to deal with. Add in the lag that usually accompanies large fights, with the fact that the mods won't stay on if you warp the ship, and you're looking at staring at a POS or safespot for an extended time if you volunteer for this role, which again is quite boring. But the 3rd module works on all ships you say? Yes it does - however, a max skilled player will only boost signal strength by 25.87%. Compare this to the lowly T2 backup array, which boosts this stat by 48%, or a ECCM II mod, which is 96% and can even be overloaded if necessary. The sensor integrity module also, of course, has a stacking penalty applied to it as well. It also only assists against jamming. It does nothing against dampeners, tracking disruptors, or painters (oddly a minmatar command mod does however). In other words, not useful.

This is how we reach the situation that we're about to reach today with the Eos, where it's not a very good combat ship, but it's also a very poor choice to use if you want a gang boosting ship (to the point where a T1 ship, being fully insurable, is arguably better). What do I think about this? I actually don't mind the combat nerfing, if CCP would just simply look at the supposed real role of the Eos, and all other command ships as well, so that it would be effective. A series of simple changes would greatly improve the problem, and IMO should be tested ASAP.

Kai Lae
Gallente
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.11.10 23:28:00 - [120]
 

A. Command mods should not shut off while warping. Simple.

B. Command mods cap usage should be looked at. It is way too high currently.

C. Command ships should have the bonus that they give to command modules boosted, so that there is a noticable difference while using them. At the same time the effect given by the mindlinks should be nerfed to compensate for this change. Cybernetics 5 should not be a unwritten prerequsite for a command pilot.

D. Stacking penalties should be eliminated from command modules. Instead, they should in effect act as a DCU would (for instance) where the one time only bonus is not affected by stacking. This would make them useful regardless how the rest of the gang sets up their ships. The bonus of course would likely need to be adjusted to prevent it from being overpowered. The goal should be that the effect remains the same (taking into account point C), however it would affect all ships in gang equally.

E. Change the bonus of the fleet command ships so that it does not have 1 preferred type of module, but 2 types. AFAIK this was suggested a long time ago when these ships came out but was ignored by CCP. However, it's still an excellent suggestion. For instance, a Eos would bonus both info warfare, and say armored warfare as well. Each racial command would gain another field of specality as well. This would improve the flexibility of these ships greatly.

F. Consider introducing T2 command mods that have a greater effect, but have more difficult fitting.

G. Take a look at the modules themselves. For instance, the sensor integrity module was introduced before ECCM modules were boosted; they originally had the same effect as a backup array. The effect should be increased. In addition, it should provide some protection against other forms of EW as well, not just jamming. Another good question would be to ask why you can only have 3 modules in each area. Originally infowar could boost things like lock time and lock range. This obviously useful module was removed as since command modules work as gang skills, it conflicted with player skills and had little effect. Instead of removing it, the way the module works should be altered so that it gives significant effect, and it should be reintroduced.


Of course, CCP will likely not even look into any of these, so I won't hold my breath, but if they did the above I'd say that the Eos would be fairly respectable, if not hugely popular due to the kind of role it plays.

Oh and wray wray I think the nighthawk complaints are in a different thread :)


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

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


 


The new forums are live

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

These forums are archived and read-only