open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Target Painter Slot Change
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.27 12:08:00 - [1]
 

I know it may cause some outcry, but why not move the target painters to a high slot item instead of a mid slot?

Currently i use a raven for pvp, sure im a fire support vessel, but i can live with a complete lack of tackling, and strange tanks. With the recent change to torps, while i enjoy them immensely, its near impossible to keep any semblance of a tank while fitting two target painters. Anti-ship torps basically demand those just to keep your dps up with the other heavy hitting ships around.

Yes i can get away with one target painter, if i use javelin torpedos, but that kills my dps(and well it should for those type of torps).

Its difficult to get any other pilots to fit TP's in support, as they need their mid slots badly as well, tackling, their own tanks, cap support etc, but there is always a few high slots free floating around.

Also being a high slot weapon would make it more usable by other ship class's, so its not a raven only thing. A properly painted target can be locked quicker, everyone gets a bonus.

Ideas? thoughts?

Reggie Stoneloader
Poofdinkles
Posted - 2008.02.27 12:46:00 - [2]
 

I like it. How many of us have setups with a salvager crammed into that last high slot, or a tractor beam, or some other 1-grid module that has no use in a fight? PUtting the largely useless painter up there would be just the ticket for getting painters into fights, and justifying their existence. It would also allow Minmatar recon ships to take advantage of their painting bonus without feeling like they're wasting a slot that could be a webber. I dig it.

But it's not going to happen. High-slot EW occurs only on the HIC, and that's a strange case. There's no way this sort of thing will go over with CCP. Their sense of symmetry is too strong.

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.27 13:12:00 - [3]
 

Well after the love they gave to torps, which pretty much made them usefull in pvp again(i had given up hope and was training a gallente character), i can only hope they see the sense in this.

I see your point about the hic, but at the same time they have EW protection on mid slots and low, maybe a new under powered painter in high? Hell id put two of those to one low slot anyday, even if its just to bring a full load of TP drones inline with 2 mid slot TP's it will make the tanks stronger.

Nian Banks
Minmatar
Berserkers of Aesir
Posted - 2008.02.27 16:36:00 - [4]
 

I was thinking about this myself, was not sure if having a painter moved to a high slot was worth the lost dps.

Granted ofcourse it would solve the issue of the Bellicose and its T2 variants having far too few medium slots.

To be honest, a Bellicose could be rather nice if the TP was moved to the highs, so yeah I guess its a go for it sort of thing.

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.27 16:47:00 - [5]
 

I know personally for the raven, it wouldnt effect my DPS. 6 siege, one smart bomb or large neut or shield transporter - i rarely use the 8th high slot, not enough power with the siege launchers on.


Serith tombe
Posted - 2008.02.27 19:16:00 - [6]
 

I agree with Marak, and not only because i have to listen to him whinge and complain about the TP being in the mid slot.ugh

Having the TP as a high would be a bonus to all ships and free up a slot that could be put to better use.

So please CCP listen to this if only so i dont have to worry about Marak complaining all the timeVery HappyVery Happy

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.27 19:18:00 - [7]
 

Gee thanks Serith. And i dont whinge, i batter you with constructive argument over and over and over again.

dugata
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2008.02.27 19:23:00 - [8]
 

screw that then i lose the 15k bonus on drone range.

Keep it where it is.

Verys
I Heart Chaos
Posted - 2008.02.27 19:43:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Verys on 27/02/2008 19:43:32
/signed - i often wished it was already there on my raven Sad

Buyerr
Posted - 2008.02.27 20:22:00 - [10]
 

well all ew should be highslots

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.27 20:48:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Buyerr
well all ew should be highslots


I dont think we would get that anytime soon unfourtanetly. Hell id be happy with a sub-quality item to go there.

Elrinarie
Gallente
Scan This
Posted - 2008.02.27 21:05:00 - [12]
 

I would agree with this, and on the raven you already have 2 non missile slots anyways just sitting and doing nothing most of the time, and unless they do something drastic like putting shield tanking in the low slots, the mid slots on a raven are way too important.

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.28 05:22:00 - [13]
 

Not just the raven but many caldari ships. Tps are a hugely underused item because of the lack of value when compared to other items in the same area. TP or Large shield extender II? All that equates to is another 20% damage, or more effective. Very hard to choose sometimes.


Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.28 05:30:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: dugata
screw that then i lose the 15k bonus on drone range.

Keep it where it is.


and huh? your drone link aug will send them 20km further, plus with decent skills your already sending drones out 50-55km, so 2 drone link aug's is a little overkill. Plus it would probably be better if they went for a new item type, at reduced effectiveness.

Typhado3
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.02.28 11:13:00 - [15]
 

I don't think so... it's ew and as a rule they all go in mid slots. though I got no problem with exceptions I just don't see enough reason.

rapier and huggin which are two TP ships need their highs for guns/utilities and they can use target painters well with their webbing bonus to allow them to slaughter small ships.

the belliclose may benefit be allowing it to stick scram/web in the mid.

my last point is that in my opinion target painters are supposed to be minmatar's ew speciality (as ecm is to caldari, sensor damps to gallente). For some reason ccp decided to give that bonus to the golem meaning we have no unique ew anymore which is something I am very strongly against. Therefor redesigning target painters to encourage their use on non-minmatar ships (if this happened any destroyer would be as good at TPing as belliclose/huggin) is something that would make a current problem only worse.

Strikeclone
Raata Fleet Command
Posted - 2008.02.28 11:31:00 - [16]
 

/signed

I suggested this idea several years ago, and no doubt its been suggested many times since.

TP are not EW in the same sense as ECM/ECCM and allowing Caldari missile boats the ability to TP for themselves without compromising their defences will go someway to redressing the current gallente i win buttons in pvp.

I must point out that the TP in use is an offensive module not a defencive one like ECM and should by rights and common sense be a high slot.


Teyrala
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2008.02.28 11:53:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Teyrala on 28/02/2008 11:53:39
Originally by: Typhado3

my last point is that in my opinion target painters are supposed to be minmatar's ew speciality (as ecm is to caldari, sensor damps to gallente). For some reason ccp decided to give that bonus to the golem meaning we have no unique ew anymore which is something I am very strongly against. Therefor redesigning target painters to encourage their use on non-minmatar ships (if this happened any destroyer would be as good at TPing as belliclose/huggin) is something that would make a current problem only worse.

For the problem if a destroyer just fitting 8 target painters, easily solved - make there be a limit of 1 (or 2) painters fitable on any ship, with the exception of specialised minmatar EW ships, which can fit as many as they like.

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.28 12:39:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Typhado3
I don't think so... it's ew and as a rule they all go in mid slots. though I got no problem with exceptions I just don't see enough reason.

rapier and huggin which are two TP ships need their highs for guns/utilities and they can use target painters well with their webbing bonus to allow them to slaughter small ships.

the belliclose may benefit be allowing it to stick scram/web in the mid.

my last point is that in my opinion target painters are supposed to be minmatar's ew speciality (as ecm is to caldari, sensor damps to gallente). For some reason ccp decided to give that bonus to the golem meaning we have no unique ew anymore which is something I am very strongly against. Therefor redesigning target painters to encourage their use on non-minmatar ships (if this happened any destroyer would be as good at TPing as belliclose/huggin) is something that would make a current problem only worse.


I understand what you mean by that, but at the same time as mentioned lower, TP isnt exactly an offensive ECM module, its more an ECM support, which already have some modules in low and med slots.

If someone wants to fit out a destroyer with 8 TP's, id be happy to have them tag along lol.

As it is every time i fly in fleet, im one of the very very few raven pilots - i can get the same DPS as the others, but my tank isnt quite as good as theirs. But with a ship dedicated to support me, i can match and out play them(but the same applies, if they had their own dedicated support ship).

The torpedos are great now with the new changes, but for a race to use a weapons system that they cannot reliably fit on their ships without destroying their own tank/dps, doesnt make sense.

If TP is gallente spec, why do my weapons need them lol.

Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
Posted - 2008.02.28 16:02:00 - [19]
 

Target painters have stacking penalties too don't they? So 8 painters wouldn't cause that much of a problem would it, no more than frigates running 4 of them does already, if they ever do.

It's all a question of balancing the painters to allow for them to be used sensibly, actually making it one painter per ship would make sense since it's a focused fire utility after all.

Question is is the painter good enough as it is for anything other than topedo Ravens running missions?

Marak Bon
Parallax Continuum
Motivated and Determined
Posted - 2008.02.28 18:57:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Danton Marcellus
Target painters have stacking penalties too don't they? So 8 painters wouldn't cause that much of a problem would it, no more than frigates running 4 of them does already, if they ever do.

It's all a question of balancing the painters to allow for them to be used sensibly, actually making it one painter per ship would make sense since it's a focused fire utility after all.

Question is is the painter good enough as it is for anything other than topedo Ravens running missions?


I thought they were stacking too, did some tests today, they dont seem to be - to a certian degree. 2-3 noticable difference, 3-4 still there(50-80 dmg per torp), 4-5 still tehre but not as much.

As for the usefull for mission running ravens only? well i use mine for pvp. also while doing tests with blasters today, we were getting a surprisingly good hit % with rails at close range when the target was painted - upto 60-70% hit at one stage.

add onto that missiles hit speed tanks harder(although ive yet to test it against the really good ones), i assume they would do the same for guns as seen above.

So yes they are usefull for more than mission running ravens(really hate those buggers, give my ship a bad name!)


 

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