Backstage - OOC Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

That some Gallente swear by Fortune?

Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado  (Read 6339 times)

Graelyn

  • Ye Olde One
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1349
  • These things just seem to happen...
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #15 on: 22 Oct 2011, 16:25 »

Gankgeddon BC!

Come to papa!
Logged


If we can hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate!

Esna Pitoojee

  • Keeper of the Harem
  • Demigod
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2095
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #16 on: 22 Oct 2011, 17:49 »

...as ridiculously awesome as this is, I must admit I'm going to miss the concept of the Tornado/other new battleships as BS-sized EWAR boats.
Logged
I like the implications of Gallentians being punched in the face by walking up to a Minmatar as they so freely use another person's culture as a fad.

lallara zhuul

  • Now with rainbows and butterflies.
  • Veteran
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1123
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #17 on: 23 Oct 2011, 04:53 »

A drone battle ship with EWAR for the Amarr would have made my decade.

But it seems like its all about the glass cannons.

Where suddenly the ping starts to play a bigger and bigger part in EVE.

Where EWAR in general turns useless.

Active tanks are already thing of the past, making the passive tank the only viable option, the only option.

I hate to say this, but it was better for EVE that you could not have a 8 heatsink gankgeddons anymore.
Fitting was just getting a stack of sensor boosters and ka-POW, anything was dead in three seconds.

Of course turning EVE into COD with spaceships would bring in more l33tkiddies...
Logged

Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!

Alain Colcer

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 857
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #18 on: 24 Oct 2011, 09:51 »

I'm so sad... really.....

To me the tornado could have been some cool destroyer-sized new class of ship, specifically aimed to do short range gankage with speed and little tank (glass cannons indeed)....

but BS guns on speedy ships? it just sounds as imbalance to me...
Logged

Julianus Soter

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 558
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #19 on: 24 Oct 2011, 11:12 »

Perfect ship class, needed at just the right time, for the current state of the metagame. Thank you ccp.
Logged

Victoria Stecker

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #20 on: 24 Oct 2011, 12:03 »

Perfect ship class, needed at just the right time, for the current state of the metagame. Thank you ccp.

I'm curious why you think this was needed? It certainly fits with the current meta, like the prevalence of sheild-nano artycanes. This just seems like it's going to do what people are already doing (because it works and is currently the best strategy) even better.  It fits perfectly, just seems like CCP looked at the current FotM and made the perfect ship for it.  Which seems to me like it'll just exacerbate the current fast > tanky imbalance.

The only thing I can see it adding that is actually needed is a fast moving gallente ship.

Anyhow, just curious what you meant.
Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #21 on: 24 Oct 2011, 16:38 »

A drone battle ship with EWAR for the Amarr would have made my decade.

A Khanid battleship with a TD and Torp bonus would have made mine.  Or torps and neuts.

Quote
But it seems like its all about the glass cannons.

Where suddenly the ping starts to play a bigger and bigger part in EVE.

Hate to break it to you, but if you think the meta shifting towards bigger and bigger fleets has been sudden, you missed the last 4 years of EVE.  While it had started before QR, it ramped up in earnest then, and has only been reinforced and encouraged with every major expansion since.  And everything CCP has done to advertise EVE Online has been to promote these enormous fleet battles (see also; claims that tens of thousands of players engage in fights together all the time), and next to nothing they've done has helped small gang warfare (these days <20 a side--if you'd have asked me in 2007 or 2008 I'd have said <10 or <15 respectively) at all. 

Quote
Where EWAR in general turns useless.

This, too, is not a new trend.  Damps were nerfed into utter uselessness (outside of situations such as the tourney) after AT4.  They've never gotten a second thought, going from one of the most effective forms of ewar in the game to utterly useless even on bonused ships (and the latter part is where the nerf went too far--an ewar specific ship such as a recon should have absolutely crippling ewar).  ECM was ushered out when it was forced inside of scorch/arty ranges in boats that can die in under two volleys to either.  The fact that it doesn't stack well against large numbers doesn't help either.  I'm not sure if the remote ECM burst was supposted to be some sort of large-scale ewar buff, but if it was it failed.  Once you get past a gang size of about 20 ECM is approaching uselessness.  By 40 it's flat out pointless, as there's no good way for ECM boats to coordinate their jams like logis can coordinate their reps.  There are no watchlists where the ECM boats can tell which targets are already jammed, so overlapping jamming will certainly occur if you field more than 1-2 ECM pilots and you're simply wasting bodies at that point.  Damps are similar in nature.  TDs as well, for that matter (though in truly small-gang PvP TDs are bar none the best form of ewar unless you wind up against a strict missile composition).  And lolwebs now that they're 50-60%.  I don't think target painters have ever been good in EVE PvP outside of very very specific tailored situations (mostly tourney, again) or when flying things like torp boats, at least not compared to the opportunity cost of fitting something else.

Quote
Active tanks are already thing of the past, making the passive tank the only viable option, the only option.

A bit of a generalization, but mostly true.  Certainly operating in any sort of small active tank composition (3 or less, more likely solo) without any sort of scouting is playing russian roulette.  But in <5 a side groups they're still viable on boats with active tank bonuses, such as the Sleip, Maelstrom, Hype, etc.  Generally need faction/deadspace on the shield tanks and/or boosters/implants or a combination thereof to make them truly shine, however.
Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #22 on: 24 Oct 2011, 16:44 »

the current fast > tanky imbalance.

This makes me curious, and generally speaking I disagree that it's the current meta.  At least around Syndicate/Fountain/Pure Blind/Outer Ring/Cloud Ring we see logifleets.  By that I mean any fleet wherein the fleet comp is >30% logistics.  It's not uncommon to see fleets of 30 with 10 logistics.  To me, that's tankier than it is fast, whether it's Hurricanes or Drakes.  And generally I think the meta shift towards Hurricanes away from Drakes comes down to utility.  At least in the fleets I've seen it used effectively in--Hurricanes with their two utility highslots can fit a shocking amount of cap warfare when comped together, and trying to run any sort of logistics or cap-dependant-anything against a Hurricane fleet is simply suicide unless you can engage from outside of 30km and hold that range on them.

Maybe my area of the world isn't in touch with the rest of EVE, though.  We stay the hell away from sov warfare unless we can harass sov fleets or we actually manage to muster a blob (aka, Friday night) and can throw our 50 at their 150 without them re-comping to perfectly counter us (like when Test reships into 40 Scorpions, 80 Maelstroms, and assorted logis/tackle--yes, they did this once when they outnumbered us 3:1 to begin with). 
Logged

Victoria Stecker

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 752
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #23 on: 24 Oct 2011, 21:16 »

the current fast > tanky imbalance.

This makes me curious, and generally speaking I disagree that it's the current meta.  At least around Syndicate/Fountain/Pure Blind/Outer Ring/Cloud Ring we see logifleets.  By that I mean any fleet wherein the fleet comp is >30% logistics.  It's not uncommon to see fleets of 30 with 10 logistics.  To me, that's tankier than it is fast, whether it's Hurricanes or Drakes.  And generally I think the meta shift towards Hurricanes away from Drakes comes down to utility.  At least in the fleets I've seen it used effectively in--Hurricanes with their two utility highslots can fit a shocking amount of cap warfare when comped together, and trying to run any sort of logistics or cap-dependant-anything against a Hurricane fleet is simply suicide unless you can engage from outside of 30km and hold that range on them.

Maybe my area of the world isn't in touch with the rest of EVE, though.  We stay the hell away from sov warfare unless we can harass sov fleets or we actually manage to muster a blob (aka, Friday night) and can throw our 50 at their 150 without them re-comping to perfectly counter us (like when Test reships into 40 Scorpions, 80 Maelstroms, and assorted logis/tackle--yes, they did this once when they outnumbered us 3:1 to begin with).

I was referring to individual ship fitting rather than fleet comp. For example, current meta favors fleets made of faster, harder hitting ships that are more fragile but can control range (shield arty canes, for example) over slower ships that can take more damage individually (armor BC or BS). In short, shield > armor (gross generalization). And based on the description, the new tier 3 BCs are just going to be even better at this than the tier 2 - fast, high damage, long range, fragile. To a great extent, the current state of the game means that whoever is fastest wins or can simply disengage. If you're outnumbered but faster, you can still fight and have a chance. If you're outnumbered and slower, you're going to have a much harder time.

Exceptions to this certainly exist (sig tanked ahac gangs) and I have little experience in fights with that much logi, most of my recent pvp has been small to medium militia gangs that sometimes don't have logi backup at all.

[semi-related tangent] Personally I think the best thing to make armor tanks more competitive atm would be to remove or reduce the speed penalty on trimarks. maybe make it a mass penalty instead.

Anyhow, it looks like the new tier 3 BC will simply do everything we're already doing (fast ships, long engagement range) but will be even better at it, so that alternative strategies will become even less viable. Hopefully they'll be more balanced than what they currently look like, but I don't have a lot of faith when it comes to CCP and pvp balance.
Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #24 on: 24 Oct 2011, 21:39 »

Wonder if they'll make good suicide gank hulls.  I get the feeling they will provided they cost less than BS. 
Logged

Julianus Soter

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 558
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #25 on: 25 Oct 2011, 01:19 »

battleship class guns = death to battleships and BC's.

Ships seen in lowsec most often = battleships and BC's.

Battlecruisers = largely invulnerable to capital ships

Tier 3 bc's = new supercap murdermachines.

It solves so many problems simultaneously.

Just don't try to take the Tier 3 up against a cruiser. Or i'll lol at your lossmail.

Simply put, it places a counter to the drakes/hurricanes/harbinger/myrmidon blobs within the same ship class that it is countering. This is commonly thought of as 'rock paper scissors' triangulation in game mechanic terms, each counters one other in the chain, but are designed to have the same cost/buildtime/size.

Drakes will be dieing by the horde to these things. And that is a very, very good thing.
« Last Edit: 25 Oct 2011, 01:22 by Julianus Soter »
Logged

Hamish Grayson

  • Guest
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #26 on: 26 Oct 2011, 08:22 »

Filling low-sec with a hull type that tracks like a battle ship, tanks like a cruiser, can't fit heavy neuts (hopefully) and a 4th bonus to AFs?  Yes please. 
Logged

Senn Typhos

  • Pod Captain
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 944
  • Strong, Silent Type
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #27 on: 26 Oct 2011, 08:34 »

If it brings about a curtailing of Drake spam, I'll praise it as a godsend.
Logged
An important reminder for Placid RPers

One day they woke me up
So I could live forever
It's such a shame the same
Will never happen to you

Invelious

  • Reshjvajarr Man
  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 358
  • Plays the Roll
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #28 on: 26 Oct 2011, 10:39 »

Ugghhhhh I got to get back into EvE
Logged

Bacchanalian

  • Omelette
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 449
Re: [Devblog] Ship-troduction: the minmatar tornado
« Reply #29 on: 27 Oct 2011, 11:20 »

Shamelessly stolen from an alliance mate talking about the Talos and 90% webs:

Hello webs my old friend
I've come to ctrl-f1 with you again
Because a spaceship softly creeping
Left its loot while my Talos was griefing
And the Gunslinger CX-2 that was implanted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of deeps
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3