L Class For Guardian

M MaraudianOP

OP 22/02/2007 · 06:48 AM #1

Same as before suggest away , no enflame arguing ect , then we will work it all out

Suggested PR`s

L garnet @ 35k pr
L Emerald @ 65k PR
L topaz @ 70k pr

L.Garnet

Scanner rating -600

Ship Attributes
Defense Modifier
Energy Shield - 20 %
Absorption Shield - 10 %
ECM + 50 %
Ionized Hull - 10 %

upkeep - 483

L. Emerald

Scanner rating - 1200

Ship Attributes
Defense Modifier
Energy Shield - 20 %
Absorption Shield - 10 %
ECM + 55 %
Ionized Hull - 20 %

upkeep - 453

L.Topaz

Missile Dmg + 2,000
Scanner rating -1000

Ship Attributes
Defense Modifier
Energy Shield - 20 %

Absorption Shield - 10 %
ECM + 60 %
Ionized Hull -30 %

upkeep - 425

Edited by Maraudian on 2007-03-01

M MaraudianOP

24/02/2007 · 07:06 AM #47

sounds good to me

A AGM94

24/02/2007 · 06:01 AM #46

or

garnet (lowest range best ratios)
emerald (middle)
topaz(highest range worst ratios)

the order isnt that important but just think it should be like that the topaz was just as an example if people didnt want to swap topaz and emeralds range

M MaraudianOP

24/02/2007 · 04:11 AM #45

hmm so let me get the picture , you want them in this order in PR

L Garnet - weakest
L topaz - middle
L Emerald - highest

A AGM94

23/02/2007 · 11:26 PM #44

Ok just a quick suggestion for topaz(as a note i havent checked mods or tested yet

Drop scanner to roughly 4500

This will give pr of 56736

attack/pr = 0.32
hull/pr = 1.5

That would make it a ship in the middle of Garnet and emerald(pr and range wise)
worse attack/pr but better attack/pr (might need to adjust hull down)

A AGM94

23/02/2007 · 11:16 PM #43

Not sure on the ratings for this but as topaz is the bigger ship maybe it should swap its range with emerald either that or lower it into the gap between 40k and 70(55k maybe)

garnet(lowest range) should have best hull and attack/pr with topaz worst(because of highest range) with Emerald in between the 2

should post same ideas soon

A Archaeoptyrex

23/02/2007 · 11:01 PM #42

at your most recent pr suggestion, generally good.
garnet hull could be same or slightly less
emmy still looks shoddy (20:65 attack:pr ain`t exactly fabulous, but better at least)
topaz still never gonna be used, but the improvement to the garnet balances this out =)

M MaraudianOP

23/02/2007 · 08:30 PM #41

uh huh , why these are public , in general these are what you all made ^^

H Hiigarans

23/02/2007 · 07:45 PM #40

Maraudian> well, not bad. for me, that`s it. L class was done with all of the suggestions n improvement.

wait, let`s hear what the other say :)

M MaraudianOP

23/02/2007 · 07:25 PM #39

im thinking

L garnet @ 35k pr
L Emerald @ 65k PR
L topaz @ 70k pr

this would result in them having more hull than power rating , nice ecm shielding ( yet not completely immune ) and reasonably lowered weaknes`s , and a slight lower upkeep

in general i think thats ok >.<

M MaraudianOP

23/02/2007 · 07:19 PM #38

ok like i said 1 scanner = 4 pr

if you have a reasonable suggestion to the new pr`s of these imrpoved ships then sure

but take into consideration that they are now about 20% or so less sucky so major drops would make them a little imba ( like my recent scanner drops o.O )

H Hiigarans

23/02/2007 · 11:24 AM #37

meh, the scanner rate should drop more, prehaps 20% - 30% of original. shield is fine too me.

Augustuni> best enegry shield resist which was mention in the race description had allocate to G class (Guardian class). that`s what it gonna combo with L class, Ruby / Taur. energy + missile + kinetic resist according those ships.

so, if Terran got the longest offensive ships, should all the other T class get range 11 too?

A Archaeoptyrex

23/02/2007 · 06:29 AM #36

again ... scanner drop is a pit pathetic

garnet had 7000 scanner --- dropping 600 is a pebble`s worth
good ol` emmy had 12000 scanner --- a drop by 10% still makes it worthless
similarly for garnet ...

your previous scanner drops were better :S

G Gronoria

23/02/2007 · 03:51 AM #35

Less scanner rating, same range and a little more ECM than the original will be fine :)

A Augustini

23/02/2007 · 01:41 AM #34

A thing i find funny.... is that L class does not have any energy shielding... despite that the Guardian race description lists their "effective energy shielding" as a racial bonus on their ships....

Z Zenith

22/02/2007 · 11:19 PM #33

Range 8 frigate? Lol...

Hii is right, range 7 is nicer. It`s shields still block the ECM capitals, and if the guards want, they can always use emerald...

H Hiigarans

22/02/2007 · 10:26 PM #32

well, i still not agree with the L.Garnet range. as a Frigate, shorter range wasnt the problem, as they r design to build with mass n die very quick if knock to Destoyer n Cruiser.

if u still want a range 8 Garnet, fine, u r the admin, u got the right :P

make sure it wont take over Topaz position. so, both range were 8, Garnet should have less hull and less dmg per pr ratio (which mean dont reduce too much scanner). also, tweak the Garnet shield abit too, ex: E: -25% K: -15% M: +40% C: -15%.

other than Garnet, i feel ok on other L class. er, Emerald ECM should be 50% if u agree the Garnet shield mod which i mentioned above :)

M MaraudianOP

22/02/2007 · 08:53 PM #31

yar i decided lowering the G class would make them more apealing for tax empires to stack with , but hey thats just a rough idea if yall dont like it , it takes 2 seconds for me to delete it

C {ching}

22/02/2007 · 08:24 PM #30

I dont think guard ships need improving - only on upkeep

M MaraudianOP

22/02/2007 · 08:10 PM #29

multi dmg already removed :p

hmmm , true

S species382

22/02/2007 · 05:03 PM #28

PLEASE dont give guards ships, which can withstand a P.class spams!!!!

If guards dont know, how to handle fodder, they are not worth winning. The old L class was ok except for the scanner ratings.

and YES, multi-dammage ships suck, since they effectively remove the concept of shields altogether. And that latter is a bad idea is generally accepted or?

Reply