SHADOWREAPERS2
2013-05-14 |  | G.agate |  |
Just seems like with energy being a guard specialty that this ship should be a energy ship. There are no energy no-retal ships for guard, and I think the ship would balance the ship list if it was switched, looking at current ships we have you would think we where kinitic masters and not energy beings. |
|
{DrKsT}GuArDiAn
99+ day(s) ago | Sibi is 100% correct. And just to set the record straight sibi was trying to say it was "no retal" but it seems his auto correct got the better of him as it happens to most of us from time to time. The agate design is a solid support ship but nothing special and that ship slot has been redesigned a few times already, if I remember correctly when EE unveiled the current agate he mentioned that if it doesn`t work out and players were unhappy we can re address it but since no one protested its trial run we just ran with it.
You will have to pardon my earlier post brotherhood cause anything to do with guard strikes close to the heart and I have been pulling for certain changes for a few years now. I am always all for creative thinking concerning guard .
Right now guard has six no retal ships three kinetic and three missile which can leave us a little weak in certain areas but considering that our build rates and upkeep make up for it I don`t see anything being done about agate. Yes your idea makes sense to add some "no retal " diversification but I don`t see it making that big of an impact overall on rt. I agree with sibi on this matter.
On a side note if/when we get this neutral class update it will provide us with an opportunity for dual weapon class ships and open up another dimension of strategy for our race.
I firmly believe g.corrundom is in need of a redesign and over the years I have made, tested, submitted, and tested again designs against the destroyer and cruiser class that was balanced and also tested vrs caps and I tweaked it until it held its own 50% of the time which was balanced but not overpowered and it would encourage stacking over spamming. But after so long I just dropped it and gave up.
All in all keep the ideas coming because their are things in motion all the time to add/fix things its just in "slow" motion. |
borok
99+ day(s) ago | Should look at some of guards lesser used ships and improve them on the reasons they are lesser used. Not really a buff, just make them more stackable, and give tourm/ruby 1k more weapon on chem and 12 range each. Then take away no def. |
Squaks
99+ day(s) ago | I`ll trade you agate for vborrs... deal? |
Omegian
99+ day(s) ago | Considering how many ships are decent under guardian right now, there would have to be a trade off. |
SystemAusfall
99+ day(s) ago | looks like yall trying to buff guardians by givin them a ship with more use than it does already |
SHADOWREAPERS2
99+ day(s) ago | Sibi, agate is no retal already :) |
Sibiriangun
99+ day(s) ago | I find the guard ships farily good these days. Agathe is a not retal ship, which guards arent too blessed with. I dont see the ned for an energy ship with no retal. Energy ships are mainly for killing herc/chimera/cronus/thresher, but there are plenty of alternatives for those (except cronus).
I think the current number of no retal ships are fairly balanced. In order to make a fleet of pure no retals a lot of slow building fez is needed, and otherwise your fleet will be vulnerable to spams that retals. |
Apollo
99+ day(s) ago | I wont be happy until the P.Apollo has at least 8 range. as it is right now... it cant even fight rubys. |
Brotherhood
99+ day(s) ago | Not a concern at all, merely a suggestion, but I am curious on what is irritating about it. Yes right now compared to tourm and ruby the ship is obsolete, this would give it relavance. But hey what do I know? Why don`t you enlighten us lesser guards and feeble peeps what all is irritating and wrong with the guard ship list then? Oh wait...it`s easier to cop out and just say non sense. Troll |
borok
99+ day(s) ago | I thnk ruby/tourm need to get their range up... to say, 12... maybe 13 but that might be pushing it. |
{DrKsT}GuArDiAn
99+ day(s) ago | Funny thing is squaks is being serious. Of all the ships to complain about you picked agate to voice your concern on?
I`m tired and irritated at this subject so I`m just posting because I`m bored. |
Squaks
99+ day(s) ago | I enjoy spamming agate/Xe/amethyst, just so i can laugh if i win |
2DPUGO
99+ day(s) ago | I think G.Agate should have exactly 7 energy attack and 4993 in kinetic. Although 11 would be a bit more realistic. |
SHADOWREAPERS2
99+ day(s) ago | I had tested raistilin, I guess I missed something cause it just changed what it was effective against. For every ship it did well against now it became ineffective mostly, but I appreciate your input. All other races has similar diversity and choices when it comes to ships like these, and I am only proposing switch in weapon type, no change in shields or range ect ect. Right now the only option for guard is a ship that 99% of guard(your the one percent) can`t use because of upkeep--(Leo) which is double the range with no retal. That ship if your guard is not even a useable ship, I meen even the broadsword is a stretch for us to use because of up-keep. So all things considered I would like more reasons, consideration into this at least. |
Raistilin
99+ day(s) ago | I appreciate anyone`s willingness to offer suggestions, so thanks Shadow! However... please test your ideas out prior to throwing them out for a suggestion. Before looking at the ship in the batsim, i could see that having a pure energy no retal ship would just boost guardian`s effectiveness even higher. Once i added it into the batsim i could easily see the results of the change would provide guardian with yet another ships with extremely high usefulness instead of a mediocre ship. |
