These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Could the Naga become a torp boat in the upcoming balance changes?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ascendic
Polaris Syndicate
#121 - 2013-01-11 06:40:35 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
snip


Yes, Caldari Hybrid ships are now in a much better state than they were before - please check the date of the post I quoted, it's back from 2011 around Crucible deployment, before we started the tiericide P

On a bright side note for missile users though, when we start rebalancing Battleships we will need to look into Cruise missiles and Torpedos as well, as both the Raven and Typhoon will heavily depend on them.


You said in the other thread that Cruise wasnt viable because of its slow velocity and long flight time. So why not have a flight time reduction with a velocity buff on the naga which will effectively eliminate that as an issue?

Maybe even give it a target painter buff?
Ascendic
Polaris Syndicate
#122 - 2013-01-11 06:41:39 UTC
FluffyDice wrote:
I remember testing the Naga with torps when it first hit singularity. It was terrible.


A torp naga with velocity and target painter buff would be smexy.
Daimon Kaiera
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#123 - 2013-01-11 06:48:48 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Let me break it down for you:

Don't. Touch. My. Naga.


Naga stole my lunch. Sad

.... . .-.. .--. / .. / .... .- ...- . / ..-. .- .-.. .-.. . -. / .- -. -.. / .. / -.-. .- -. -. --- - / --. . - / ..- .--. / ... - --- .--. - .... .. ... / ... .. --. -. .- - ..- .-. . / .. -.. . .- / .. ... / -. --- - / ... - --- .-.. . -. / ... - --- .--.
Daniel Whateley
#124 - 2013-01-11 07:26:02 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Daniel Whateley wrote:
and the naga aswell its a terrible rail boat, absolutely no dps


"No DPS"? Lol

You get close to 700 DPS at 70Km with CN Antimatter L on a standard fit 425mm rail Naga. Even more with Javelin.



the max you can get out of javelin is 780 with max skills, maybe 860 with implants and rigs, 720dps with antimatter and 50km optimal, you still might aswell fit blasters to it and get your 900dps with null, and exact same range, talos performs that better though, so the naga is actually a useless ship without spike or long range ammo and then you might aswell fly a oracle P
Daniel Whateley
#125 - 2013-01-11 07:38:02 UTC
does anyone even know why they were decreasing missiles explosion velocity and increasing explosion radius, it was cause you can just orbit and shoot, no tracking or piloting needed, that needed to be leveled out, naga was just simply overpowered if it had torps on it 2 target painters would make them hit microing targets at full power, and ALL t3bc's can fit 100mn ab's if configured right, so a 100mn ab torp shooting naga, that'd be untouchable imho, and you'd be able to 1 shot a shuttle with 2 target painters, even as it stands at the moment guns still get horribly effected by tracking disruptors but missiles still deal damage, i don't believe it was a viable option to fit launchers on a naga, i was on the test server aswell when the naga was released with torps on sisi for testing, fitting t1 launchers to it produced 700dps with 2 ballistics tech 2 would have to be 1400, and adding a ballistic 1500, it unbalanced the game, made bombers obsolete, made the skill prereqs too quick to get into for such skills involved, and outmatched most other battlecruisers with the range the torps produced.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#126 - 2013-01-11 09:41:51 UTC
Daniel Whateley wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Daniel Whateley wrote:
and the naga aswell its a terrible rail boat, absolutely no dps


"No DPS"? Lol

You get close to 700 DPS at 70Km with CN Antimatter L on a standard fit 425mm rail Naga. Even more with Javelin.



the max you can get out of javelin is 780 with max skills, maybe 860 with implants and rigs, 720dps with antimatter and 50km optimal, you still might aswell fit blasters to it and get your 900dps with null, and exact same range, talos performs that better though, so the naga is actually a useless ship without spike or long range ammo and then you might aswell fly a oracle P


My skirmish doctrine fit Naga has a tracking comp. Load range script, get 71Km optimal + 49km falloff; I don't think you're going to get that with Null mate.

And Spike? Who on earth uses Spike on a Naga? Even CN Lead outranges the Naga's lock range. You'd need to fill the mids with sensor boosters! My "long range" ammo is CN Plutonium.

425mm Rail Naga basically flies like the old school Sniper HACs used to, and they were one of my favourite fleet types. Now the tier 3s have brought that fighting style back to life and I love it. The Rail Naga is incredibly effective for that style.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Mag's
Azn Empire
#127 - 2013-01-11 11:43:45 UTC
Daniel Whateley wrote:
does anyone even know why they were decreasing missiles explosion velocity and increasing explosion radius, it was cause you can just orbit and shoot, no tracking or piloting needed, that needed to be leveled out, naga was just simply overpowered if it had torps on it 2 target painters would make them hit microing targets at full power, and ALL t3bc's can fit 100mn ab's if configured right, so a 100mn ab torp shooting naga, that'd be untouchable imho, and you'd be able to 1 shot a shuttle with 2 target painters, even as it stands at the moment guns still get horribly effected by tracking disruptors but missiles still deal damage, i don't believe it was a viable option to fit launchers on a naga, i was on the test server aswell when the naga was released with torps on sisi for testing, fitting t1 launchers to it produced 700dps with 2 ballistics tech 2 would have to be 1400, and adding a ballistic 1500, it unbalanced the game, made bombers obsolete, made the skill prereqs too quick to get into for such skills involved, and outmatched most other battlecruisers with the range the torps produced.
This post brought a tear to my eye, then I realised they were actually bleeding.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#128 - 2013-01-11 11:51:25 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Daniel Whateley wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Daniel Whateley wrote:
and the naga aswell its a terrible rail boat, absolutely no dps


"No DPS"? Lol

You get close to 700 DPS at 70Km with CN Antimatter L on a standard fit 425mm rail Naga. Even more with Javelin.



the max you can get out of javelin is 780 with max skills, maybe 860 with implants and rigs, 720dps with antimatter and 50km optimal, you still might aswell fit blasters to it and get your 900dps with null, and exact same range, talos performs that better though, so the naga is actually a useless ship without spike or long range ammo and then you might aswell fly a oracle P


My skirmish doctrine fit Naga has a tracking comp. Load range script, get 71Km optimal + 49km falloff; I don't think you're going to get that with Null mate.

And Spike? Who on earth uses Spike on a Naga? Even CN Lead outranges the Naga's lock range. You'd need to fill the mids with sensor boosters! My "long range" ammo is CN Plutonium.

425mm Rail Naga basically flies like the old school Sniper HACs used to, and they were one of my favourite fleet types. Now the tier 3s have brought that fighting style back to life and I love it. The Rail Naga is incredibly effective for that style.

Our rail Naga setup doesn't actually use T2 guns anyway, since there's not enough PG or CPU left with the rest of the fit.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#129 - 2013-01-11 14:09:34 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Our rail Naga setup doesn't actually use T2 guns anyway, since there's not enough PG or CPU left with the rest of the fit.


Eh.... you're giving up quite a lot of DPS if you do that, and DPS is the whole point of tier 3s in the first place. Plus the tracking bonus from Jav is a lifesaver when you're forced to fight at close quarters. I'm happy with the fit we use.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jazmyn Stone
Perkone
Caldari State
#130 - 2013-01-11 16:37:25 UTC
OMG, a torp Naga would have been awesome!

Can you imagine the damage that a torp Caldari State Raven puts out, or more, in a much lighter and faster hull?

When I first heard about it I just started drouling. ( my meds are fine.) The torp Naga was nyxed by CCP because a small fleet of them would have been just too over-powering and cause a major imbalance. A cheap ship putting out over 1200+DPS!! OMG (but it'll never happen)

Sara, I hope you end up hating me forever.


imho


-Jaz

Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
Jazmyn Stone
Perkone
Caldari State
#131 - 2013-01-11 16:40:26 UTC
Opertone wrote:
I would not remove Hybdrids from NAGA. . . .



And what excites me most - 8 launcher ship, now isn't it awesome? (It comes near raven State issue, which is a dream beyond reach of every caldari pilot)



This.

(Sorry Opertone, I missed your post.)

-Jaz

Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#132 - 2013-01-11 23:40:26 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
blahblah stuff thingy stuff

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Maveric Keldoran
Paladin of Shadows
#133 - 2013-01-12 03:55:26 UTC
Daniel Whateley wrote:
does anyone even know why they were decreasing missiles explosion velocity and increasing explosion radius, it was cause you can just orbit and shoot, no tracking or piloting needed, that needed to be leveled out, naga was just simply overpowered if it had torps on it 2 target painters would make them hit microing targets at full power, and ALL t3bc's can fit 100mn ab's if configured right, so a 100mn ab torp shooting naga, that'd be untouchable imho, and you'd be able to 1 shot a shuttle with 2 target painters, even as it stands at the moment guns still get horribly effected by tracking disruptors but missiles still deal damage, i don't believe it was a viable option to fit launchers on a naga, i was on the test server aswell when the naga was released with torps on sisi for testing, fitting t1 launchers to it produced 700dps with 2 ballistics tech 2 would have to be 1400, and adding a ballistic 1500, it unbalanced the game, made bombers obsolete, made the skill prereqs too quick to get into for such skills involved, and outmatched most other battlecruisers with the range the torps produced.



This is completely wrong tho... my question is if you are attempting this, why are you not using a MJD tactic?
Grey Azorria
Federation Industries
#134 - 2013-01-12 05:31:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Grey Azorria
Jazmyn Stone wrote:
OMG, a torp Naga would have been awesome!

Can you imagine the damage that a torp Caldari State Raven puts out, or more, in a much lighter and faster hull?

When I first heard about it I just started drouling. ( my meds are fine.) The torp Naga was nyxed by CCP because a small fleet of them would have been just too over-powering and cause a major imbalance. A cheap ship putting out over 1200+DPS!! OMG (but it'll never happen)

Sara, I hope you end up hating me forever.


imho


-Jaz

The torp Naga was aborted while still on Sisi, not because it was OP, but because it was awful - I believe the word used was 'suicidal'.

Ascendic wrote:
You said in the other thread that Cruise wasnt viable because of its slow velocity and long flight time. So why not have a flight time reduction with a velocity buff on the naga which will effectively eliminate that as an issue?

Maybe even give it a target painter buff?

That sounds like a Minmatar ship...

Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Sometimes when I post, I look at my sig and wish that I'd follow my own god damned advice.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#135 - 2013-01-19 15:28:19 UTC
Grey Azorria wrote:
Jazmyn Stone wrote:
OMG, a torp Naga would have been awesome!

Can you imagine the damage that a torp Caldari State Raven puts out, or more, in a much lighter and faster hull?

When I first heard about it I just started drouling. ( my meds are fine.) The torp Naga was nyxed by CCP because a small fleet of them would have been just too over-powering and cause a major imbalance. A cheap ship putting out over 1200+DPS!! OMG (but it'll never happen)

Sara, I hope you end up hating me forever.


imho


-Jaz

The torp Naga was aborted while still on Sisi, not because it was OP, but because it was awful - I believe the word used was 'suicidal'.

This.
I actually played with the torp naga quite a bit when it was on sisi, and it was, by a HUGE margin, the worst of the tier 3 BCs
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#136 - 2013-01-19 15:32:12 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Malcanis wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Our rail Naga setup doesn't actually use T2 guns anyway, since there's not enough PG or CPU left with the rest of the fit.


Eh.... you're giving up quite a lot of DPS if you do that, and DPS is the whole point of tier 3s in the first place. Plus the tracking bonus from Jav is a lifesaver when you're forced to fight at close quarters. I'm happy with the fit we use.

Well I at first wasn't going to say this because opsec about fittings and all that, but seeing as you could probably go to our killboard (or any killboard really) and see our naga fit from there...

We do sacrifice some DPS, yes, but we gain a tremendous amount of tank. Our T1 rail Naga hits about 50k EHP.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
SB Rico
Sumo Wrestlers
#137 - 2013-01-19 15:56:43 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
snip


Yes, Caldari Hybrid ships are now in a much better state than they were before - please check the date of the post I quoted, it's back from 2011 around Crucible deployment, before we started the tiericide P

On a bright side note for missile users though, when we start rebalancing Battleships we will need to look into Cruise missiles and Torpedos as well, as both the Raven and Typhoon will heavily depend on them.


This should be exciting - I'd love for the torp boats to become viable in PvP again

A good first step would be to review the reason for short range missile launchers to be harder to fit than long range missile launchers. I've never seen a serious explaination for this. Short range turrets are all considerably lighter on fittings than their long range equivalents, and it's generally assumed that this is because short-range turrets implicitly mean committing to the fight, and also being in energy neut range, so the llighter fittings leave more room for tank, cap injectors and so on.

But apparently this consideration doesn't apply to medium & large missile launchers, and it's the long range boats that need more fitting space, for some reason.

And finally, there's the infamous 'Caldari penalty' that applies to almost all the original Caldari ships: "Caldari role bonus: -25% reduction of powergrid"

Raven, 6 missile slots: 9500 base PG
Typhoon, 5 missile slots: 12500 base PG

Why should the Raven have 3000 less PG than the Typhoon? I have never heard a plausible explaination.


Just to help out, the PG reduction is to do with the tank not the weapons. Shield tanking modules tend to be heavy on the cpu light on the PG (look at xl shield booster vs larger repper, or LSE vs 1600 plate.)

So caldari shield tank ships tend to have higher CPU and lower PG to accommodate.

Scammers are currently selling killrights on this toon for up to 5mil, if you have paid for this service demand your money back at once.

Killing me should be for free.
Jazmyn Stone
Perkone
Caldari State
#138 - 2013-01-19 17:10:26 UTC
Cambarus wrote:
Grey Azorria wrote:
Jazmyn Stone wrote:
OMG, a torp Naga would have been awesome!

Can you imagine the damage that a torp Caldari State Raven puts out, or more, in a much lighter and faster hull?

When I first heard about it I just started drouling. ( my meds are fine.) The torp Naga was nyxed by CCP because a small fleet of them would have been just too over-powering and cause a major imbalance. A cheap ship putting out over 1200+DPS!! OMG (but it'll never happen)

Sara, I hope you end up hating me forever.


imho


-Jaz

The torp Naga was aborted while still on Sisi, not because it was OP, but because it was awful - I believe the word used was 'suicidal'.

This.
I actually played with the torp naga quite a bit when it was on sisi, and it was, by a HUGE margin, the worst of the tier 3 BCs



For any ship in EVE, I guess everything would depend upon it's use. Rail Naga is great as a sniper. A torp naga could be great depending on its use, and putting out more damage than rails. Obviously any torp ship doesn't do well on small targets. Pirate gank squads have used torp Ravens to take HS mission runners. What is the damage per volley that a State Raven would put out? (I don't have access to EFT at this time.) Some pirates would be drooling to have an eight torp launcher platform for ganks. It would be quicker and cheaper than a Raven. (the insurance nerf dampened their spirits).

I don't see the problem of enabling the Naga or even the other new BCs be more flexible by having an option of turrets and launchers.


-Jaz

Always remember Tovil-Toba, and what was done there.
BEPOHNKA
Ner Vod Fleet Systems
Goonswarm Federation
#139 - 2013-01-19 17:13:14 UTC
At this point some people would like to see this type of ship use missles, add we add them with out any bounes? butt able to add 8 or 6 large torps to the ship?
Kamden Line
Sovereign Citizen and other Tax Evasion Schemes
#140 - 2013-01-19 17:19:57 UTC
CCP: "You know that one battleship that has sucked ass since well before 2006? Well, let's make at least one of our T3s emulate that."