These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey] Faction Navy Cruisers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#321 - 2013-03-29 22:27:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
Viribus wrote:
If you want to test it out, just put 4 turrets on a Harbinger, it gets the same 10% bonus to damage per level

For reference, this works out to ~290 dps with heavy pulses, 2x heat sinks, perfect skills, and scorch

Literally hits like a frigate



Still does more damage than a Cynabal at 20,000m or more. Also, I do believe I would do 3 heat sinks and that would be 320 damage per second (with scorch) or something.

I do believe the drop in damage is worth the increase in range and less capacitor usage. One of my biggest issues with the Navy Omen was capacitor.

Also I would have lows like this for a armor setup solo:

- heat sink x3
- AAR x1
- 800mm x1
- 1x Adaptive

Overall the ship will do 500 damage per second and 40, 000 ehp or something. Maybe more I dont know for sure.

The shield setup wont be much different from what we're able to put together now. I really wish this ship had 4 mid slots.

- killz

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Viribus
Dark Enlightenment
New Eden Alliance 99013733
#322 - 2013-03-29 22:37:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Viribus
Major Killz wrote:
Viribus wrote:
If you want to test it out, just put 4 turrets on a Harbinger, it gets the same 10% bonus to damage per level

For reference, this works out to ~290 dps with heavy pulses, 2x heat sinks, perfect skills, and scorch

Literally hits like a frigate



Still does more damage than a Cynabal at 20,000m or more. Also, I do believe I would do 3 heat sinks and that would be 320 damage per second (with scorch) or something.

I do believe the drop in damage is worth the increase in range and less capacitor usage. One of my biggest issues with the Navy Omen was capacitor.

Also I would have lows like this for a armor setup solo:

- heat sink x3
- AAR x1
- 800mm x1
- 1x Adaptive

Overall the ship will do 500 damage per second and 40, 000 ehp or something. Maybe more I dont know for sure.

The shield setup wont be much different from what we're able to put together now. I really wish this ship had 4 mid slots.

- killz


The new NOmen will actually use slightly more cap than the current one, since the current one gets a cap use reduction to offset the higher RoF

EDIT: What kind of cynabal is this, one that doesn't use damage mods? A standard 2x TE 2x gyro cynabal with 425s and barrage does 300 dps at 20km

watch me be a scurb and get owned
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#323 - 2013-03-29 22:59:22 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Castellan Garran Crowe wrote:
I am worried about the Caracal Navy Issue, I plugged the changes into EvE HQ, and changing the Kinetic Damage Bonus to a Rate of Fire bonus dropped its DPS by about 120, now i don't know if it is a glitch with EvE HQ or that's whats actually going to happen if they implement this change, so I am not overly happy with that if that's the case il just stick to flying normal Caracal's as they will be way better as you can do the same DPS as this change from Point range.

Caracal: Ok it is obviously a Kitter with Heavies or HAM's because of the range bonus.
Caracal Navy Issue: Supposed to be more of a Brawler, so if its not doing more damage up close their is no point in having it as the Normal Caracal will kick its ass every time.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
:Caracal Navy Issue: Finds a niche as the heavier version of the Caracal, more suited to brawling than kiting.
Cruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus Rapid Light, Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile Launcher rate of fire
5% bonus to Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile explosion radius
Slot layout: 6 H, 5 M, 4 L, 0(-2) turrets, 6 launchers
Fittings: 715 PWG(+35), 465(+50) CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 3000(+187) / 1950 / 2250(-35)
Shield Recharge Time: 1250s (-600)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1450(+75) / 482.5s(8.75) / 3(+0.2)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 210(+46) / 0.51(+0.09) / 9600000 / 6.79s(+1.2)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0(-15) / 0(-15)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 57.5km / 270(+28) / 7
Sensor strength: 21(+3) Gravimetric
Signature radius: 125(-5)
Cargo capacity: 450(+200)


CCP Fozzie, you said as quoted above "Finds a niche as the heavier version of the Caracal, more suited to brawling than kiting." so how is this thing going to perform well in Brawling with Terrible DPS, if its just and EvE HQ coding fault then tell me so I can quit worrying about this thing going to be weak.

Thank You Fozzie

A ROF bonus ends up with considerably more damage than a straight damage bonus.


I don't know about that but i know you end up reloading (10sec) also more often than with just straight damage buff...

My problem is that while every other ship either keeps or gets more drones Navy Caracal is actually losing ALL 3 of them, why? I have mine usually fitted with HAM's and drones even with just 3 of them were many times what saved me from certain death either by ecm drones or warrior 2's. Without them if i'm caught there will be nothing i can do as i'm slow as a brick too, every other ships has more options.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#324 - 2013-03-29 22:59:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Pelea Ming wrote:
Liang, I appreciate that your attempting to play the role of devil's advocate here, but all your points so far about this specifically were addressed earlier in the thread and agreed upon to be counter to what your raising them as.


I'm not playing the devil's advocate here. You're campaigning for changes to the plan on a platform of ignorance. There may be things wrong with the popularity of long range platforms, but there's way more wrong with people's perceptions rather than a problem with Scorch, Barrage, or Null. In a very real way, people's (mis)perceptions will greatly magnify a perceived imbalance. And sometimes, that imbalance really doesn't exist (or is relatively small). There are countless times in the history of Eve that this has happened.

If you want to use beams for kiting, there's nothing stopping you. Do it. I've done it, and it works great.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#325 - 2013-03-29 23:00:56 UTC
Viribus wrote:

The new NOmen will actually use slightly more cap than the current one, since the current one gets a cap use reduction to offset the higher RoF

EDIT: What kind of cynabal is this, one that doesn't use damage mods? A standard 2x TE 2x gyro cynabal with 425s and barrage does 300 dps at 20km


So 280 DPS at 40km vs 300 DPS at 20km? Gee, I wonder which one I would choose!

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Viribus
Dark Enlightenment
New Eden Alliance 99013733
#326 - 2013-03-29 23:06:00 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Viribus wrote:

The new NOmen will actually use slightly more cap than the current one, since the current one gets a cap use reduction to offset the higher RoF

EDIT: What kind of cynabal is this, one that doesn't use damage mods? A standard 2x TE 2x gyro cynabal with 425s and barrage does 300 dps at 20km


So 280 DPS at 40km vs 300 DPS at 20km? Gee, I wonder which one I would choose!

-Liang


Well as long as we're comparing apples and oranges, a Caracal does 300 dps out to 90km, and is obviously the superior ship

Clearly your extensive pvp experiences of camping the Ossogur gate 23/7 shining through

watch me be a scurb and get owned
The Sinister
Interbellum
#327 - 2013-03-29 23:08:51 UTC
I think the Scythe FI is ok, because even with that 50% rate of fire bonus the 4 guns will not pass 500 DPS with T2 Fitting. Also I do think it needs to be a full Gun ship and not a Missile ship so that missile damage bonus should be taken out, maybe replace it with a tracking speed bonus or a shield boosting bonus. So that it gets 2 bonuses aplyed like all the other cruisers in this list.

Note: That all the other cruisers in this list will have 2 bonuses and the Scythe FI will only have 1 at same time unless u fit mixed guns and missiles wich is what they suposedly wanted to change in the first place.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#328 - 2013-03-29 23:08:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Major Killz
True on the capacitor reduction bonus.

As far as damage.

Based on what I quoted above I believe my argument is correct. As with these changes the ship will start out damaging a Cynabal at 20,000m. Also, why would anyone use barrage when you can use faction ammunition at that range and do the same overall damage but more effective damage because of damage type What?

I suppose faction ammunition does run out. v0v Beyond 24,000m I can understand that though...


- killz

EDIT: I decided to check the damage graph in EFT and apparently the propose Navy Omen would start out damaging the Cynabal @ 18,000m. Provided 4 heavy pulse lasers are being used and 3 heat sinks.

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#329 - 2013-03-29 23:11:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Ok i've changed my mind, i took a look at the Navy omen and its ****.

It has a useless highslot
the dps is terrible (It struggles to break 300 dps with scorch)
The fittings are terrible, you can't really put anything on it.

Its an armor tanker so you can't kite with it, the best you can do is keep range as long as you can but it can't really deal with getting caught. Its just pretty.. bad..

Other points aside, it always amuses me when someone asserts that a kite ship has no use for a utility high.

As for being an armor tanker, if it has to rely on it's "tank" you've done something wrong.



1. utility high only has a job on kiters to neut down frigates. The navy omen however 1. doesn't have any cap. 2. doesn't have any fittings to fit a med neut.
2. " if it has to rely on it's "tank" you've done something wrong" So you're only going to fight slow blaster boats? This isn't a frigate.. A lot of its targets are going to have comparable range and speed.. So yes tank matters.

Don't be bad.


1: Correct, it is used to deal with frigates (along with drones). 1: It will obviously use a cap booster in most fits. 2: I've already said that fittings may need to be adjusted, as although a small neut is a possibility it is a bit problematic... and storylines are somewhat expensive and hard to find.

2: Pick your targets, and if kiting always try to pick targets slower than you. Fortunately this boat has excellent speed and slots to boost it considerably... although a case could be made for a moderate tank that would be sufficient after whittling down your opponent during the chase.

I will agree with you that fittings and cap "may" need to be looked at, but that is exactly what this time is for. I think that the intention is for most viable fittings to involve at least a small cap booster and we should take that into consideration.

Edit: My main point was that your assertion about useless utility slots on kite vessels was made as a sweeping generalization often heard in these threads... one that is entirely incorrect.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#330 - 2013-03-29 23:25:20 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:

If you want to use beams for kiting, there's nothing stopping you. Do it. I've done it, and it works great.

-Liang


I tried to EFT warrior it earlier.. you get way better dps since the optimal range bonus lets you use multi freq

However its pretty much impossible to fit because lolbeams and has virtually no cap because lolbeams.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#331 - 2013-03-29 23:34:22 UTC
Viribus wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Viribus wrote:

The new NOmen will actually use slightly more cap than the current one, since the current one gets a cap use reduction to offset the higher RoF

EDIT: What kind of cynabal is this, one that doesn't use damage mods? A standard 2x TE 2x gyro cynabal with 425s and barrage does 300 dps at 20km


So 280 DPS at 40km vs 300 DPS at 20km? Gee, I wonder which one I would choose!

-Liang


Well as long as we're comparing apples and oranges, a Caracal does 300 dps out to 90km, and is obviously the superior ship

Clearly your extensive pvp experiences of camping the Ossogur gate 23/7 shining through


The Cynabal is considered really good and people even talk about how great its damage is. The NOmen does 20 less DPS at twice the range before the equal sized drone bays are considered. How's that apples and oranges except that it doesn't support your view that the NOmen won't be worth flying unless it's WTFOP?

Also, bring your new NCaracal against my new NOmen. That'd be funny.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Viribus
Dark Enlightenment
New Eden Alliance 99013733
#332 - 2013-03-29 23:38:38 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Viribus wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Viribus wrote:

The new NOmen will actually use slightly more cap than the current one, since the current one gets a cap use reduction to offset the higher RoF

EDIT: What kind of cynabal is this, one that doesn't use damage mods? A standard 2x TE 2x gyro cynabal with 425s and barrage does 300 dps at 20km


So 280 DPS at 40km vs 300 DPS at 20km? Gee, I wonder which one I would choose!

-Liang


Well as long as we're comparing apples and oranges, a Caracal does 300 dps out to 90km, and is obviously the superior ship

Clearly your extensive pvp experiences of camping the Ossogur gate 23/7 shining through


The Cynabal is considered really good and people even talk about how great its damage is. The NOmen does 20 less DPS at twice the range before the equal sized drone bays are considered. How's that apples and oranges except that it doesn't support your view that the NOmen won't be worth flying unless it's WTFOP?

Also, bring your new NCaracal against my new NOmen. That'd be funny.

-Liang


How about we compare something that matters, like the old NOmen and the new NOmen (hint, the old NOmen wins)

Also I was talking about the regular T1 caracal

Please try to read

Seriously I don't understand the hilarious mental gymnastics you're doing to justify why a faction cruiser does less DPS than its T1 counterpart

watch me be a scurb and get owned
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#333 - 2013-03-29 23:44:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Viribus wrote:

How about we compare something that matters, like the old NOmen and the new NOmen (hint, the old NOmen wins)

Also I was talking about the regular T1 caracal

Please try to read

Seriously I don't understand the hilarious mental gymnastics you're doing to justify why a faction cruiser does less DPS than its T1 counterpart


Ok:
- New NOmen vs Old NOmen: New NOmen wins because the old NOmen does 0 DPS at the ranges the new NOmen is comfortable with.
- T1 Caracal vs new NOmen: New NOmen obliterates it because ~missiles~
- NCaracal vs New NOmen: New NOmen obliterates it because ~missiles~
- Faction cruiser dealing less than T1 counterpart: How much DPS is the Omen doing at 40km again? Oh.

-Liang

Ed: I do appreciate that you've backed off the whole "It does frigate DPS" thing. Because we were all wondering what kind of mental gymnastics you were doing to justify that line of bullshit.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Viribus
Dark Enlightenment
New Eden Alliance 99013733
#334 - 2013-03-29 23:56:45 UTC
Ahahaha okay so we're doing this thing where comparisons only happen in a hypothetical where only one ship has every advantage?

Well I don't know what else to expect from heretics lmao

Time to get scooped by an orca and jump out of this thread

watch me be a scurb and get owned
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#335 - 2013-03-30 00:00:04 UTC
No, we're apparently doing this thing where you say some bullshit and then try to throw more bullshit into the air to distract us from the original bullshit thing you said. I guess the game plan is to make there be so much bullshit in the air that you look like you somehow have a clue what's going on. I don't know what else I'd expect from Confederation of xXxxXxXXXxXXxxXxxxxXxxXXXxXXxXXxXxxX.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#336 - 2013-03-30 00:03:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Soon Shin
No one is going to fly the NOmen since its dps potential has been nerfed to awful damage, that even the tech 1 version beats it. Its a bad joke.

Proof: 37.5% ROF bonus = -37.5% reduction in firing time in game mechanics

So 100% firing time -> 62.5% firing time

DPS = Damage/time

100% Damage / 62.5% time = 1.6 x DPS

5 turrets x 1.6 = 8 Effective Turret DPS. - Current NOMEN


Now a 50% damage bonus equates to 50% bonus in DPS

150% damage / 100% time = 1.5 DPS

Now 4 turrests x 1.5 = 6 Effective Turret DPS - Proposed NOMEN

Now look at the Regular Tech 1 Omen

25% reduction firing time:

100% damage / 75% time = 1.33 dps

5 x 1.33 = 6.67 Effective turret DPS - Regular Tech 1 Omen


The Navy Omen will be awful, it will do less damage than its tech 1 version. Use more capacitor as well. No one will fly this piece of crap when you have the tech 1 omen and the zealot.


The range bonus on the New Omen is rather redundant when you have the Zealot for that purpose.

If you want range go fly a zealot.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#337 - 2013-03-30 00:12:43 UTC
Soon Shin wrote:

The Navy Omen will be awful, it will do less damage than its tech 1 version. Use more capacitor as well. No one will fly this piece of crap when you have the tech 1 omen and the zealot.


If you are going to compare the old NOmen to the new NOmen, please make sure to do it correctly. Yes, absolutely the turret DPS has been lowered. However, the drone DPS has been raised and that's something that should be considered. It's also been made faster and will have an optimal range bonus.

I am slightly concerned by the low DPS myself, but I am very confident that if the DPS is actually too low in play testing then the designers will up the DPS (or otherwise address the problem).

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#338 - 2013-03-30 00:17:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Soon Shin
Liang Nuren wrote:
Soon Shin wrote:

The Navy Omen will be awful, it will do less damage than its tech 1 version. Use more capacitor as well. No one will fly this piece of crap when you have the tech 1 omen and the zealot.


If you are going to compare the old NOmen to the new NOmen, please make sure to do it correctly. Yes, absolutely the turret DPS has been lowered. However, the drone DPS has been raised and that's something that should be considered. It's also been made faster and will have an optimal range bonus.

I am slightly concerned by the low DPS myself, but I am very confident that if the DPS is actually too low in play testing then the designers will up the DPS (or otherwise address the problem).

-Liang


Realistically you would not use medium drones. Otherwise frigs will speed tank them, kill them, then kill you by getting under the tracking of your guns.

Besides in terms of damage application and travel time,the dps difference of 5 medium drones over 5 light drones will no way compensate for the loss of 2 effective turret DPS.

The range bonus just turns the Navy Omen into a zealot, a much inferior zealot. The current NOMEN has a purpose compared to the zealot in close range brawling. Ranged combat is Zealot's specialty. I am a firm believer in making ships excel at different things rather than them stepping on the abilities of other ships.

EDIT: also the NOMEN will field only one more medium drone than the tech 1 Omen. Wow such a big difference.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#339 - 2013-03-30 00:20:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Garviel Tarrant
Also the comparison of the Nomen vs Cynabal based on the dps difference is ********. EDIT: For fucks sake, this ******* censorship of "offensive" words is going too ******* far.

Lets try that again "Also the comparison of the Nomen vs Cynabal based on the dps difference is mentally handicapped.

The Nomen isn't even in the same league, and even if its dps was higher it still wouldn't be.


Edit 2: I'm not saying the Nomen won't be usable, It just doesn't seem to be a sensible choice over a normal omen to me.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#340 - 2013-03-30 00:23:15 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Also the comparison of the Nomen vs Cynabal based on the dps difference is ********.

The Nomen isn't even in the same league, and even if its dps was higher it still wouldn't be.


Exactly, ask anyone which is the better ship the current Nomen or the Cynabal.

9/10 will say the Cynabal is better than the current Nomen.

After the changes are made 10/10 will say the Cynabal is better than the proposed Nomen.

No one will fly the Nomen, if you want a ranged attack cruiser go fly the Zealot does way more dps.