These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Tech 1 Battleships - Minmatar

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#321 - 2013-04-10 16:04:33 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Meant turrets, sorry about that =)

Hey Rise, thanks for being awesome. Cool

But I would seriously consider the previously suggested changes shown below. Loosing a launcher hard point for some drones would reduce paper dps by a bit but would give the phoon better damage application against a wider variety of targets. Damage application is something with which torp and cruise battleships always struggle. This helps mitigate that at the cost of some nominal dps from the 6th launcher.

As an added bonus, this further distinguishes the typhoon from the raven making the raven the only 6 launcher boat.
Rebecha Pucontis wrote:
Gal'o Sengen wrote:


Typhoon:

Minmatar Battleship Skill Bonuses:
5% bonus to Cruise and Torpedo launcher rate of fire
5% bonus to Cruise and Torpedo launcher explosion velocity

Slot layout: 7H, 5M, 7L; 5 turrets, 5 launchers (-1)
Fittings: 12500 PWG, 640 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 6500 / 6000 / 6000
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second) : 5400 / 1087s / 4.97
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 130 / .11 / 103600000 / 15.8
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 (+25) / 200 (+100)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 115 / 7
Sensor strength: 19 Ladar Sensor Strength
Signature radius: 330
Sparkus Volundar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#322 - 2013-04-10 16:20:23 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Meant turrets, sorry about that =)

Hey Rise, thanks for being awesome. Cool

But I would seriously consider the previously suggested changes shown below. Loosing a launcher hard point for some drones would reduce paper dps by a bit but would give the phoon better damage application against a wider variety of targets. Damage application is something with which torp and cruise battleships always struggle. This helps mitigate that at the cost of some nominal dps from the 6th launcher.

As an added bonus, this further distinguishes the typhoon from the raven making the raven the only 6 launcher boat.
[quote=Rebecha Pucontis][quote=Gal'o Sengen]

Typhoon:

A 6th bonused launcher doesn't provide "nominal" damage, and changing from 100 --> 125 BW wouldn't offset the loss of the 6th.

.
Rebecha Pucontis
Doomheim
#323 - 2013-04-10 16:24:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Rebecha Pucontis
Sparkus Volundar wrote:

A 6th bonused launcher doesn't provide "nominal" damage, and changing from 100 --> 125 BW wouldn't offset the loss of the 6th.


Bear in mind you are able to fit a second unbonused turret in their also with the removal of a launcher hardpoint. And I suggested, although it was cut in the quote above, that perhaps the rate of fire bonus be altered to 7.5% per level if extra dps is still required.

Also with the drone bay size being increased to 200m3 you are getting added utility and options, so the price for that could be slightly reduced dps.

But in essence, I don't think many would mind a dps hit if it meant that the phoon retained some of its original character, myself included.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#324 - 2013-04-10 16:35:43 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Sparkus Volundar wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Meant turrets, sorry about that =)

Hey Rise, thanks for being awesome. Cool

But I would seriously consider the previously suggested changes shown below. Loosing a launcher hard point for some drones would reduce paper dps by a bit but would give the phoon better damage application against a wider variety of targets. Damage application is something with which torp and cruise battleships always struggle. This helps mitigate that at the cost of some nominal dps from the 6th launcher.

As an added bonus, this further distinguishes the typhoon from the raven making the raven the only 6 launcher boat.
[quote=Rebecha Pucontis][quote=Gal'o Sengen]

Typhoon:

A 6th bonused launcher doesn't provide "nominal" damage, and changing from 100 --> 125 BW wouldn't offset the loss of the 6th.

Changing from 100->125 Bandwidth and 100->200 Drone bay allows you to carry a full flight of heavies or sentires in addition to a flight of lights or mediums. This gives you more real applied damage than the 6th launcher. Torps do abysmal damage to anything that moves or anything that is smaller than a BS (and cruise missiles are just bad for anything outside of missions).

So yes, in this case you do trade some nominal paper dps for real applied dps against all targets.
Miss Mass
Doomheim
#325 - 2013-04-10 16:54:02 UTC
One more vote for restoring the Phoon's original drone bw and bay at the expense of the guns, or even one launcher.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#326 - 2013-04-10 16:59:28 UTC
U guys are trying to calculate what gives more DPS withotu statign how many ballistic units you have in low slots. The value of a launcher is completely different with 0 or 3 damage mods.

I still prefer 6 launchers. I prefer a bit of focus when I try to push really high dps.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#327 - 2013-04-10 17:01:18 UTC
I do not think we've reached the goal yet, but I do like the direction we are traveling in.

How about.....
Quote:
Tempest (ATTACK)

Minmatar Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+12.5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret damage
+5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret tracking

Slot layout: 7H(-1), 6M(+1), 6L; 6 turrets , 3 launchers(-1)
Fittings: 16000 PWG(+500), 565 CPU(+15)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 7300(+346) / 7100(+889) / 6600(+59)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second) : 5400(+87.5) / 1087s(-67) / 4.97 (+.3)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 125(+5) / .118(-.02) / 100050000(-3250000) / 16.36s(-.45s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50(-25) / 75
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 67.5km(+5k) / 105(+5) / 7
Sensor strength: 20 Ladar Sensor Strength(+1)
Signature radius: 350(+10)
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#328 - 2013-04-10 17:02:18 UTC
To remove a launcher from the Typhoon is just cripple the entire ship modification. I see the new phoon as the only and new missile boat armored based ship. The phoon is not a drone ship period. For that we have the new Dominix already.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#329 - 2013-04-10 17:05:07 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
To remove a launcher from the Typhoon is just cripple the entire ship modification. I see the new phoon as the only and new missile boat armored based ship. The phoon is not a drone ship period. For that we have the new Dominix already.

Because what the game REALLY needs is an armor raven. Roll
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#330 - 2013-04-10 17:10:05 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
DeadDuck wrote:
To remove a launcher from the Typhoon is just cripple the entire ship modification. I see the new phoon as the only and new missile boat armored based ship. The phoon is not a drone ship period. For that we have the new Dominix already.

Because what the game REALLY needs is an armor raven. Roll


Yep. It needs an armored BS missile boat since we dont have any. Roll
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#331 - 2013-04-10 17:12:19 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
DeadDuck wrote:
To remove a launcher from the Typhoon is just cripple the entire ship modification. I see the new phoon as the only and new missile boat armored based ship. The phoon is not a drone ship period. For that we have the new Dominix already.

Because what the game REALLY needs is an armor raven. Roll


Yep. It needs an armored BS missile boat since we dont have any. Roll

Yep. That really "fits the spirit" of the old typhoon. Roll
Gal'o Sengen
Doomheim
#332 - 2013-04-10 17:12:54 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
To remove a launcher from the Typhoon is just cripple the entire ship modification. I see the new phoon as the only and new missile boat armored based ship. The phoon is not a drone ship period. For that we have the new Dominix already.


The Phoon is a ship of versatility. The Drones added a vast amount of versatility to it, and frankly, i think removing them would cripple it worse.
Keep in mind that nobody suggested changing the slots, that extra high from the lost Launcher can be filled by another Neut, RR, a Smartbomb, a Drone module, Probe launcher or Cloak. As someone who loves the Typhoon and Fleet Typhoon, i am perfectly willing to do a few hundred less paper DPS if it means keeping that versatility.
Sparkus Volundar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#333 - 2013-04-10 17:16:06 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Sparkus Volundar wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Meant turrets, sorry about that =)

Hey Rise, thanks for being awesome. Cool

But I would seriously consider the previously suggested changes shown below. Loosing a launcher hard point for some drones would reduce paper dps by a bit but would give the phoon better damage application against a wider variety of targets. Damage application is something with which torp and cruise battleships always struggle. This helps mitigate that at the cost of some nominal dps from the 6th launcher.

As an added bonus, this further distinguishes the typhoon from the raven making the raven the only 6 launcher boat.
[quote=Rebecha Pucontis]

A 6th bonused launcher doesn't provide "nominal" damage, and changing from 100 --> 125 BW wouldn't offset the loss of the 6th.

Changing from 100->125 Bandwidth and 100->200 Drone bay allows you to carry a full flight of heavies or sentires in addition to a flight of lights or mediums. This gives you more real applied damage than the 6th launcher. Torps do abysmal damage to anything that moves or anything that is smaller than a BS (and cruise missiles are just bad for anything outside of missions).

So yes, in this case you do trade some nominal paper dps for real applied dps against all targets.


Whereas on the other hand, a Typhoon with 6 launchers and 100/100 drones can carry more lights and mediums than if it had 5 launchers and 125/200 including 5 Heavies/Sentries.

I suppose both versions work and that I prefer the 6-torp option that has greater paper DPS with the option to carry smaller drones being a choice.

.
Sparkus Volundar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#334 - 2013-04-10 17:16:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Sparkus Volundar
Dear CCP Rise,

I write to suggest putting a 7th mid on the Raven whilst leaving the Maelstrom essentially unchanged will be out of balance.

At Minmatar BS 5, The Meal will have a 37.5% Shield Boost amount bonus. If the Raven uses a Shield Boost Amp II in its 7th Mid, it will get a 36% Shield Boost amount bonus, which is almost identical (96% of the Meal bonus). With PVP fits, it's very unlikely that stacking penalties will apply and in PVE, Faction etc. versions of Amps come into play more easily.

In summary, I would suggest that proposing to give the Raven a 7th Mid slot and a smaller Sig Radius than the Maelstrom will be too much of a buff (or that the Maelstrom needs some additional boost to offset what seems to be the loss in value of it's tanking bonus).

(Cross-posted from the Caldari thread)

Regards,
Sparks

.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#335 - 2013-04-10 17:54:40 UTC
This is bullsh!t I f*cking DEMAND a 7th low slot on the TEMPEST. If not then increase damage and rate of fire from 5 - 7.5%. YOU DO THAT and INCREASE THE F*CKING CPU OF THE MAELSTROM. ATLEAST ALLOW THE F*CKING TEMPEST TO BE WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE AND WHAT CCP HAS SAID IN PREVIOUS POST. THEE ARTILLARY PLATFROM FOR MINMATAR BAR NON. NOT THE MAELSTROM SIR.

I DO DECLARE THAT AFOREMENTIONED TO BE JUST AND TRUE!

sceneCool...


- killz

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#336 - 2013-04-10 17:59:06 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
This is bullsh!t I f*cking DEMAND a 7th low slot on the TEMPEST. If not then increase damage and rate of fire from 5 - 7.5%. YOU DO THAT and INCREASE THE F*CKING CPU OF THE MAELSTROM. ATLEAST ALLOW THE F*CKING TEMPEST TO BE WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE AND WHAT CCP HAS SAID IN PREVIOUS POST. THEE ARTILLARY PLATFROM FOR MINMATAR BAR NON. NOT THE MAELSTROM SIR.

I DO DECLARE THAT AFOREMENTIONED TO BE JUST AND TRUE!

sceneCool...


- killz



Caps lock.. Just under your Tab key.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#337 - 2013-04-10 18:17:10 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
This is bullsh!t I f*cking DEMAND a 7th low slot on the TEMPEST. If not then increase damage and rate of fire from 5 - 7.5%. YOU DO THAT and INCREASE THE F*CKING CPU OF THE MAELSTROM. ATLEAST ALLOW THE F*CKING TEMPEST TO BE WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE AND WHAT CCP HAS SAID IN PREVIOUS POST. THEE ARTILLARY PLATFROM FOR MINMATAR BAR NON. NOT THE MAELSTROM SIR.

I DO DECLARE THAT AFOREMENTIONED TO BE JUST AND TRUE!

sceneCool...


- killz


Perhaps if you sounded like less of a petulant child your request would be considered in a more serious fashion.

On topic, I personally see no glaring issues with the new Minmatar battleship lineup save for the Typhoon suddenly turning into an armor raven, which is pretty much a nerf into uselessness. Which should be addressed.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#338 - 2013-04-10 18:37:31 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
This is bullsh!t I f*cking DEMAND a 7th low slot on the TEMPEST. If not then increase damage and rate of fire from 5 - 7.5%. YOU DO THAT and INCREASE THE F*CKING CPU OF THE MAELSTROM. ATLEAST ALLOW THE F*CKING TEMPEST TO BE WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE AND WHAT CCP HAS SAID IN PREVIOUS POST. THEE ARTILLARY PLATFROM FOR MINMATAR BAR NON. NOT THE MAELSTROM SIR.

I DO DECLARE THAT AFOREMENTIONED TO BE JUST AND TRUE!

sceneCool...


- killz

butthurt whinematard ...
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#339 - 2013-04-10 18:58:25 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:

butthurt whinematard ...



And your posting basically defines you as the greatest butthurt in the forum. Please stop perturbing proper discussions.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Sunuva Gunn
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#340 - 2013-04-10 19:27:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Sunuva Gunn
I've always flown Phoons.

I'm not terribly active at the moment, so these changes would possibly see me voting with my boots just because I can't really be bothered training for another race's ships. Not leaving out of rage, but just because of the fact that there will no longer be a dual-weapon Minnie battleship anymore. I'll no longer be able to fly a flexible boat: It'll -=HAVE=- to be a missile or projectile boat.

Theres no whining or anger here, but I hope that someone reads these posts ant re-thinks these changes a bit.

I don't suppose theres any chance of changing it in a similar way to what they've discussed for the Fleet Scythe is there? (same weapon mods as it has, but as many turret and launcher slots as it has highs so you can fit it any way you like?)