These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lidia Caderu
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#221 - 2013-04-11 13:09:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Lidia Caderu
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Firu Issier wrote:
Buhhdust Princess wrote:
Mr Floydy wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
im guessing they all have the command link bonus like T1 ?....
the brutix will surely obsolete the mega same tank almost same slots and much more mobile.....


Well the faction Brutix is going to cost a lot more than a Mega. So yes on stats alone it will potentially obsolete a Megathron, you know in the same way that the Proteus has obsoleted pretty much every Gallente ship on the game. I've never seen any Gallente pilot not flying a Proteus.


Love the amount of confusion these ships are causing. The amount of completely contrary posts saying these ships are under/over powered is hilarious!


The confusion means CCP has done their job correctly. It is almost a perfect balance because noone really knows which way this is going to swing.


But....... But....... But....... I want a navy Myrmidon.......

Where would/could they go with a Navy Myrmidon?
Turret damage bonus with 125Mbps? Would that not step on the Role of the Ishtar, the Eos? Pure Drone ship? That is the Navy Vexor or the Dominix.
The Navy Brutix is a very nice ship.

it does not need 125mbps,100 is enough. it needs 7 hi slots.

Also I think its needed to add one parameter to ships, it will define maximum drones in space allowed. For Myrm 6-7
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#222 - 2013-04-11 13:10:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Gaines
Naomi Knight wrote:
Vincent Gaines wrote:
Hurricane > former tier 3
Drake > former tier 3
Harby > former tier 3
Brutx > um.... what?


So why not a navy Myrm?

tier 3? are u sure?



Lul. 2. tee hee.

Still, there's no reason not to give it to the Myrm, just as the Drake is a tougher Caracal.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Meditril
Hoplite Brigade
Ushra'Khan
#223 - 2013-04-11 13:25:29 UTC
Nice one, I love it!
Now you just need to make Large plexes appear more often in FW so that we can also use these ships!
NinjaStyle
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#224 - 2013-04-11 13:28:27 UTC  |  Edited by: NinjaStyle
Navy Drake 880 pg 8 launchers normal drake 800 pg 6 launchers.... Yeah makes sense right? or is it just surposed to not be able to fit thoese 2 extra launchers?

same amount of mids / lows makes the +80pg vs normal t1 look kinda bad

allso don't give us the old hurricane back and the brutix instead of myrm choice is bad since the brutix is still ****.

try 6 / 6 / 6 Harb
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#225 - 2013-04-11 13:45:10 UTC
There are a lot of Drake fans here. I used to be one too, so here are the Navy Drake and Revelation 1.1 Drake stats for comparison:

DRAKE NAVY ISSUE:

Unwilling to imitate our dear friend Victor by creating a Drakenstein monster, the Navy version focuses on flexibility instead of improving the already good raw firepower and tank of the standard Drake. It has a 10% missile velocity and 5% missile explosion radius bonus per level, 8 launchers and improved mobility.

• Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses: +10% to heavy missile and heavy assault missile velocity and 5% bonus to explosion radius of heavy missile and heavy assault missile per level
• Slot layout: 8 H, 6 M, 4 L, 0 turrets, 8 launchers
• Fittings: 880 PWG, 550 CPU
• Defense (shields / armor / hull) :7875 / 4875 / 5625
• Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 2500 / 658 s / 3.8
• Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 150 / 0.64 / 13329000 / 11.8 s
• Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
• Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 60km / 195 / 8
• Sensor strength: 23 Gravimetric
• Signature radius: 295

==============

Revelation 1.1 Drake: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=191595

Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to all Shield Resistances
10% bonus to heavy and heavy assault missile kinetic damage
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H (-1), 6 M, 4 L , 6 Launchers (-1)
Fittings: 800 PWG (-50), 500 CPU (-25)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 5250(-219) / 3250(-658) / 3750(-156)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2500(-312.5) / 658s(-92s) / 3.8 (+0.05)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 140 / 0.64(+0.012) / 14810000 (+800,000) / 8.9s (+0.7)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 60km / 195 / 8
Sensor strength: 19 Gravimetric
Signature radius: 295 (+10)
Cargo capacity: 450 (+105)

(The align time is actually higher on the navy? Seems odd since mass is lower and agility the same.)

=================

Navy Hull Analysis vs. Drake:

The navy drake is 7% faster. (+10 m/s)
The align time looks dorked - Presumably the Navy drake will align faster too with less mass.
It has a built-in LSE II (exactly 2625 more shields). (Effectively +1 mid slot)
...countered by no resist bonus, so the +1 mid slot is a 2nd Invuln II if you want to keep comparing vs. a drake.
...Or you can just have a weaker tank and use that extra mid slot as flexibility.
To count the increased armor and hull you need to fit a damage control - regular drake could get away without one.
Cap is the same.
Fittings are slightly higher, +80 PG, +50 CPU - but you have 2 more launchers to fit.

Damage is lower, but more flexible, projectable and applicable.
vs. cruisers it will probably hit about the same or better depending on the cruiser's sig/speed.
vs. frigates it will do better than a drake - most of you damage will still be drones though.
vs. tech II Gallente ships it will do better - you can dodge the kinetic resist.
vs. everything else it will hit about the same or a little softer, and use more ammo to do it.

Guys that already roam in Nano drakes will like the navy hull for the flexibility and chance to kite with HAMs instead of heavies. They'll probably have success with it, but not because they splashed an extra 150M isk.

For most other drake applications, this is just another drake that costs more. Although, it will make for a more tempting bait-drake.

For my money it's just not that amazing, but I'll give it a go once it hits Sisi. I have a couple characters with stale Caldari LP sitting unspent, and one used to be my drake alt. (He flies a Cyclone now)

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#226 - 2013-04-11 13:58:21 UTC
@ War Kitten

you seem to have done quite some calculating already

I'm under the impresion that this navy drake will especialy shine with T2 High Damage missiles, you got some numbers on that?
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#227 - 2013-04-11 14:18:00 UTC
NinjaStyle wrote:
Navy Drake 880 pg 8 launchers normal drake 800 pg 6 launchers.... Yeah makes sense right? or is it just surposed to not be able to fit thoese 2 extra launchers?

same amount of mids / lows makes the +80pg vs normal t1 look kinda bad

allso don't give us the old hurricane back and the brutix instead of myrm choice is bad since the brutix is still ****.


The point about the Drake is valid however I think the Idea is that you won't be fitting two LSE's, instead you will be fitting another resistance mod.

As for your point about the brutix... It's got enough grid to fit ions, mwd, small cap booster, scram, web, 1x 1600mm, 2x eanm, 1x dcuII, 1x explosive/reactive hardener, and 2x mag stabs. The ship is going to do very very well.
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#228 - 2013-04-11 14:22:45 UTC
Martin0 wrote:
Soooooo the navy brutix will be as expensive as an astarte without t2 resists.


Well the be fair, the Astarte takes far more SP than the Navy Brutix.

Astarte is also not rebalanced yet, it currently has 2 less total slots than the proposed navy Brutix and far less base ehp, even factoring in the t2 resistances. Wait till they buff the astarte/commands till you start this complaints please.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#229 - 2013-04-11 14:32:05 UTC
Katsami wrote:

Faction ships are also at least supposed to provide a nominal upgrade over T1 for that inflated price.
These don't even come close.

My Navy Brutix will be able to support a full rack of 250's and it looks like a full rack of magstabs/te's in the lows to enhance those 250s as well. We're talking 672 dps at 23 km with excellent tracking. Massive tank (1.5x regular Brutix). And with FW LP, it will be reasonably priced (for me).
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#230 - 2013-04-11 14:40:03 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:

- buff battleships tanks across the board by 25%.

Otherwise why use a bs when a navy bc will do the job better for similar price or less?


This is something that I was hoping CCP would address with the t1 BS revamp. ATM, BS are one of the most poorly tanked ships when talking about fleet level fights with logi support. Sure they have a bit more ehp compared to Cruisers/HACs/ and BCs however their massively increased sig and slower speed coupled with standard t1 resistances mean that they have some of the worst mitigation out there.

A 10% resistance buff to BS across the board would have been a healthy change imo.
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#231 - 2013-04-11 14:48:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Buhhdust Princess
After doing a bit of research, I have found the following:

Quote:
With level 5 skills, the Harbinger Navy Issue can NOT fit:

6x Heavy Pulse Laser II
1x Medium Unstable Neutraliser I

1x Experimental 10mn Microwarpdrive I
1x Faint Warp Disruptor I
2x 'Langour' Drive Disruptor I
1x Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I

1x 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plate
1x Internal Force Field Array I
2x Heat Sink II
2x Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

1x Medium Anciliary Current Router I
2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

Was it CCP's intention to
1. Remove the cap bonus from the ship, so it effectively reduces DPS over time? (Yes, I know they added mid for Cap booster hence above)
2. Make the fitting SO tight that it REQUIRES Implants, t2 rigs, or more than 1 fitting rig to fit it for it's main purpose? (Therefore nerfing the setup more than the rest) (As u will notice I used all the maximum cpu/pgrid saving mods on SENSIBLE mods).
3. Make the harbinger a new Nano Shield ship?

My suggestion:
• Fittings: 1595 PWG, 425 CPU
• Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 4500 / 7750 / 6500

Optional Suggestion
I say optional because this would massively benefit the N Harb, but I'm not quite sure how it would balance out, and that is simply:
+1 Lowslot

Reason: None of the amarr BS have 8 lowslots, apart from when you hit Faction BS. None of the Amarr BCs have 8 either, maybe until they hit faction BC?
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#232 - 2013-04-11 15:00:55 UTC  |  Edited by: War Kitten
Mike Whiite wrote:
@ War Kitten

you seem to have done quite some calculating already

I'm under the impresion that this navy drake will especialy shine with T2 High Damage missiles, you got some numbers on that?


No, I don't. Sorry.

In napkin calculations though, they'll do either 8/9ths as much (scourge) or 8/6ths as much (non-scourge) as a regular drake - you'll just be able to apply that damage, in some cases, to things smaller than a battlecruiser.

Versus specific targets, I don't have numbers - it's all practical experience feel from how an pre-retribution drakes flew in pvp.

Personally I think kiting will still work better in small groups and solo with HML instead of the longer reaching HAMs, because there are times when you are outside 30k in an engagement that you could still be applying DPS if you had HMLs.

...now you've done it, I've opened EFT again... (all level 5 skills)

Drake, one T2 launcher:
HAM Rage Scourge (NON)[Navy]: 333(222)[295] damage, 161.25 radius - Navy Drake 75% radius is 120.93
HAM CN Scourge (NON)[Navy]: 284(189)[251] damage, 93.75 radius - Navy Drake 75% radius is 70.31
HAM Jav Scourge (NON)[Navy]: 222(148)[197] damage, 93.75 radius - Navy Drake 75% radius is 70.31

HML Fury Scourge (NON)[Navy]: 375(250)[333] damage, 180.75 radius - Navy Drake 75% radius is 135.56
HML CN Scourge (NON)[Navy]: 320(213)[283] damage, 105 radius - Navy Drake 75% radius is 78.75
HML Prec Scourge (NON)[Navy]: 278(186)[247] damage, 93.75 radius - Navy Drake 75% radius is 70.31

(NON) = Non-scourge on a Drake
[Navy] = Fired from a Navy Drake regardless of flavor. (scaled up by 33% to account for 2 extra launchers)

EDIT: DOH!

The Navy damage figure is non-scourge * 1.33 - not raw damage from one launcher. Sorry about that. I was just fixating on the % damage difference of 6 vs 8 launchers.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#233 - 2013-04-11 15:06:13 UTC
Lidia Caderu wrote:
it does not need 125mbps,100 is enough. it needs 7 hi slots.

Also I think its needed to add one parameter to ships, it will define maximum drones in space allowed. For Myrm 6-7


Drone optimal range bonus maybe? Can't think of other ships having that right now... :/

Why a parameter for maximum drones in space allowed? That's what drone bandwidth is for...

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#234 - 2013-04-11 15:10:42 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
Lidia Caderu wrote:
it does not need 125mbps,100 is enough. it needs 7 hi slots.

Also I think its needed to add one parameter to ships, it will define maximum drones in space allowed. For Myrm 6-7


Drone optimal range bonus maybe? Can't think of other ships having that right now... :/

Why a parameter for maximum drones in space allowed? That's what drone bandwidth is for...



because he wants to be able to allow you to have 10 drones in space... with 50 meters bandwidth. Or 1 drone with 25 meters... Or 5 in space with 125. To allow flexibility on balancing drone ships.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#235 - 2013-04-11 15:12:22 UTC
From the above data you can draw your own conclusions.

To me, I see the Navy drake doing more damage with T2 ammo than a standard drake with Faction, but the faction ammo Drake still applies its damage to smaller targets better than the Navy does with T2.

And if both were using T2 ammo against an MWD-running foe, or anything BC or bigger, explosion radius isn't an issue and the old drake wins (with scourge).

Navy drake is just different - better against smaller foes, weaker against larger... its not universally better, and its certainly not OP as someone tried to claim.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2013-04-11 15:19:59 UTC
I would have preferred Navy Myrm, I think it’s a much more flexible ship.

Brutix - now I can see why people like it as people dislike the rep bonus but compared to the uniqueness o the Navy ship line upgrades e.g. Comet Navy Vex and ENI it feels a little bland.

It’s a strong ship I guess stat wise but I would have liked to have seen a little more variation than the slap a slot on and buff EHP approach. Not sure it is gaining a lot with the tracking bonus unless it is with a fleet BC in mind and rail usage. The current proposal could do with about 12 more powergrid for a 200mm rails and 1600mm plate config, it is annoyingly a tiny amount short.

I like the Idea of a big Comet. It has the tracking and Damage Bonus but to be a really flexible brawler I perhaps would have liked to see a larger drone bay say 50 (100) although ideally I perhaps would have like 75(125) and seen a bit more creativity with the high slots and bonus to really exemplify Gallente combat doctrine in one hull.
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#237 - 2013-04-11 15:24:59 UTC
What about the other 4 Combat BCs?
I want a faction Myrm
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#238 - 2013-04-11 15:30:31 UTC
I'm pretty sure we'll see:

Guristas Ferox
Serpentis Myrmidon
Angel Cyclone (Probably a new model)
Blood Raider Prophecy
Sansha Battlecruiser (Probably larger Phantasm)

So please stfu about the bloody myrmidon.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#239 - 2013-04-11 15:32:16 UTC
Askulf Joringer wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:

- buff battleships tanks across the board by 25%.

Otherwise why use a bs when a navy bc will do the job better for similar price or less?


This is something that I was hoping CCP would address with the t1 BS revamp. ATM, BS are one of the most poorly tanked ships when talking about fleet level fights with logi support. Sure they have a bit more ehp compared to Cruisers/HACs/ and BCs however their massively increased sig and slower speed coupled with standard t1 resistances mean that they have some of the worst mitigation out there.

A 10% resistance buff to BS across the board would have been a healthy change imo.

+1
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#240 - 2013-04-11 15:44:29 UTC
Not to seem ungrateful but with all the hints towards new ships- any chance for new hulla in Odyssey?